Talk:Visa requirements for Thai citizens

Egypt - Visa Required

The map needs to be edited to show that a visa is required for Egypt. I've already updated the information. I learned this the hard way, at the airport! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.61.164.139 (talk) 17:37, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Turkey to be added on the map

Turkey is added in the information, but not on the map. Can anyone edit the image by adding Turkey with dark blue? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.109.229.120 (talk) 11:56, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Thai citizens require visas for Egypt. --Themilkbarkid (talk) 18:08, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Visa is not required to France for Diplomatic passport only. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.246.132.177 (talk) 17:33, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Japan

Visa requirement will be lifted on July 1st (http://www.th.emb-japan.go.jp/th/jis/2013/1321.htm). I think the map and the article should show that visa is required for Japan until that time to avoid confusion. —Mongkhonvanit (talk) 06:44, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Recent Edit re Timaticweb etc

Hi Twofortnights (talk), you recently made an edit to the above Visa requirements page. Your enthusiasm for editing this page and other Visa pages is appreciated, however there have been numerous problems with your edit. In Particular:

• More reliable sources have been replaced with less reliable ones. The primary or authoritative source for Visa Requirements is the Department of foreign affairs (or equivalent responsible government department), and the visa information is often found either directly from them or from embassies (either printed or on their website). | Timaticweb is a database service by IATA for the aviation industry, often used by airline/agency staff to quickly ascertain visa/heath/document requirements. While it is generally reliable, it should not be used in place of information by official government sources. Importantly, Timaticweb is aimed at airline passengers, it may not reflect requirements for those entering by land or sea. For example visas may be available on arrival at some land entry points and not at others. Examples of some of the citations that your edit deleted include Sri Lanka, Japan, Turkey, Philippines. See Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources for more information.
• There are too many citations and practically all of them are to a single source. This is overkill (see Citation overkill and Overlink crisis). There is no need to create the citation for each search on timaticweb, rather only to the main search page. it result in a bulky article, and all the links would become dead should timaticweb change their search parameters. This could be overcome by a sinle external link in references or by naming the reference so it only appears once. Some guidance can be found at Help:Footnotes, Citing sources.
• Wikipedia should generally not be used as a repository or mirror of data from a single source (i.e. timaticweb), see WP:NOTMIRROR and similar. Most users of wikipedia could refer to timaticweb should they need to, but they the usefulness of the visa requirement articles comes from the variety of sources (in this case official government web pages). Should you wish to add or make changes to the visa requirements article, I would suggest sourcing it from these official government sources.
• The table has been re-arranged. While a sortable table is often helpful, it doesn't help the article in this case as there is only one column "Country" for which to sort by. The old tables were split according to continent, and this made finding the country easier. I would suggest the one table with a column or feature that allows countries to be sorted by continent.
• In future, if you do wish to make substantial changes to a page which has a long history and many editors, you should first make an entry into the Talk Page of the article, then perhaps wait a week or so (or even longer if not urgent) explaining what you want to do and why you wish to do it. This will give the chance for other editors to respond before you may spend too much time making the changes. See also Talking and editing

Because it is easier and less work overall to add one link, change the table than to remove repetitive links and individually restore some of the existing links, i have regrettably had to reverted the entire edit. I believe that the edit was done in good faith. I'd suggest making smaller edits end explaining each one in the edit summary, that way the whole work would not need to be undone. Advanstra (talk) 02:37, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

You have reverted my edit with over 200 references to a version that has the whole 8 references. I don't know if I should go any further than that.

• In short though, Timatic is the most up to date source on the matter as the Governments provide information to IATA daily. Timatic information is the Government provided information, it's used by airlines, but the content is provided by national Governments. Also many countries don't update their websites very often though. Malaysia lists even countries like Upper Volta and Zaire in their visa policy listed on Immigration website - [1], there is nothing reliable in that.
• As for no need for single Timatic references - there is even a template Template:Timatic for easier insertion of single Timatic references. This template wouldn't exist if it wasn't intended.
• Comment on usefulness of the variety of sources is again questionable with total of 8 references in your preferred version.
• As for the re-arranged table, my version included all countries and I intended to add all regions with separate entry rules. Current version lists only a smaller group of countries, and the criteria is unclear and the article is thus slightly outdated. Sortable was only the country column but all of them so I don't understand what you meant by that.

I will not revert your edits, but I will add maintenance templates to all unreferenced claims in the article.--Twofortnights (talk) 12:14, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Also may I add that I am fully aware that my version is not perfect, but it's a very solid base to improve. Current article is not a solid base at all, it has practically no references, it lists only some countries and is in part outdated. I would have expected you to add further references to strengthen the article (strengthen because Timatic is in 95% correct and the only serious discrepancies or missing other sources are found with Egypt, Congo, Malaysia, Nicaragua, Kyrgyzstan, Bangladesh and Syria and some smaller issues with maximum stays for Dominica and South Korea) as I've already started doing with some other articles. And again it's just a mirror of the diligence of national governments of those countries to either inform IATA or update their websites. While my version is obviously not perfect, reverting back to a version that's several times worse (especially in the aspects raised by you regarding my version) is hardly an improvement.--Twofortnights (talk) 12:40, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

---

• In cases where Government source is available, then the Government is generally the one to use. It not just about reliability, but Government sources often (and should) provide more detailed information, eg visa forms, embassy locations etc. If there is a problem with the Government source (not updated, unreliable, disputed), that should be noted somewhere and timaticweb used. This article, and indeed many other Visa Requirements articles, were already using timaticweb as a source for the most part. They are not unreferenced, rather it was seen as redundant and clutter (and generally contrary to WP article readability guidelines) by other editors including myself to add 200+ references to the same timaticweb source. Like many articles it wouldn't be surprising requirements have changed and that several have not been updated and updating some of these as you have done is helpful and your effort there is appreciated. I agree the articles could better indicate that timaticweb is actually used as general reference for all unless otherwise indicated. Also agree that some countries are not listed and also a newer, more consistent table layout that you used is better.
• Regards the timaticweb template: As you probably know, Timatic doesn't seem to have a standalone website for the public to query, rather it gets the query from other websites (member airlines etc). This has made it difficult to provide a single reference for the multiple countries. Template:Timatic generates exactly the same query as airline websites (formerly Delta but now KLM Travel documents and health advice page, as per your recent edit there. Using that KLM URL (or equivalent) once per page in "External Links" and once again in references should be sufficient for referencing, plus it gives the option for users to enter other parameters such as "Embarkation", "Transit" perhaps relevant for airline passengers.
• TimaticWeb is also proprietary data of IATA and it is not released CCbySA so there may also be copyright issues in simply pulling data straight from it even with the references. IATA themselves may not be concerned or indeed see its re-use in this instance as favorable to their aims but generally better not to be over reliant on it.
• While your effort is appreciated, my suggestion is to allow visa requirements articles to remain same for the next few days. I will edit the Thailand page with the scheme for referencing and presentation aiming to reflect what's been described above. It also gives us and other editors some time to think it over and comment.

-Advanstra (talk) 21:40, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Well as proven with Malaysian case and a few other countries, Government websites are often outdated. They do (except for a few island nations) regularly inform IATA of any updates to their visa policies though. However I don't disagree with reinforcing the article with additional sources to IATA. But that in no way means dissing the first as somehow irrelevant or removing such information en masse based on "I don't like this source". Even a source you don't like is better than no sources at all, and when you don't like a source then the right course of action is to expand the article with new sources that you think are more appropriate, not to remove valuable information back to a version practically without references and with outdated and incomplete information.

As for the running theme of Timatic possibly changing how links work and Timatic possibly changing information on visa requirements (although I am noting again Timatic is just a system, it's the national Governments that supply this data) - I am sorry but how does this not equally apply to Government websites? It might be worth saying though that Timatic hasn't changed their system ever while many of the websites change quite often (or for an example their visa policy is in a PDF file with date of the latest change as part of the file name example, so you have to go back to the original site to check if there is a new file). Also the edit history or cite web template can tell when the source was accessed. Any article on Wikipedia can get outdated, it's got nothing to do with this particular source although this one is easily reviewed if necessary. Finally one simple additional comment, many third world countries don't publish their visa policies anywhere else online, just through IATA. If you open their embassy websites they publish only information for citizens of that country, and their local websites are usually lacking any information whatsoever.

Anyway this is not a place about philosophical debate on how Timatic works and even somehow bring up copyright into the story (the only way I can see it being a copyright issue is your idea of not using Timatic references everywhere where Timatic was used due to "clutter", that indeed could be a problem, although probably not as it's just raw data that we use which can't be copyrighted but still; also there is nothing that prohibits using copyrighted content as a reference, that is how it is in the majority of cases anyway - references to books, films, websites - if they weren't copyrighted they would have been copy/pasted here), it's really about which version was more complete, up to date and reliable. Was it better to add further national Government references next to the Timatic ones, or to revert back to an outdated, unreferenced and incomplete version. It really comes down to that.

I have already said I will not undo your revert. Article can stay as it is, I only added maintenance templates. You are more than welcome to try and create a comprehensive article and I'd be glad however the current article is all but a model article (all together with a random link to a Turkish consulate and unrelated link for Thailand visa policy).--Twofortnights (talk) 22:31, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

For the sake of everyone's, Department of Consular Affairs of Thailand has made a file (updated monthly and links may be broken from time to time) concerning Visa requirements. They are subject to be verified with the relevant counterparts of the destination country. I will not engage into the edits, though I am less welcome into the addition of [citation needed] for the entire page. Feel free. --G(x) (talk) 06:24, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder of that page, I think the diplomatic/official section was based on this (that section not really useful for the article though). I shall clean up the page and the 200 or so [citation needed] later in the week when time permits. Can't say I have the time to do it for the other pages with potentially 50,000+ near identical citations to timaticweb. - Advanstra (talk) 11:50, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Just for the record, I am not behind the IP address 39.47.62.145 that just reverted the article.--Twofortnights (talk) 21:14, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

In future Thai citizens go to China with Visa free?

I don't know in the future Thai go to China wwhith visa free (I'm Thai asker) pleese give answer to me. --Sutthiphat Borworncharuphat (Talk) 21:28, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

While there has been the news regarding the visa waiver agreement (for ordinary passport; diplomatic and official passport already received 30 days visa-free) between two countries, the agreement has yet to be signed or came into effect. As of moment Thai citizens still required visa (except travelling to Macau/Hong Kong SAR) to enter China, but this may be change in the future. (this is unrelated to the purpose of talk page) --G(x) (talk) 14:57, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Stay in Japan forever for Thai Citizens?

Residence Permit Visa of Japan for Thai Citizens have a get this visa or not? --Sutthiphat Borworncharuphat (Talk) 21:42, 26 February 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sutthiphat Borworncharuphat (talk • contribs)

And when is the visa waiver with European Union for Thai citizens?

Anyone who knows this please tell me. Bellnathaniel (talk) 04:42, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

I am not aware of such negotiations. Ruslik_Zero 07:18, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

I see thank you! CharlizeChrisMatt (talk) 17:50, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Visa requirements for Thai citizens. 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 {{dead link}} tag to http://www.somalilandgov.com/Visa%20Application.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120426085021/http://as.and.nic.in/TourismAND/TCorner/ForeignersNew.htm to http://as.and.nic.in/TourismAND/TCorner/ForeignersNew.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121031132558/http://environment.gov.au/coasts/mpa/ashmore/activities.html to http://www.environment.gov.au/coasts/mpa/ashmore/activities.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131115035856/http://www.cook-islands.gov.ck:80/faq.php to http://www.cook-islands.gov.ck/faq.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131017211743/http://www.fws.gov/bakerisland/visit.html to http://www.fws.gov/bakerisland/visit.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131017212340/http://www.fws.gov/howlandisland/visit.html to http://www.fws.gov/howlandisland/visit.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130607120346/http://www.fws.gov/johnstonisland/visit.html to http://www.fws.gov/johnstonisland/visit.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20131017212056/http://www.fws.gov/kingmanreef/visit.html to http://www.fws.gov/kingmanreef/visit.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140128062001/http://www.fws.gov/midway/visit.html to http://www.fws.gov/midway/visit.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130522074332/http://www.fws.gov:80/palmyraatoll/visit.html to http://www.fws.gov/palmyraatoll/visit.html
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.fco.gov.uk/content/en/travel-advice/north-central-south-america/12940285/fco_trv_ca_britishantarcticterr?ta=travelSummary&pg=1
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131017215217/http://www.npolar.no/en/antarctica/peter-I-oy.html to http://www.npolar.no/en/antarctica/peter-I-oy.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131017215832/http://www.npolar.no/en/antarctica/dronning-maud-land.html to http://www.npolar.no/en/antarctica/dronning-maud-land.html

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: 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) 16:07, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Israeli stamps

@BushelCandle +Twofortnights, the problem with the Israeli stamps us that them seem to target specific type of countries: East Asian/West Pacific [China, Hong Kong, Japan, Korea (South), Philippines, San Marino, and Thailand], major historically-Catholic countries [Andorra, Brazil, France, Hungary, Mexico, Monaco, Poland, Portugal, and Spain], and some random set of countries [Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Norway, and Serbia]. It explicitly excludes most Anglophone countries except Australia and New Zealand, African countries, Carribean countries, and certain large countries such as India, Italy, and Russia. There seem to be an intrinsic reason why the editor is intent on forewarning people from these countries. That and the statement reamins unsourced which may equate to vandalism. Shhhhwwww!! (talk) 20:00, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

What you are saying is suggesting that there is a conspiracy. I assure you that there is not. Not all articles are complete and that is the only reason why some information can be found here but cannot be found in another article.--Twofortnights (talk) 08:16, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Visa Requirements Map

The map doesn't show visa-free (green) for Albania, for which Thai citizens supposedly have 90 days visa-free. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VisualOriginal2 (talk • contribs) 03:28, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

It's just a temporary policy during the summer.--Twofortnights (talk) 20:23, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Bermuda not on map

Bermuda is visa free for Thais. A green dot should be added to the map, about 1000 miles east of South Carolina. 2603:8080:2A00:F12C:34CD:52EF:27B5:F715 (talk) 01:44, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

Morocco – new e-Visa

Since July there's the possibility to get an e-Visa for Thai citizens. I've tried it. It works well and fast. https://www.diplomatie.ma/en/launch-electronic-visa-%E2%80%9Cevisa%E2%80%9D 2A04:EE41:3:4272:1174:8580:5895:7891 (talk) 15:12, 11 March 2023 (UTC)