Talk:Panthongtae Shinawatra
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page is badly written, makes numerous unverifiable statements, and contitutes a personal attack on the subject of the article.
"In the past, he had a reputation as a wasted playboy who had lived a reckless life." <- NPOV
"he was expelled from high school (Triam Udom Suksa School)" <- Can someone confirm this?
"As a teenager, he was ... caught red-handed in cheating at Ramkhamhaeng University examination." <- This statement is made without any supporting evidence.
"Once a drug addict, ..." <- This statement is made without any supporting evidence.
"As his father has become a Prime Minister, Panthongtae has gained a softened, cleaner image as a loving young businessman who founded his own company..." <- WTF! NPOV?
I'm no fan of the subject either, but an article like this is a slap in the face of everything that wikipedia stands for.Patiwat 07:47, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Unsupported allegations bordering on character assasination
I would like to reiterate my request for supporting evidence for certain claims made in this article. Particularly 1) unsupported allegations that Panthongtae was caught cheating in university examinations, 2) unsupported allegations that Panthongtae was expelled from Triam Udom, and 3) unsupported allegations that Panthongtae is a meth and ecstacy addict. Come on - these are outrageous claims, but easily verifiable.
This is starting to look like character assasination. Come on - these are outrageous claims, but should be easily verifiable or falsifiable. If nobody can come up with a shred of evidence or even a mention in a newspaper or website, then I will delete these claims.Patiwat 21:20, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
- I support the neutrality dispute with this article. The Ramkhamhaeng test scandal was well-documented in the English-language press. I will do what I can to track that information down. However the other stuff - the drug allegations especially - are fodder for the vernacular tabloid press. It's doubtful anyone can verify that information, and therefore it doesn't belong. Wisekwai 07:21, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- The vernacular tabloid press has websites too. It isn't that I don't want to see allegations of his cheating or drug abuse or whatever in the article - but I have major issue with such serious claims being made without any publically-available references.Patiwat 08:42, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- I'm with you on this, Patiwat. If sources for the allegations of drug addiction and his expulsion from Triam Udom can be verified, then by all means, let's have them in the article. Wisekwai 09:14, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- Good job there Wisekwai. Any references for the Triam Udom allegations? I know he did study there for a period. Also, I'll supplement the share disclosure topic with some information from the Thaksin Shinawatra article.Patiwat 15:17, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- I'm with you on this, Patiwat. If sources for the allegations of drug addiction and his expulsion from Triam Udom can be verified, then by all means, let's have them in the article. Wisekwai 09:14, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
- I found a couple references in the BBC to the cheating scandal. I included one in reference to his still being punished by failing the subject he was sitting. The other indicated that it took three weeks for the university "investigation" to determine that the notes were "unrelated." I thought that was also relevant to note, especially in light of the university's acting rector at that time quoted as saying cheating was "common," "trivial" and unworthy of punishment.[1]24.28.72.224 08:26, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
- The vernacular tabloid press has websites too. It isn't that I don't want to see allegations of his cheating or drug abuse or whatever in the article - but I have major issue with such serious claims being made without any publically-available references.Patiwat 08:42, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Billionaire?
When it says "billionaire", is it assuming US Dollars? Certainly, being a billionaire in baht is much less impressive. -MescalineBanana 01:59, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Photo not in public domain
- The photo of Panthongtae that had appeared in this article (Pantong2.jpg) was not in the public domain. It was taken from the Thai website deedeejang.com. I have deleted the photo from the article. Patiwat 05:33, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
- Somebody put the image back in. I have removed it again. Patiwat 07:16, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Claims not backed up by reference
The article noted "This deal caused controversy and drew claims of nepotism, however, as How Come was a new firm and a sole advertising concession for the subway had previously been awarded to Triad Networks Co[2]." The linked article does not make any claim that the deal was the result of nepotism. I have therefore deleted the sentence. Patiwat 22:09, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
- I have reverted this deletion. The article states, "Others said the entry of How Come was not surprising, given the lack of transparency and nepotism that have characterised state contracts in the past." Is that not drawing claims of nepotism? As for your deletion of the entire sentence and reference, is it your position that the deal did not cause controversy? As a sidenote, I've folded the earlier How Come reference into this reference as they are the same Bangkok Post article from different URLs. WokYai 06:58, 19 September 2006 (UTC)