Talk:Bangkok

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
This article has an assessment summary page.
Bangkok is included in the 2007 Wikipedia for Schools, or is a candidate for inclusion in future versions. Please maintain high quality standards, and make an extra effort to include free images, because non-free images cannot be used on the CDs.
Peer review Bangkok has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.
To-do list for Bangkok: edit · history · watch · refresh
  • Expand:
  1. History
  2. Economics
  • Add or Improve these sections:

(Some topics are briefly mentioned in other areas but plaese give these thier own section)

  1. Introduction
  2. Communiation/Media
  3. Geography
  4. Crime
  5. Tourism (after changed from hotels) Done
  • Change:
  1. Hotels to Tourism and then improve tourism Done
  • Other:
  1. Add references and sources
  2. Change the lists in the Education and Healthcare section to actual texts. See Bangalore and Boston, Massachusetts for examples.

Thanks. Felixboy 20:26, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
Priority 1 (top) 

Contents

[edit] Subdivisions of Bangkok

I know that "amphoe" is used to describe administrative subdivisions of provinces, but I think "keht" is the more commonly used name for subdivisions of Bangkok. - erzengel - 1423 UTC - 23 Apr 2003

+Bangkok

 -Keht
    -Kwang

+Other provinces

 -Amphoe (Um-per)
    -Tambon
       -Moo Baan (village) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 221.128.126.2 (talk • contribs) 16:37, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

See: Administrative divisions of Thailand. Also: Amphoe, Tambon, Mubaan, Khet, Khwaeng, ... --hdamm (talk) 07:03, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Population discrepancy

There are two different numbers as to the number of inhabitants on the site: in the opening sentence, it's 8,538,610 and later on in the statistics table the number changes to 6,355,144. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Heiks (talk • contribs) 04:59, 26 February 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Symbol in Thai version of name

I think that the second Thai version of the name at the top of the article, technically, should also have the symbol ฯ at the end as it is still a shortened form (but often the symbol is missing in both these shortened names). I will check this when possible. I'll also see if I can convince somebody to translate the article into Thai as it seems a shame not to have it in the 'correct' language :-) --KayEss 18:47, 29 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Officially, the symbol ฯ is to be used only with the first one. Although the second name was a shortenned one, it is considered correct without the symbol. - from a Thai —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.147.1.2 (talk • contribs) 09:04, 29 September 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Coastal city?

In what way is this a coastal city? If it's listed as coastal I hope London is too... --KayEss 18:23, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)

A part of Bangkok i.e. part of Khet Bangkhuntien is in fact on a coast line -- a fact that many Bangkokians don't know either. The beaches in Bangkok are unfortunately muddy and hence do not make a popular tourist attraction. -- Jakris 12:13, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Question about name

Does Krung mean "city" and Thep "angels", or is it the other way around? —Lowellian (talk)[[]] 12:22, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

It is that way round, yes. --KayEss 14:13, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Uh, sorry, confused by your answer. By "that way round", do you mean the former or the latter? —Lowellian (talk)[[]] 08:27, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)

The former. Mark1 06:00, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

[edit] BangkokRecorder.com

The link to BangkokRecorder.com is not appropriate for this article. Please stop adding it. If you want to advertise your website there are plenty of other places where you can do so inexpensively. I am the registrant for Bangkok.com yet it would never occur to me to tag an encyclopedia article about the City of Bangkok with a link to Bangkok.com. Take a look at the links that have remained on the article by consensus to get an idea of what sort of link is acceptable. Thanks. --AStanhope 17:32, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

(Comment by BangkokRecorder.com: "We have found this wikipedia entry by accident. In no way do we condone spamming or the posting of the link of our site where its not appropriate. We did NOT do so and we are defnitely NOT trying to advertise our site here. We kindly ask the person who was doing so to stop posting our link as it is not appropriate here. Thanks.") —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.84.211.93 (talk • contribs) 09:11, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Intellectual property discussion

I find the somewhat lengthy discussion of copyright issues odd in an article about the city. You don't see such a discussion, for example, in the article about Vancouver, Canada, which also faces this "current issue". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.180.173.96 (talk • contribs) 08:08, 18 March 2005 (UTC)

Agreed, it's hardly of major significance to most residents, who are likely more concerned about the homelessness and illegal immigrant worker situation and probably consider it a good thing. Traffic and the stalling over infrastructure, especially mass transit and the airport, are far more important than that, but it gets about three lines. NPOV is also questionable, it reads like something put out by the BSA themselves. Maybe we need to delete it entirely or reduce it to a brief mention, after all this is rife all over Asia and not just Bangkok. --Legalizeit 08:05, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Population

I would love it if someone can write some more info on the people of Bangkok, including numbers, but also proportion of nationalities. Etc. And anything else that would be interesting. The article seems incomplete without it. Astrophil —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 18:51, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

It's hard to say exactly how much Bangkok is getting more populous. It all has to do with mobility. Some people are moving out to nearby provinces aided by a boom in car registrations, but generally not too far beyond city limits, as traffic is crushing. (This is not Tokyo with excellent public transport) Then again, tons of multi-story (30 stories is not uncommon!) condos have been under construction and are being built near transportation areas, especially now since urban rail is getting popular. Most likely, the 2000 census was an undercount, as there are countless homes/shacks with little more than concrete paths to them, locals a house away have no idea how to get to the other house, and a census here would be a daunting task indeed, thai people are resourceful though, with the new mega-apartments and condos and megamalls, more shantytowns are being replaced with proper housing, making counts a bit easier. I highly doubt the figures for 2549 (2006) that Bangkok has simply 5.672 million, especially since the 2000 census counted 6.355 million, and Bangkok is getting denser all the time, but let's not get too carried away, maybe 7-7.5 million seems about correct. (not including nearby provinces). Including suburbs, 9-10 million is about right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.136.72.160 (talk • contribs) 08:38, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Population figures for Bangkok are often based on housing registrations (Tabian Baan). However these housing documents are typically help by land owners and most people remain on the document for the house in which they are born. Bangkok has a massive number of trans-migrant workers (in my own experience I rarely meet people who are native to the city) and these people are typically not counted in population figures. I would estimate that there are at least 10M resident at any one time, and probably more. --Chuckygobyebye 13:21, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Photowars

Might I be so bold as to suggest something with the two new Bangkok photos that are being added and removed at an alarming rate. I think that we can find many more pictures of Bangkok and there is undoubtably reason to have many more pictures of the city available, but there must be a limit to the number within the article. If the new pictures could be uploaded to Wikipedia commons then we should put a Commons link on the article going to all of the pictures that we may want. I do think the two pictures in question are great pictures, but there is no copyright information on either of them. As it stands they are likely to be deleted quite soon. It'd be great if the person who uploaded them could put them on Commons with copyright information and then we'll link to that gallery from this article. I know I have a few pictures I'd like to put up too :-) — KayEss | talk 18:04, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

The link to commons is definitely worth adding, as Wikipedia is not a photo album and commons already has many photos of Bangkok, many of them already prepared for articles yet to write. We only need to decide wether we want to link commons:Bangkok or commons:Category:Bangkok. However what is much more disturbing are the comments by the anonymous user, which are a clear violation of the no personal attacks policy, and that about such a minor issue. andy 16:11, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
Indeed it is sad, and as you say, over something so trivial. — KayEss | talk 06:24, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

I'd like to point out that one of the photos (2nd one from the top)is actually overlapping some of the text. I don't know how to fix that so I'll leave that up to the more qualified among you. - T. Desloges (6 January 2006)

Which browser are you using? And what resolution? On my IE6 it looks fine (in any resolution). −Woodstone 17:59, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
It's fine for me (Firefox, tried various text sizes). The causes of text/picture overlaps are very mysterious though. Mark1 18:40, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bang Makok

"called Bang Makok ("place of olive plums")" - I know this snippet is included in one of the more popular Thailand guide books, but is it actually true, or just one of the many common myths originating in those books?

The Olive plum (Cassine melanocarpa) appears to be native to Australia. The Thai for 'plum' is still 'plum'. And as far as I've been able to ascertain, the original site was, and is, called Bang Kok. TheMadBaron 19:44, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Wasn't the original name "Ban Ngok"?--193.27.50.81 12:05, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

The makok is actually Spondias pinnata (L.f.) Kurz, according to the Thai Royal Institute's dictionary. However, there seems to be no real evidence concerning the origin of the name Bangkok. The Phra Racha Wang Derm Restoration Foundation says here that it might have derived from Bang Koh (Koh meaning island, perhaps referring to the geography carved out by the canals). This site offers a more extensive explanation, but unfortunately doesn't give references. Paul C 15:53, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
Bangkok - There is no one certain definition of the name Bangkok, it is either one of two; 'Village of Plums' or 'Village of Olives'. Bangkok is infact a nearby village rather than the city known to foreigners.Ukuser (talk) 12:05, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Question about a book

I wonder if anyone more familiar than I with the city has read Bangkok 8, a 2003 mystery novel by John Burdett? If so, could you comment on its authenticity or lack of it? I've only visited there a couple of times, and not for some years, but the flavor of Burdett's version of Bangkok seems very true-to-reality. . . . --Michael K. Smith 19:25, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] IPA transcription for full name of Bangkok

Can someone provide the IPA transcription for the full name of Bangkok? 128.12.20.195 04:00, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Note

I just went through the article and took care most of the grammar problems and such. 134.114.59.41 06:23, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] City Photo Guide link

Dear BKK topic editors,

Based on Astanhope's suggestion, I present Bangkok City Photo Guide for your consideration for inclusion in the Bangkok article.

  • Bangkok City Photo Guide [1]

Here is a list of reasons why I think a link to this site will add value to the article.

1. It provides unique content about Bangkok organized by area and category to help visitors and locals navigate the city.

2. It empowers local businesses of all sizes with free internet presence.

3. It provides realistic views of Bangkok's tourist destinations.

4. It includes satellite maps (where available) and/or street maps in every listing.

5. It contains minimal and unintrusive advertisements.

6. It is an ongoing project, which will continue to grow and include other areas of city.


I apologize for rushing in with a link directly in the article and await your decision.

--Cityphoto 13:44, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

  • Mark - I asked Cityphoto to do precisely this on the Talk page and he did so eagerly. The question/conversation revolves around the link. It should be here for the sake of the conversation. I've restored it for now. Perhaps once a consensus about the link in the article proper has been reached we can nix it from the discussion here. Thx, Khon Dii! --AStanhope 14:03, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

IMHO we don't need any external photo links - there is wikimedia commons with many free photos of Bangkok. Wikipedia is NOT a web directory, and if we include one then why not another? andy 13:06, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

The main difference is that City Photo Guide is not just another collection of Royal Palace photos. It's more like photo yellow pages with local business listings and maps. --Cityphoto 16:56, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The song of Krungthep Mahanakorn

I've found a link of the song Krungthep Mahanakorn in http://www.hawaii.edu/thai/materials/, but I've no idea if this was sung by Asanee-Wasan Chotikul. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.166.160.50 (talk • contribs) 09:28, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it is. -- Lerdsuwa 06:49, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Population (again)

I see this has been raised twice before on the talk page, but with no resolution. We currently have three different population figures (in the lead, infobox and Demographics section)- the different numbers seem to be for province v.BMA, and 1990 v. 2000 census. Obviously we should be using the newer figure, but does anyone have a preference for province or BMA? HenryFlower 10:09, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

  • I've always prefered the metropolitan area as it reflects more accurately the population of the city and its suburbs. A province boundary is often arbitrary not relevent to the natural boundary of a city. For example, my home town of Melbourne has a metro area population of ~3,600,000 but the actual 'City of Melbourne' has a population of around 50,000. Which is the more accurate population of the city? :) Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 10:07, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Population episode three

I'm living in Bangkok since 2004 and I have this to add about its population:

15,000,000-18,000,000 people live here, but very few are registered as Bangkok citizens (because it's hard to change your home address in Thailand).

During elections and big holidays Bangkok gets more or less empty because everyone goes home to their home towns/villages (you have to vote in the town you're registered).

I suggest the info box should say ~15,000,000 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.196.114.202 (talk • contribs) 22:21, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I've standardised the numbers on the last official figure, from the 2000 census. I've removed the 2005 estimate (from a random, unofficial website) from the infobox. I've no idea what the reference to a 2004 census was meant to mean- the Thai statistical office doesn't mention one in 2004, and I very much doubt they'd have two in four years. If there's a reputable source for a more recent estimated figure, for the whole metropolitan area, or for unregistered residents, then they should be added, but wild guesses should not. HenryFlower 15:22, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Common "mis-spellings"

As a Thai speaker/reader I would like to add the following comments. If people agree with me maybe we should change the main pages too, but I'll start with just these comments.

When transcribing from Thai script to English you lose a load of information - just like when converting a color movie to black and white. This "lost information", along with poor English skills, has led to countless errors in transcribed Thai (the Thais call the transcribed text karaoke).

1) "Krungthep" should be Grungtep - There are no K-sounds or H-sounds in the Thai script

2) "Koh" should be Goh, as in Goh Pa Ngan (the island with the full moon parties), Goh Chaang (the elephant island).

3) Singha beer should be Sing Beer

4) The Prime Minster's name is Taksin Shinawat - not Thaksin ShinawaTRA.

In general the letters K,V,L,R,S are used incorrectly because the corresponding Thai chars have different meanings depending on their context.

/Eric —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.196.114.202 (talk • contribs) 22:21, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

You should probably read the RTGS article. All is explained there. HenryFlower 15:24, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
If the key to the math task 1+1=? says "3" you might want to question that key. This RTGS system you refer to is messed up, simply because it's written by people who don't speak English. However I'll start posting on the RTGS page instead.

Thanks /Eric —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.144.143.9 (talk • contribs) 03:02, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, RTGS is a bag of shite, I agree. But Wikipedia's not the place to campaign to reform/replace it. HenryFlower 12:48, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
Singha Beer certainly should remain the same as that's how it's written on the bottles and cans.
The "k" sounds used when writing English transliterations of Thai words is actually the un-aspirated, "soft" k sound, as found in Koh Pha Ngan, Koh Chang, etc. To write the English-style "k" sound it's usually written "kh", as in "Sukhumvit".
Although the un-aspirated "k" sounds closer to "g" to the untrained ear, it still wouldn't be accurate to write "Goh Pha Ngan" as the starting letter is neither "g" nor the English-style "k", but the un-aspirated "k" for which there is no equivalent letter in the English alphabet. "Koh" is the accepted standard and is how the word for "island" is nearly always written (except for some instances of "Ko"), so it would be best to keep it like that for this and other similar articles.
Similarly for "t" and "th", "p" and "ph", etc.Dantilley 05:22, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

What Thais always fail to understand is that there are a lot of languages out there using Latin scripts. Letters like K, G, and stuffs are pronounced differently in various languages. Just because the English K is aspirated, therefore unsuitable for the Thai ก which is unaspirated? Anyone who speaks English would know that the English G is not the same as ก either. I do not really like RTGS since it cannot distinguish the very main difference like short and long vowels. (They can use some diacritics to do that job, like in IAST. Pinyin can even tell the tones when written in full script!) Still, I don't see any reason why the letter K cannot represent ก? It's not English, it's just Thai language written in Latin script. Many languages also have unaspirated K, do they change it to G when using in English context? The point of it is that normal people can pronounce it roughly, and ones who study can pronounce it more correctly. kinkku ● ananas 11:34, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

For ph and th, you might be interested to know that IPA use the same, just in superscripts. kinkku ● ananas 11:37, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] External links

....: I should like to propose the link: http://www.bangkokresidents.com as an external link to a site about Bangkok as it provides photographs, information, listings, important information and is under constant management and change. The site is written by people with years of experience in Bangkok, adding up to over 30 years in total and so what is written is from experience and not just by someone who has been here a year or two.:..... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mengkysan (talk • contribs) 12:35, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

/ On the subject of Thai language I have lived here 14 years and I'll tell you that there is most definately a K sound in the Thai language. Grung Thep is correct and Goh is correct ( Goh as in Got ) but the words Krap and Kha are most definately used with a K sound and not a G sound. I have just clarified this in a room full of Thais ( 30 in all ) and they all say the same. I do agree that the sound is very close to both the G and K sounds for almost all words that we might spell with a K. The province / town of Kanchanaburi is said with a G sound too, but he tone is so slight that is generally comes across as a K sound more than a G sound. / Mengkysan 09:43, 9 August 2006 (UTC) Meng

[edit] Changed "Chinese run pawnshops" to "pawnshops"

To call pawnshops, that fence stolen goods, "Chinese run" is a primitive form of relative Orientalism: it attempts to re-present the homegrown crime as somehow from abroad, from an "orient", here China. The fact is that sinoThai are Thai in the modern sense, not "Chinese" unto the next generation, and no more likely to be crooks than Tai people.Spinoza1111 06:51, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Peer review needed

This article has potential to be a featured article omeday but we neeed a peer review to figure what really needs to be improved. I'll try to get one. Felixboy 13:25, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] See Also - Bangkok University? Bangkok University FC?

Why does "see also" include Bangkok University but not any other universities in Bangkok? Bangkok university is neither the largest or the oldest. And there are many other universities in Bangkok that argubly have more importance to this article (Chula is much older, Thammasat is historically significant, Ramkhamhaeng probably has the most students, etc.). Even more ridiculous is why their football team, "Bangkok University FC," also included in the list? --Melanochromis 05:41, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

just fixed it. Not an issue anymore. --Melanochromis 21:06, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Help needed

HELLO TO EVERYONE WHO LOVES TO DISCUSS ABOUT BANGKOK, I'm a Bangkokian and a very proud one i must say. I have been do a heck load of editing, a HUGE heckload of editing on the Bangkok website. I need everyones help to give me really accurate information and continue to edit this page until it reaches an equilibrium with the readers and editors. Sometimes I have sketchy info thats in the top of my head and is distorted, please help me correct. Also, for the wikipedia guys, I have no idea how ot upload pics so u better find pics for my grand city. PLease, itd be really nice, pics of the skyline, like a really nice one, i suggest www.skyscrapercity.com and go to the Thai forum and talk to the guys for their copyright. Other pictures can come from say, the clubs of Bangkok, Vertigo, Sirocco, Bed Supperclub. We're the biggest party city behind London and New York so you should get clubs up there. Another thing is the tourism, why is there nothing. We've been on the top 10 tourist cities for like 50 years in a row so more tourist information. I've gotten you guys started. I would also like to thank the wikipedia editors for creating a gorgeous article about current events. GUYS, my fellow Bangkokians, KON KRUNG thung lai (CITY PPL), u need to get cracking n help me edit my city. We're getting hampered by Tokyo and Hong Kong n Singapore. Its a lot of work, i've gotten u guys started. START EDITTING. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.116.220.35 (talk • contribs) 19:49, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sister Cities

How are we determining the list of "Sister Cities"?

The wikipedia Town twinning article doesn't identify the 'authoritative' source. Sister Cities International web site doesn't show these same "sister cities". Likewise, List of twin towns and sister cities doesn't include anything between Turkey and Thailand (which, of course, may be an oversight).
  • Was the "sister cities" section meant to be a casual association list (which, to me, would be content of questionable value), or
  • Do "sister cities" come from a formal source/list of 'twins' (and if so, what is that authority/reference)? - Thaimoss 14:56, 23 December 2006

[edit] Project Assessment - Article Expansion

An excellent article overall - far more thorough than many other articles I've seen on cities. The history section is quite short, though. I gather, from this short section, that perhaps there isn't much to be said, but at the very least, some years would be good. When did it "begin as a small trading center and port community"? LordAmeth 14:15, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tourist mecca???

"The city's wealth of cultural sites makes it one of the world's most popular tourist destinations." Is there any evidence for this? Many tourists come to Bangkok, but most don't stay more than a few days: they head to the beaches or the islands. BKK is too hot, too smelly, and the traffic is hideous. Those that stay are more interested in the nightlife and cheap shopping. There are some interesting cultural sites (Grand Palace, Wat Pho, Wat Arun), but you can visit most of them within a couple of days days.Widmerpool 14:25, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Suvarnabhumi Airport picture

Surely we can get a better (and if possible smaller) picture of the new Suvarnabhumi Airport than the currently used one? Perhaps one taken from the AOT web site Dantilley 05:39, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A population citation is needed.

There is no citation for the vague statement saying simply "the city's population must be twice what the census says". I'm sorry, but you must cite something like that!

Metro area is not = City area

Commuters not = city population —The preceding unsigned comment was added by McMatterson (talk • contribs) 00:47, 8 May 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Long lists of institutions

Why are there long lists of hospitals and universities in this article. This is not common for city articles. They do not strike me as of primary interest. If they are useful at all, they should be moved into their own article and referenced. −Woodstone 22:06, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Opinion

This article looks like nationalistic propaganda. 211.116.87.131 18:24, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Infobox

This article is currently using the Thai province infobox; shouldn't the city infobox be used as it can accomodate more info? --BrokenSphere 23:16, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Green Bangkok?

The section on parks mentions that Bangkok is known for it's parks. In my opinion this is in error. Central Bangkok has only one large park (Lumpini, which is remakable) but the city is notable for its lack of other green spaces. The other parks mentioned in this section are very far from the city centre. I don't want to be overly critical of Bangkok (I live there) but there's a desperate shortage of parks, and no children's playgrounds whatsoever. --Chuckygobyebye 13:06, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SET location

Unless I am wrong, the Stock Exchange of Thailand, mentioned in the 'Roads' section of the article, is not actually on Wittayu, but on Ratchadapisek, next to the Queen Sirikit Convention center. See the SET link: http://www.set.or.th/en/contact/contact.html. Wittayu doesn't have much except the US Embassy + residence, and the huge and new All Seasons (or is it 4 Seasons?) place where the Conrad is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.10.219.39 (talk) 19:16, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Bangkok@night.jpg

Image:Bangkok@night.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:35, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] English?

"...the eastern side which pertains the majority of Bangkokians is called subjectively as Krung Thep, the name of the city itself (also called 'Pranakhorn' side)."

Wow. Just...wow. That is horrid. Stick to the Thai Wiki, OK? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.69.81.2 (talk) 22:10, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Krung Thep or an English equivalent surely?

Why is this article called Bangkok? It hasn't been called that for over two hundred years! They're not even the same city. The King founded a new city called Krung Thep so surely this article ahould be renamed that or an English equivalent of it? Note that Bangkok is not the English equivalent of Krung Thep, they're two completely different entitie., Either "Bangkok" should redirect here, or surely a Bangkok article should be about the historical city from over two hundred years ago. Deamon138 (talk) 21:57, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

This article is about the English name Bangkok, not บางกอก, and correctly refers to Krung Thep Mahanakhorn as it is known internationally. You may want to continue this discussion at Talk:Thailand#Capital City - wrong name? --Paul_012 (talk) 12:15, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 1688 map

Description of the village of Bangkok (lower left, M), next to a fortress built by the French (A) in 1688.
Description of the village of Bangkok (lower left, M), next to a fortress built by the French (A) in 1688.[1]
Siege of the French fortress of Bangkok by the Siamese revolutionary forces of Petracha, and "village of Bangkok" on the other side of the river in 1688.
Siege of the French fortress of Bangkok by the Siamese revolutionary forces of Petracha, and "village of Bangkok" on the other side of the river in 1688.

Here is a 1690 French map of the village of Bangkok (shown in an enclosure by the letters M), next to the fortress built by the French at that time (A) on the left bank of the Chao Praya in 1688. Feel free to introduce the map in the article, for example in the history section. For more details see France-Thailand relations. PHG (talk) 04:48, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Please note that the image is turned 90°, so that the upper edge points to the east. Actually "the enclosure by the letters M" is today's Thonburi. What we call the Bangkok of today is where the big fortress is (in the middle of the picture). --hdamm (talk) 14:01, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Here's another view of Bangkok in 1688. The caption describes the "Fortress of Bangkok" held by the French and being besieged by the troops of Petracha in the upper part (left bank of the Chao Praya river). It also mentions "the village of Bangkok on the other side of the river" ("De l'autre coté de la rivière est la ville de Bancoq", beginning of line 4). Apparently, at least for French people of the period, all the area was designated as "Bangkok" already... Anyway, one of these maps would be a nice addition to the article, as they document the small scale of Bangkok in the 17th century, especially compared to Ayutthaya or even Lopburi. PHG (talk) 07:43, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Please note, that in both French maps the river Chao Phraya flows from left to right, so that the fort in the upper part of the map is actually on the eastern bank (compare these two French maps with a map by La Loubère from 1687, where the flow of the Chao Phraya is indicated by an arrow). It seems, that another river flows from the Chao Phraya down to the lower edge of the map. This is Khlong Bangkok Yai, formerly the original flow of the Chao Phraya before the king of the Ayutthaya kingdom dug a shortcut (probably around 1521), to drastically reduce the travelling time from the Gulf of Siam to the capital. Today the shortcut - roughly from the former Thonburi Railway Station to Wat Arun - is called "Chao Phraya", while the original flow is called "Khlong Bangkok Yai". It might be, that also the western part (today's Thonburi) was originally called Bangkok, as the newly dug shortcut would also cut the original settlement of Bangkok into two halves. --hdamm (talk) 12:43, 1 June 2008 (UTC)