Talk:Burma

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing changes to the article itself. This article has been moved multiple times recently and the name is the subject of a current dispute. Please place discussions on the name of the article on the name dispute page or the request for comment page.

This article is a frequent source of heated debate. Please try to keep a cool head when responding to comments on this talk page. How about a nice cup of tea?

This article is within the scope of multiple WikiProjects. Click [show] for further details

This article is supported by the WikiProject on Countries, which collaborates on nations and related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article Burma, or visit the project page for more details. B This article has been rated as B-Class on its quality. Burma is part of WikiProject Myanmar (Burma), a project to improve all Burma related articles on Wikipedia. The WikiProject is also a part of the Counteracting systemic bias group on Wikipedia aiming to provide a wider and more detailed coverage on countries and areas of the encyclopedia which are notably less developed than the rest. If you would like to help improve this and other Burmese-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome. B This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. Top This article has been rated as Top-importance for this Project's importance scale. Myanmar (Burma) To-do: edit purge Contribute to recent events articles: 2007 Burmese anti-government protests and International reaction to the 2007 Burmese anti-government protests Create requested articles on Burmese subjects. Improve Top-importance and High-importance articles. Add the newly created category, Burmese democracy activists to appropriate biography articles. Develop articles on states/local divisions of the country and articles on smaller towns and villages   This article is within the scope of WikiProject Southeast Asia, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Southeast Asia-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details. B This article has been rated as B on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team. This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia. Additional information: B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale. Feel free to make short comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. Top This article has been rated as Top-Importance on the assessment scale. This article is included in the 2006 Wikipedia CD Selection, or is a candidate for inclusion in the next version. Please maintain high quality standards and, if possible, stick to GFDL-compatible images.

This page has been cited as a source by a media organization. The citation is in: Maria Kruczkowska. "Birma. Od Rangunu po Chaungtha", Gazeta Wyborcza, 2006-01-14. (details)

	Burma is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Article milestones Date Process Result June 7, 2006 Featured article candidate Not promoted July 16, 2006 Peer review Reviewed July 24, 2006 Featured article candidate Not promoted Current Status: Former featured article candidate

Archives

March 2003 – August 2007 September 2007 October 2007:RM "Burma" October 2007:RM "Myanmar" December 2007:RM#2 "Myanmar" January 2008:RM#3 "Myanmar" June 2008

[edit] Current events

Might we want either a temporary hatnote or a "see also" for the present humanitarian crisis? I came here expecting to find a link to that article, wherever it may be, and couldn't find any. - Jmabel | Talk 19:39, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Y Done. --Regents Park (moult with my mallards) 20:35, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

A lot of this coverage is over at Cyclone Nargis. Sadly, there just isn't a lot of information out there since access to the country is so tightly controlled, and even the assessment teams on the ground probably don't have the information we'd expect to see.Somedumbyankee (talk) 20:06, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Name

in the article, some parts say Burma, and some say Myanmar.

I think we should calll it Myanmar, since it may not be recognized by many countries, but that is the official (inter)national name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Timbomcchoi (talk • contribs) 04:32, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Please read the tag at the top of the page. The name is under dispute.Somedumbyankee (talk) 04:44, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Moved the Page Move Protection tag to talk page

There isn't really a need for the tag to be on the article itself. As was successfully argued regarding the "dispute tag" previously, the tag itself doesn't help the article, and it being on the talk page achieves the same end. Beam 14:47, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Having a warning on the front page shows that the article is in a state of flux. Anyone who isn't particularly wiki-savvy wouldn't realize that there is an ongoing dispute and that the current version may well change in the near future. The "non-endorsement" of the current name of the article is a reasonable point to make. I don't particularly care for either name, but making it look stable when it's unclear is kind of misleading to the reader.Somedumbyankee (talk) 15:57, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

You're not making a lot of sense. The first sentence of the article notes the naming of the country. I believe you were involved with the discussion regarding the "Dispute" tag, and it came to the point where the only sensible solution was to have it on the talk page. The same applies with this tag. It has nothing to do with honesty and I'd be insulted if I didn't assume good faith. Please reconsider your reversion, the last thing I want is an edit war of any sort. Beam 16:50, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Look at the discussion on this page regarding the name dispute tag. I wouldn't say that there was a consensus that removing the tag was the only "sensible solution".

• The statement is true and not misleading. Neither staying nor moving are WP:SNOWBALL.
• Protection tags are usually on the front page of the article. See WP:PROTECT#Other_notes for talk page templates.
• The tag deflects mastodons: Having the tag on the article itself sends a clear message to people who might just assume that the name is wrong and move it.
• The tag shows that the current name of the article is not a consensus statement: Not having the tag implies to a casual reader that the current name is appropriate (not the current consensus because there is no consensus).

It seems kind of redundant to you or me since we've been staring at it for the last couple of weeks, but to someone who is not already involved it shows that the article is not stable. I mean, I really don't care that much, but why is it so critical to take it off? Somedumbyankee (talk) 17:24, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Because disputes regarding page moves aren't what the user should be reading. Beam 01:51, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

No it's exactly what the user should be reading. How can a reader make up there mind up about the name of the country if they don't know there's a dispute and aren't (as above) "wiki-savvy" to find out elsewhere? Every other page I've come across under dispute has the tag on the article page. Your reasoning resembles those who would go against WP:SANTA. Thus, "Let's protect our users from the big bad world of wiki-disputes." Well no, we don't do that, we let them know that the information they are about to receive might be wrong and is being challenged. Deamon138 (talk) 22:46, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

The first line of the article states the dispute and we have a whole section in the article talking about the dispute. We're not hiding it. Beam 23:00, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

And yet you stated, "Because disputes regarding page moves aren't what the user should be reading," which shows your desire that such information was hidden. Anyway the first line of the article you mean is either, "Burma, officially the Union of Myanmar (Burmese: , pronounced [pjìdàunzṵ mjəmà nàinŋàndɔ̀]), is the largest country by geographical area in mainland Southeast Asia," or, "The name "Myanmar" is derived from the local short-form name Myanma Naingngandaw,[1] the name used by the regime currently in power in the country," neither of which "state the dispute" as you say. As for a whole section on the dispute, actually no, there is three paragraphs talking about the dispute, and not an entire first section. It is not even the lead of that section, it seems a little hidden. Besides, I was not talking about the dispute on the political and media stage about the name, I was talking about the Wikipedia dispute that has been going on. Even if a user read those paragraphs about the name dispute, they wouldn't necessarily know that there was a dispute about the article itself. We could (in fact are: I advocate Myanmar as the new name but that's beside the point) be providing them with misleading information, and they wouldn't even know it! The tag needs to be on the article page. Deamon138 (talk) 23:17, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rename

In the interest of trying to knock out systematic bias, we should rename the article Union of Myanmar with Burma redirecting to that, not the other way around as it is now. Hooper (talk) 18:05, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Please remember to keep all discussion of naming conventions at Talk:Burma/Myanmar .

There is a dedicated page for discussions of the name of the article. Somedumbyankee (talk) 18:14, 7 June 2008 (UTC)