Talk:Burmese–Siamese War (1785–1786)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Article title
editI think it should be either Nine Armies' War or Nine-Army War to be grammatically correct. --Paul_012 (talk) 13:42, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
No. It should move to Burmese-Siamese War (1785–1786). Because Nine army war is called from Siamese side. There is no Burmese account for it. I will change it later 220.255.2.98 (talk) 16:27, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Burmese–Siamese War (1785–86). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120514195207/http://www.m-culture.go.th/detail_page.php?sub_id=525 to http://www.m-culture.go.th/detail_page.php?sub_id=525
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:57, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
Why is it (1785-76) and not (1786-87)?
editYourlocallordandsavior (talk) 09:00, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
- Probably because the article didn't originally consider the Tha Din Daeng Campaign to be part of the war. (I don't know if it should.) --Paul_012 (talk) 17:47, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
- So should it be in the aftermath section? Yourlocallordandsavior (talk) 06:03, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
- That would be consistent with how the article was arranged before User:Tanakorn Srichaisuphakit's 30 September 2021 edit. If he doesn't comment I'd support the change. --Paul_012 (talk) 10:32, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
- So should it be in the aftermath section? Yourlocallordandsavior (talk) 06:03, 19 January 2022 (UTC)