Template talk:History of Myanmar

The name of the country should be change; it's officially Myanmar now. 96.229.179.106 02:19, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Wrong, see the recent WP:RM see Talk:Burma#Requested move Chris 02:31, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

The article "British rule in Myanmar said the British rule started in 1824. I think the name "Post-independence Burma, 1947–1962" is more exactly than "Democratic Republic". 96.229.179.106 —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 07:27, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

That's mixing apples and oranges, those are two different issues. Burma was only democratic from 1947 to 1962, it is not now, the name fits. Chris 07:37, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Burma gained independence in 1948 (4 January 1948)--not 1947. The underlying article's name--Post-independence Burma, 1947-1962--needs to be changed. Hybernator 00:18, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Aung San, U Nu, U Thant, Ne Win, Aung San Suu Kyi-these are just the names of the persons and are not periods of history, so they should not be in the template. I often didn't see any history template that has person's name. Moveover, 8888 Uprising and Saffron Revolution are also small events and not periods. They also should not in the template. 96.229.179.106 02:07, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Those are your opinions. The persons and events you mention are seminal in the history of Burma. Chris 23:33, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

sockpuppetry by 69.234.180.200

If you want to make changes to the template, explain them here, in detail first. Chris 08:12, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I think 96.229.179.106 is absolutely right: Aung San, U Nu, U Thant, Ne Win, and Aung San Suu Kyi should not be in the template because they are just people's names no matter how important they're in Burmese history. In addition, I also feel that now people mostly use the name "Myanmar", instead of "Burma". 75.31.20.81 (talk) 05:07, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Not according to Wikipedia conventions. And it's interesting, the only ones making these changes and "opinions" are all anonymous IPs. You would carry weight if you signed in as a legitimate editor. Chris (talk) 08:45, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

accusations of vandalism by User:JacquesNguyen

User:JacquesNguyen accuses me of vandalism in his edit summaries when I revert his POV pushing. He has never once justified why one system of dating is preferable to the other, and I cannot possibly be the vandal in this, as I created the template. It is he that is changing it without explanation, and I will continue to revert him. Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 08:04, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers), "*Either CE and BCE or AD and BC can be used—spaced, undotted (without periods) and upper-case. It is inappropriate for a Wikipedia editor to change from one style to another unless there is a substantive reason; the Manual of Style favors neither system over the other." No substantive reason has been offered. Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 05:25, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

07:57, 10 April 2008 (UTC) On this talk page under his now-removed 3RR block, it states clearly "Also, please familiarize yourself with WP:VANDALISM. Calling other people's edits vandalism is inappropriate if it is not in fact vandalism." Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 07:57, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

template is protected

I have protected this template from future edits. Please discuss your disagreements in this Talk arena. Come to some sort of compromise or understanding. Edit wars are not useful to our project. Kingturtle (talk) 14:43, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

State of Burma

Should we add State of Burma? 68.120.227.206 (talk) 01:55, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

If it can be made a better article, yes. Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 03:56, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Be more specific. 68.120.227.206 (talk) 05:38, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

State Peace and Development Council ????

The last two links in this template (in "Modern era"),

"Union of Myanmar" (1989–2010) and

"Republic of the Union of Myanmar" (2010–present),

both link to the same article ¨[[State Peace and Development Council]. However, this is no longer the present situation, as stated in the article. This section needs some clean up. Unfortunately I am totally unfamiliar with this issue, therefore I am of no help in doing so. It would be awesome if this could be resolved. Cheers,Saippuakauppias ⇄ 08:30, 17 August 2011 (UTC)