Talk:Aditayadornkitikhun

RTGS romanisation

According to the RTGS rules, the name "ติ๊ด" is romanised as "Tit", not "Tid".

The consonants ฎ, ฏ, ฐ, ฑ, ฒ, ด, ต, ถ, ท, ธ, ศ, ษ, and ส, when ending a syllable, provide the sound of [t] and are all romanised as "t". Please see the RTGS romanisation table.

This is solely a matter of romanising a Thai word, that is, writing a Thai word in Roman letters. There's nothing to do with the English slang/vulgarity "tit".

--YURi (talk) 20:01, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

This topic might concern you: @แอนเดอร์สัน, IdreamofJeanie, Keeratipit, and ParichatCh:. --YURi (talk) 20:22, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

@ParichatCh: You need to be civil and stop the nonsensical edit war. The form "Tit" is the correct one according to the linguistic rules. --YURi (talk) 03:42, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

@แอนเดอร์สัน, IdreamofJeanie, Keeratipit, and YURi: This page is english and target to show to people who don't understand Thai language. The word 'tit' has no meaning in Thai language but it is english slang word which is impolite. The foreigners won't understand and they will make a joke about it. RGTS rules is out of date, for example the word 'Phuket' pronounce 'fuket' that sounds funny and impolite.--Keeratipit (talk) 04:38, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

@Keeratipit:

1. Yah, this page is in English. But any English speaker of sound mind, sound judgment, reasonability, etc, will know "Tit" here is not an English word. Politeness or impoliteness is irrelevant here.
2. The RTGS template is intended for containing a term romanised according to the RTGS rules. If you want a term otherwise romanised, you should remove the entire RTGS template before adding the term you want, not just modifying the term contained therein. That's why your edits got reverted.
3. Anyway, I'm not sure if you should replace the RTGS with any other system on grounds of politeness, especially when the RTGS is in this article just for reflecting the actual pronunciation of the word or its romanisation under the official system. The Manual of Style says Wikipedia uses the RTGS-based romanisation.
4. Moreover, your modification of the IPA transcription is inappropriate. It must follow the IPA rules, which say "ติ๊ด" is rendered as [tít].
5. Let me invite @Paul 012, Pawyilee, RJFF, and Seligne: to join this discussion. They seem to be experienced users regarding this matter and their opinions will be of great value.

--YURi (talk) 06:03, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

The policy is to follow the RTGS (however much I personally dislike RTGS). So let's follow it 100 percent. It would be folly to use it sometimes and sometimes not depending on one's tender feelings. By the way, see Tit. Widely used without anyone's knickers getting twisted. Seligne (talk) 08:24, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Keeratipit and ParichatCh, your edits changed RTGS transcriptions and IPA pronunciations into incorrect forms. Either you don't know what you are doing, or you are deliberately messing with the integrity of Wikipedia. Use of such misleading edit summaries as "Correct RTGS spelling" may also be considered disruptive. Your editing patterns as single-purpose accounts also raise questions of whether sockpuppetry is taking place.

Now the concerns listed above by Keeratipit may have merit, but even if they are accepted it is blatantly wrong to list any alternative spelling as RTGS, and in no case is it appropriate to change IPA pronunciations according to your wishes. If you continue such disruptive editing, you will be reported and blocked from editing. --Paul_012 (talk) 12:29, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Aditayadornkitikhun. 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/20150721013904/http://image.dek-d.com/23/1173068/103235185 to http://image.dek-d.com/23/1173068/103235185

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) 22:01, 1 January 2017 (UTC)