W
Active Editors
Back to Profile

User Talk: MoonsMoon

Server-side rendered snapshot of this editor's Wikipedia talk page discussions.

16th Jebruary 2026



Hi, MoonsMoon. I just want to say to you that I'm not an extremist doing flawed things, but I have my principles, so do you. Thais and Khmers have been formed at the same time, Khmers didn't come before Thailand, and Thailand didn't come before Khmers. And Khom is not Thai, but related by marriage, not nationality. Khom is not Thai-propaganda, Khom is often misunderstood as a term. Khom is not a nationality, Khom is a civilization that later intermarried with Thais, and Thais absorbing Khom identity. Just like Khmers absorbing Angkor Wat, (In Thai we call Nakhorn Wat).

And If you dare to mess with me again, well there are consequences. I'm a Thai person, but my ancestry and heritage can be traced back to the Monic ethnic group, which lived at present day Myanmar. Civilizations like Dvaravati, Hongsawaddy. The Swan is the symbol of Mon, and the symbol of Mon, is the symbol of Mon Royalty, That's right. My ancestors were once royals, who migrated to Thailand/Siam after the Burmese took over my lands of the Irrawaddy Delta, my ancestors titles, became Phraya, which is below Chao Phraya in which Chao Phraya is King.


-RedCheekshavingfoodtoeat!


July 2025



25px|alt=Information icon ↗ Hello, I'm Criticize. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions ↗&#32;to :Khom ↗ have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse ↗ or the Help desk ↗. Thanks.<!-- Template:uw-vandalism1 --> '''Criticize''' 23:58, 17 July 2025 (UTC)

:Hello! I added "fascist" as it's used in the citation supporting the content. Quoted from the cited content: "This idea became more sophisticated during the time of military rule under Phibun. The ideological
:foundations of his fascist-leaning policies were laid by the Thai thinker Luang Wichit Wathakan, whose officially sanctioned ideas about Thai nationalism have been pervasive until today. One of the
:theories he put forward was, that the Khmer of today have no connection to the ethnic group that built Angkor, which he termed khom." I'm confused as to why that can't be included as a descriptor? MoonsMoon (talk) 00:20, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics: minimum 500 edits required for editing caste articles



{{ivmbox | image = Commons-emblem-notice.svg |imagesize=50px | bg = #E5F8FF | text = You have recently edited a page related to '''the region of South Asia ↗ (India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal), broadly construed, including but not limited to history, politics, ethnicity, and social groups''', a topic designated as '''''contentious ↗'''''. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and <em>does <strong>not</strong> imply that there are any issues with your editing</em>.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as ''contentious topics''. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee ↗. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia's norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators ↗ have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit <strong>carefully and constructively</strong>, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

<p>Additionally, you must be logged in, have 500 edits, and have an account age of 30 days ↗ in order to make edits related to two subtopics: (1) Indian military history, or (2) social groups, explicitly including caste associations and political parties related to India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal.</p><p>Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics ''procedures'', you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard ↗ or you may learn more about this contentious topic here ↗. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{tl|Ctopics/aware}} template.</p>}}<!-- Derived from Template:Contentious topics/alert/first --> Ekdalian (talk) 16:48, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

Dance in Thailand



I see that an admin responded to your edit-warring ticket by applying extended confirmed protection to the page until October 13. Since neither of you have the required number of edits (500), this effectively stops the edit war until then. I also see that the other editor removed the disputed content about two hours before the protection was added. I'm sure this is a bitter pill to swallow, but it's actually the better state for the article to be in. Allow me to explain. We are encouraged to follow a process called "Bold, Revert, Discuss" (wp:brd ↗). In this case you were the wp:bold ↗ editor adding content, the other editor did the wp:revert ↗ to remove content they disputed. At this point, the proper thing to do is for the bold editor (you in this case) to start a discussion on the ''article'' talk page and say, "Hey, I see you reverted me here, let's discuss", and then ''wait'' for a response. There is no hard and fast rule for how long, but at least a couple of days. If you get no response, the better thing to do is seek other opinions rather than restore the disputed content. This is consistent with the essay, wp:onus ↗ which says the burden is on the person seeking to add disputed content to get consensus before doing it. There are several ways to do this, I already gave you one in article talk (go to relevant wikiproject pages and ask for help). Another acceptable way is to scan the list of most recent editors and wp:ping ↗ them in article talk to ask for help. Again, ''neutral'' questions are best. You can get a list of editors by content added to the article and/or most recently edited by going to the article revision history and clicking on the "Page statistics" link. Let me know if you have further questions or need help. Xan747 (talk) 14:12, 29 September 2025 (UTC)

:I never should have bothered. But since we're apparently allowed to use Facebook as a reliable source, I'll remember that when I find something I like and then just keep reverting the edit like Hotgas did since how things are done. MoonsMoon (talk) 23:38, 30 September 2025 (UTC)
::We're not allowed to use Facebook as a reliable source, and did not realize that was the case here. That changes thing a bit, and if you will document that in article talk for me, I'll have a look and make any suggested changes for you which I feel are appropriate. Xan747 (talk) 00:09, 1 October 2025 (UTC)
:::I brought it up in the Dance In Thailand Talk over a *month* ago. It's still there. No replies. I'd mentioned it in my edits multiple times too. It was ignored.
:::It's literally a Facebook post. It just happens to be that TNN Thailand printed it, though without verifying anything. So yes, the source is literally Facebook - https://www.tnnthailand.com/socialtalk/140881/ MoonsMoon (talk) 05:10, 3 October 2025 (UTC)
::::Ok so that is basically one person's oral tradition, and yes, it's just a copy of the facebook post with no further analysis ... so not a good source. But now I am confused because the other editor is *removing* content you added back ↗, which as far as I can tell *is* properly sourced, so why are we even talking about facebook now, unless there is content based on that source you wish removed? But this really should be discussed on article talk, not here. I only came here to discuss the procedural aspects of navigating Wikpedia's complex and often capricious dispute resolution system. I'll ping you there to continue this. Xan747 (talk) 21:56, 3 October 2025 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 14



Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dance in Thailand ↗, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Khmer ↗. Such links are usually incorrect ↗, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. <small>(Read the FAQ{{*}} Join us at the DPL WikiProject ↗.)</small>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 07:56, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Comments



Hi MoonsMoon, do you mind if I edit your comment to format them into proper Wikipedia links? <span style="background-color:light-dark(#f3f3fe,#252558);color:var(--color-progressive,#36c);padding:2px 5px;border-radius:3px;white-space:nowrap">Northern Moonlight</span> 19:58, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

:Which comment is that?
:Also, I was told I could add an additional George Groslier quote to the existing one. However, Hotgas once again reverted the page (which I guess is just going to keep happening forever) and now that you've reverted it back the new content for which I got permission isn't included. MoonsMoon (talk) 20:33, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Help



@Xan747 I got an email to confirm my own email address which I did of course. Then it said there was somebody assigned to help me if needed, or something like that. Well now I need them but I have zero clue how to find them or even what their name is. How do I get back to that info? I clicked the link in my email again but that didn't work. MoonsMoon (talk) 00:31, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

:I don't have any experience using the e-mail system, or any sort of help system that would require using the e-mail system. Maybe someone at wp:teahouse ↗ can help you. Xan747 (talk) 14:34, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
::No problem, thank you so much for being patient and helping me. MoonsMoon (talk) 00:45, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
:::You are welcome, any time. Good luck! Xan747 (talk) 14:54, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 28



An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Dance in Thailand ↗, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Khmer ↗.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:55, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

:Sorry! :-/ MoonsMoon (talk) 23:57, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents ↗ regarding an issue with which you may have been involved



link=|25px|alt=Information icon ↗ There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents ↗ regarding an issue with which you may have been involved.<!--Template:Discussion notice--><!--Template:ANI-notice--> Shirt58 (talk) 🦘 08:42, 8 November 2025 (UTC)

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message



<div class="ivmbox " style="margin-bottom: 1em; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: #fdf2d5; padding: 0.5em; display: flex; align-items: center; ">
<div class="ivmbox-image" style="padding-left:1px; padding-right:0.5em;flex-basis: 40px">40px ↗</div>
<div class="ivmbox-text">
Hello! Voting in the '''2025 Arbitration Committee elections ↗''' is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on {{#time:l, j F Y|{{Arbitration Committee candidate/data|2025|end}}-1 day}}. All '''eligible users ↗''' are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee ↗ is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process ↗. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans ↗, topic bans ↗, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy ↗ describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2025 election, please review the candidates ↗ and submit your choices on the '''2025|poll}}|voting page ↗'''. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{tlx|NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. <small>MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:52, 18 November 2025 (UTC)</small>

</div>
</div>
<!-- Message sent by User:Cyberpower678@enwiki using the list at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee_Elections_December_2025/Coordination/MM/09&oldid=1322758983 -->

Thanking me



Hi, @MoonsMoon, I was notified that you thanked me for my edit at Sompot chong kben ↗, and I wanted to say thank you for my first thank ↗ ever. Ligh&#38;Salv (talk) 06:57, 1 December 2025 (UTC)

In Dangrek Incident article



I am unable to find any cited source in the “Incident (June 1979)” section that explicitly supports the figure of 110 buses. Reference [6] mentions 20 buses, and the other cited sources do not specify a number. Could you please indicate which reliable source supports the number 110? Per WP:V, numerical claims should be directly supported by the cited material. Rainy1992 (talk) 06:12, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

:"On the morning of Friday, June 8, 110 buses pulled up at the border site of Nong Chan, a few miles north of Aranyaprathet, where several thousand refugees were now camped in fields." page 88-89 <ref>{{cite book |last1=Shawcross |first1=William |title=The Quality of Mercy : Cambodia, Holocaust, and Modern Conscience : with a report from Ethiopia|date=1985|pages=88, 89, 90|url=https://archive.org/details/qualityofmercyca00shaw_0/page/88/mode/2up}}</ref> MoonsMoon (talk) 06:16, 24 February 2026 (UTC)
:Why did you bother coming onto my Talk Page if you were just going to ignore it and delete the content anyway? MoonsMoon (talk) 19:03, 24 February 2026 (UTC)

OrphanReferenceFixer: Help on reversion


Hi there! I check pages listed in :Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting ↗ to try to fix reference errors. Recently, you reverted ↗ my fix to :Sampot ↗.

If you did this because the references should be removed from the article, you have misunderstood the situation. Most likely, the article originally contained both <code><nowiki><ref name="foo">...</ref></nowiki></code> and one or more <code><nowiki><ref name="foo"/></nowiki></code> referring to it. Someone then removed the <code><nowiki><ref name="foo">...</ref></nowiki></code> but left the <code><nowiki><ref name="foo"/></nowiki></code>, which results in a <strong class="error">big red error</strong> in the article. I replaced one of the remaining <code><nowiki><ref name="foo"/></nowiki></code> with a copy of the <code><nowiki><ref name="foo">...</ref></nowiki></code>; I ''did not'' re-insert the reference to where it was deleted, I just replaced one of the ''remaining'' instances. What you need to do to fix it is to make sure you remove '''all''' instances of the named reference so as to not leave any <strong class="error">big red error</strong>.

If you reverted because I made an actual mistake, please be sure to also correct any reference errors in the page so I won't come back and make the same mistake again. Also, please post an error report at User talk:AnomieBOT so my operator can fix me! If the error is so urgent that I need to be stopped, also post a message at User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/OrphanReferenceFixer. Thanks! AnomieBOT<span style="color:#880">⚡</span> 00:15, 10 March 2026 (UTC) <small style="color:#888">If you do not wish to receive this message in the future, add {{tlx|bots|2=optout=AnomieBOT-OrphanReferenceFixer}} to your talk page.</small>

:I don't think I'm understanding all of this. MoonsMoon (talk) 01:19, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

Avoiding an edit war



30px|alt=Stop icon ↗ '''You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war ↗, according to the reverts you've made to :Khmer traditional clothing ↗.''' This means that you are repeatedly reverting content back to how you think it should be, despite knowing that other editors disagree. Once it is known that there is a disagreement, users are expected to collaborate ↗ with others, avoid editing disruptively ↗, and try to reach a consensus ↗ – rather than repeatedly reverting the changes made by other users.

Important points to note:
# {{strong|Edit warring is disruptive behavior ↗ – regardless of how many reverts you have made;}}
# {{strong|Do not engage in edit warring – even if you believe that you are right.}}
You need to discuss the disagreement on the article's talk page ↗ and work towards a revision that represents consensus among everyone involved. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard ↗ or seek dispute resolution ↗ if discussions reach an impasse. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection ↗. {{strong|If you continue to engage in edit warring, you may be blocked ↗ from editing.}} <!-- Template:uw-ew --> &#126; ToBeFree (talk) 11:40, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

:Thanks for creating a discussion at {{slink|Talk:Khmer_traditional_clothing#Edits_and_photo_deletions:_what_is_the_issue?}}. The templates you may have been looking for are {{tl|uw-ew}} (or {{tl|uw-ewsoft}}) and {{tl|please see}}, the latter to invite the other user to the discussion with a message on their talk page, and one of the edit warring templates so that a report doesn't get instantly declined for a lack of a warning. &#126; ToBeFree (talk) 11:42, 27 March 2026 (UTC)
::When am I going to be allowed to edit Khmer traditional clothing? The new editor in question never joined the discussion, predictably. I found more information about charobab that I've added to the Sampot article which must also be added to the Khmer traditional clothing article. MoonsMoon (talk) 19:49, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
:::I think the WP:DISCFAIL ↗ essay contains helpful advice for such situations including an explanation of reasonable timespans. &#126; ToBeFree (talk) 20:53, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
::::It didn't. MoonsMoon (talk) 20:54, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::It says: {{tqq|Wait: Check daily to see if there has been a response at either the article talk page or at their user talk page. If there has not been a reply in a week, it is probably safe to move to the next step.}} &#126; ToBeFree (talk) 22:42, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
::::::(It is not a strict guideline or policy you'd have to follow, but I like it.) &#126; ToBeFree (talk) 22:43, 29 March 2026 (UTC)
:::::::It's been nine days and that person hasn't said a word anywhere! So it's my understanding I can now edit the article. MoonsMoon (talk) 00:54, 6 April 2026 (UTC)
:::::::So I checked just in case I missed something and they're globally blocked! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Sophialee8899 MoonsMoon (talk) 00:57, 6 April 2026 (UTC)
::::::::Interesting. The global lock is not for block evasion, so WP:BE ↗'s permission to undo all of their edits doesn't apply, but of course there is noone left to discuss or dispute your changes, so ... no concerns from my side ... &#126; ToBeFree (talk) 04:24, 6 April 2026 (UTC)
:::::::::I'm going to go ahead and use some of the photos they kept inserting. If they would have put them in the correct section there'd be no problem. But it was like inserting a photo of a jean jacket into a section about leather pants! MoonsMoon (talk) 18:03, 7 April 2026 (UTC)
:::::::::I have to bug you again. I pinged the last legit contributors to Khmer traditional clothing (including you) on its Talk Page about how three different Wikipedia articles have a Khmer Textiles section. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Khmer_traditional_clothing MoonsMoon (talk) 04:49, 8 April 2026 (UTC)
::::::::::This does not work. You have to make the pings in the same edit that adds your signature. You'll need a new message there with proper pings. &#126; ToBeFree (talk) 08:03, 8 April 2026 (UTC)
:::::::::::My signature? I'm not sure what you're saying here so I'm going to Google it. MoonsMoon (talk) 16:41, 8 April 2026 (UTC)
::::::::::::That worked! I got that ping. Thanks. &#126; ToBeFree (talk) 19:01, 8 April 2026 (UTC)
:I tried discussing it on the Talk Page. Before that, I explained multiple times in the edit summary that their edits were inaccurate and unexplained. While this was going on, I'm actually trying to improve the page itself. But fine. MoonsMoon (talk) 17:03, 27 March 2026 (UTC)

CS1 error on Cambodian art ↗


25px|alt=|link= ↗ Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have '''automatically detected''' that this edit ↗ performed by you, on the page :Cambodian art ↗, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive ↗, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:Qwerfjkl/Botpreload&editintro=User:Qwerfjkl/Boteditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:Qwerfjkl&preloadtitle=Qwerfjkl%20(bot)%20–%20MoonsMoon&section=new&preloadparams%5b%5d={{FULLPAGENAMEE:Cambodian art}}&preloadparams%5b%5d=1353415927 report it to my operator].
Thanks, <!-- User:Qwerfjkl (bot)/inform -->Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 04:13, 10 May 2026 (UTC)

:No you're right, robot, but I have no idea how to fix it, sorry. MoonsMoon (talk) 05:02, 10 May 2026 (UTC)