Talk:Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya (city)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was proposal 1. —harej (talk) (cool!) 00:17, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

---

Relisting to gain consenus. — AjaxSmack 20:41, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Ayutthaya → Ayutthaya (city) — The current article on the modern city is not the primary meaning of "Ayutthaya." See talk page for more options. — AjaxSmack 01:43, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

Proposal #1: Move Ayutthaya to Ayutthaya (city) and Ayutthaya (disambiguation) to Ayutthaya

Rationale: The kingdom, the former city (now the Ayutthaya historical park) and the modern city are all important but none is primary.

Proposal #2: Move Ayutthaya to Ayutthaya (city) and Ayutthaya Kingdom to Ayutthaya

Rationale: The kingdom is the primary meaning.

Proposal #3: Don't move anything.

Rationale: The modern city is the primary meaning.

Survey

Proposal #1

• Support. I'm tending to agree with this option, since Ayutthaya may as commonly refer to either, depending on context. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 07:13, 18 July 2009 (UTC), 05:36, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support per User:Paul_012's comment below. — AjaxSmack 05:01, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Proposal #2

Proposal #3

• Oppose. Either the kingdom or nothing is primary. The modern city is not. — AjaxSmack 02:08, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
• Support. The present system works. The kingdom is at Ayutthaya Kingdom which is self explanatory. Generally, the policy on Wikipedia is to avoid using (city) as a disambiguator for place names, though there are exceptions. Skinsmoke (talk) 03:16, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
• Comment: I think this should be viewed differently from other cities, since Ayutthaya differs from other western former-city-states which still hold relevance today in that the ancient city of Ayutthaya was largely destroyed, and the modern city reflects little of what was there of old. An article focusing solely on the modern city would therefore have less significance, but would still be a target for readers looking for information such as historical sites and tourism. If information on the history of the city is consolidated in the Ayutthaya Kingdom article, the kingdom would likely appear to be the primary topic, although I'd still support having the disambiguation page at the title, the reason being that readers may still be looking for either. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 05:36, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Name again

If the province is at Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya Province, should the city not also be under its long-form and official name of Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya, or merged into Amphoe Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya, which appears to be the same thing as the city? Skinsmoke (talk) 12:24, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Having the city article at Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya would be the logical solution in line with our current treatment of other localities, although arguments against it include Wikipedia's policy of using the most "widely accepted" name, which would suggest Ayutthaya (city) instead. (This would also apply to the province, which should be at Ayutthaya Province if Ayutthaya (city) is used, but not the district (amphoe), since the shortened term doesn't appear to be widely used with the latter.)

In other words, I think we should either have pages at Ayutthaya (city) and Ayutthaya Province, or at Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya and Phra Nakhon Si Ayutthaya Province. --Paul_012 ^(talk) 16:14, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Former capital

Could be listed in Category:Former national capitals (when considering Ayutthaya Kingdom as a predecessor of Siam) or Category:Capitals of former nations? –Gumruch (talk) 10:44, 4 May 2019 (UTC)