Talk:Wat Pho

Thailand High‑importance

	Thailand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Thailand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Thailand-related articles on Wikipedia. The WikiProject is also a part of the Counteracting systematic bias group 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 Thailand-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.ThailandWikipedia:WikiProject ThailandTemplate:WikiProject ThailandThailand articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Southeast Asia Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Southeast Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Southeast Asia-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Southeast AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject Southeast AsiaTemplate:WikiProject Southeast AsiaSoutheast Asia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Buddhism Mid‑importance

	This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Buddhism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Buddhism. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page for more details on the projects.BuddhismWikipedia:WikiProject BuddhismTemplate:WikiProject BuddhismBuddhism articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled[edit]

I have always heard the Reclining Buddha at Wat Pho referred to as the largest Recling Buddha in Thailand - not necessarily the largest Buddha. I can think of at least one grotesque outdoor concrete upright Buddha in Lopburi that may in fact be "larger."

Wat Pho may indeed have more than 1000 Buddha images. Whether or not this is more than in any other temple in Thailand is certainly questionable. Wat Mahathat in Nakhon Si Tammarat which has been accumulating gifts from pilgrims for decades may add 1000 amulet-sized Buddha images to its vaults on a busy Saturday. --AStanhope 04:18, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

It is also not the largest reclining Buddha in Thailand, in Ang Thong's Wat Khun Inthra Pramun is one which is 4 meters longer, but the longest is in Wat Bang Phli Yai Klang in Samut Prakan with a length of 53 meters, compared with the 46 of the one in Wat Pho. See Richard Barrow's Blog for more. andy 21:13, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You know, I must confess that I have serious doubts that it is the "oldest" wat in Thailand, too. --AStanhope 02:01, 15 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Date format[edit]

According to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers [1], both 21 Februari 2008 and Februari 21, 2008 are correct. Still the first form was corrected into the second form on 12:25, 12 November 2011‎. How to react, should such a change be made undone, or what? Notice that the dates in the Revision history of the Wikipedia articles are in the first format!

FredTC (talk) 10:57, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There's only one date in the article so it's not a big deal. The editor who changed it may not have been aware of the MOS. WP:STRONGNAT is rather specific to English-speaking countries, but it should be okay to change it back in this case. --Paul_012 (talk) 03:52, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What is the Buddha made of?[edit]

What is the reclining Buddha made of? Please include this in the description.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.63.50.134 (talk) 22:14, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RTGS[edit]

I think the RTGS version of the name transcription is not correct. The part เช ตุ is che tu, not chet tu. I'm not shure about the pronunciation, but the IPA version could be wrong as well. --FredTC (talk) 11:53, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

/พระ-เชด-ตุ-พน/ is actually the correct pronunciation, according to the Royal Society.[2] Such apparent discrepancies are common in proper names deriving from Pali/Sanskrit. --Paul_012 (talk) 03:22, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the link to the page at the Royal Institute. I knew there are situations where a consonant is written once but pronounced twice, but a rule was not given where this was mentioned. So the IPA version is correct.

The RTGS version however should not have the double t, or is there something in RTGS that I have overseen? --FredTC (talk) 09:08, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The RTGS follows pronunciation, so the double t is correct: the first one ends the previous syllable, the second one opens the next. --Paul_012 (talk) 11:08, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe you are right with that. RTGS follows (transcription) the Thai script, not the pronunciation. It is only an indication of the pronunciation. --FredTC (talk) 11:44, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're confusing transcription with transliteration. Transcription transcribes speech into words; transliteration represents written words in a different writing system. See the Royal Thai General System of Transcription article for details. --Paul_012 (talk) 02:57, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Consistent usage of terminology[edit]

The article must be checked for consistent usage of terminology. For instance, the building that contains the Reclining Buddha is referred to as:

chapel of the reclining Buddha
temple housing the reclining Buddha
Viharn Phranorn
The Viharn containing the reclining Buddha

And there is more that needs to be checked. --FredTC (talk) 02:16, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So do it, Fred! Seligne (talk) 06:32, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Wat Pho. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 21:15, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]