Talk:Norodom Sihanouk

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleNorodom Sihanouk has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
In the newsOn this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
September 14, 2015Good article nomineeListed
October 25, 2015Peer reviewReviewed
April 2, 2016Peer reviewNot reviewed
May 31, 2016Featured article candidateNot promoted
In the news A news item involving this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "In the news" column on October 16, 2012.
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on April 4, 2005, April 4, 2006, April 4, 2007, April 4, 2008, April 4, 2016, April 4, 2017, April 2, 2019, and September 24, 2023.
Current status: Good article

Untitled[edit]

Well, I don't know how it is handled in Cambodia, but in other monarchies kings/queens retain the style "His/Her Majesty" when they abdicate. Gugganij 23:30, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I'm sure the late Princess Juliana of the Netherlands would dispute that with you. john k 01:22, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I thought the late Queen Juliana retained her titel and her style as well, like the Queen Mum (officially known as HM Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother). The BBC referred to Juliana as Queen Juliana. Gugganij 19:54, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Juliana and her mother reverted to the style of princess,but normally it has been different (Léopold III of Belgium became "His Majesty King Léopold III" when he ceased to be "His Majesty the King of the Belgians", for example).I think the wider issue here is whether the article should treat the King's announcement of his abdication as having taken legal effect just yet in the absence of legal provision for it to do so.--L.E./12.144.5.2/le@put.com
Thanks for the information. As far as the later point is concerned, I agree. Gugganij 22:15, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

How can you know that Norodom Sihanouk has officially abdicated, there is no official document that I know of stating this... Even his son, Rannaridh has asked his father to reconsider his decision... So as long this is pending (unless Norodom Sihanouk confirms his decision) he is technically the King of Cambodia squash 01:19, Oct 10, 2004 (UTC)

After previous abdications he reverted to being a Prince so the precedent is set in Cambodia. His successor has been proclaimed by the throne conuncil so the abdication is evidently "legal"AndyL 18:01, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

As for the "Queen Mum" she never abdicated because she was never Queen regnant. Look instead at Edward VIII who ceased being King Edward when he abdicated. AndyL 18:02, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

just two cents[edit]

Although I'm not aware of all the subtlties myself, I do know that throughout Cambodian history it has been a fairly common occurance to have more than one king at a time. Sometimes there was a Great King with other kings or sub-king sort of people, close relations usually, to have charge over specific areas. This tradition of a Grand king and lesser king may be similar to what exists now with Sihanouk and Sihamoni. It is certain though that at Sihamoni's blessing and investiture as king he was never actually crowned or enthroned in the traditional Khmer way. NguyenHue 02:20, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)NguyenHue

Title[edit]

His title right now is Samdech Euv (Father King). Though it's not the full, entire, formal version of his title. It's just what people of Cambodia refer to him now. --Dara 02:03, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

New Category[edit]

Is it possible to create a new category for the Royal Family of Cambodia? There is one for the Monarchs of Cambodia (Category:Cambodian_monarchs), but it is only a list of kings. There are other members of the royal family of Cambodia that have their own entry here but they are aren't or were never kings. It would very convienient if there was a list of all of them on one page. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sirik_Matak http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norodom_Ranariddh

And I may add future entries for Bopha Devi (Buppha Devi), Queen Norodom Monineath, the late Sisowath Kossamak Nearireath, plus others. So grouping them all in one category may help those that are interested about the royal family of Cambodia. --Dara 02:11, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Hello Dara, I crrated some categories for members of the Royal family at Category:Royal_Family_of_Cambodia which consists of:
Category:Cambodian monarchs e.g. Norodom Sihamoni Norodom Sihanouk Norodom Suramarit
Category:Cambodian princes e.g. Sirik Matak Norodom Ranariddh
Category:Cambodian princesses e.g. Bopha Devi
Category:Cambodian queens e.g. Norodom Monineath, Sisowath Kossamak

I see that you which I have a list of all of them on one page, I agree with you. But some people they might not agree and they go and change it. Squash 09:40, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Offsprings...[edit]

Can someone put up a list of Norodom Sihanouk's children? There are many, but I don't know exactly how many there are. I just know of Arun Rasmy, Sihamoni, Narindrdarapong (recently deceased), Ranariddh, and Bopha Devi.--Dara 23:00, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

POV issues???[edit]

Does anybody else see any POV issues here. I've just read through the entire article. Upon first reading, it seems very skewed towards giving an overly positive view of Sihanouk. For example the last paragraph talks about a "lifetime of fighting for independance for Cambodia". I've done a fair amount of study and concur with many who believe that Sihanouk is a very shrewd politician but overall a very inept leader. It seems he has spent a lifetime fighting to make sure that he gets/keeps power. The article puts a postivie slant on every area of Sihanouk's life and mentions nothing about Sihanouk's many, many failures. --WilliamThweatt 22:53, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Make any changes that you feel are justified, and NPOV. However, let's keep some sense of proportion: the failures of Sihanouk are nothing in comparison with the horrors of the Khmer Rouge. Also, perhpas Sihanouk has "spent a lifetime fighting to make sure that he gets/keeps power", but so have Roosevelt or Churchil in their own countries. Nothing particularly special about it. Finally, most Cambodians remember fondly Sihanouk's regime (at least those old enough to have lived before 1970), a time of relative peace and prosperity compared to what followed after 1970, so his leadership skills must not have been so totally bad after all. I am not a Sihanouk's apologist, but just hopping we avoid the extremes of presenting Sihanouk as either a perfect leader, or a real-evil-not-yet-uncovered. PS: I wrote only the linguistic/etymology part of this article, nothing else. Hardouin 13:38, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree about the sense of proportion. A politician is, afterall, just a politician no matter what country you look at. I was in no way saying that Sihanouk was "evil", as you put it. I'm just saying this article seems overly positive toward him. I'm sure that after the horrors of the Khmer Rouge, it's easy to look back to the "good-ole-days" when Sihanouk reigned with nostalgia. However, his independent reign lasted from the early '50's to 1970, just over 15 years. While this may have been a time of relative peace and prosperity (key word being "relative"), Sihanouk probably had very little to do with it. He writes in his own memoirs that he was not concerned about affairs of state and spent this time carousing after women and obsessing over his own movie production company, while various factions (Son Ngoc Thanh, the Khmer Rouge, etc) manuevered to overthrow him. At best it can be said that Sihanouk was coasting on the foundations and bureaucracy that the French laid down and it was inevitable that he would run them into the ground and loose his country. Since 1970, he continues to constantly switch allegiances to which ever side will allow him to keep a public face. As I said earlier, a very shrewd politician, but overall, an inept leader. Some good sources are his own memoirs, David Chandler's A History of Cambodia and Milton Osborne's Sihanouk.--WilliamThweatt 23:34, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It wasn't just since 1970 that he switched allegiances. He has done that during his entire public life. During the "good-ole-days" he would tack back and forth between left and right politicians at home...and the communists and non-communist blocks overseas. He preserved his own position by playing everyone inside and outside cambodia off against each other. The guy is a master manipulator and his memoirs should not be trusted at face value. His political "system" could only last as long as he could balance the left against the right. As to "peace and prosperity", it was never what it seemed. Many people's impression of the country was based on what they saw (the capital) rather than the country as a whole. 205.188.116.199 06:23, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

citations for material removed as "unsourced nonsense"[edit]

These are citations for a number of recent edits that whose accuracy was questioned and which were removed from the page. I'm giving citations from Philip Short's "Pol Pot: anatomy of a nightmare". The source is well-regarded, widely available and has extensive footnotes.

  • For an account of Pol Pot sending Sihanouk to the UN in during the Vietnamese invasion, See (Short p. 396, 402-404).
  • For an account of Pol Pot's attempt to seek political asylum in the US, his rejection by the US, France/etc and the eventual deal struck where China took him, See (Short. p. 403)
  • Hun Sen's being an ex-Khmer Rouge official is well-known.
  • For an account of Sihanouk's resignation in 1976, see (Short p. 334)
  • For an account of Sihanouk's lifestyle in Cambodia during the rule of the Khmer Rouge (air conditioning, his deserts) see (Short p. 335)

205.188.116.199 06:16, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I very strongly object to the use of Short as the sole source for the accounts of Sihanouk's resignation. Short is far from "well-regarded" and his "extensive footnotes" are primarily interviews with former Khmer Rouge officials. Short barely has a working knowledge of spoken Khmer and doesn't even read Khmer. His book is seen by most as one-sided and contrary to history. Here's an extract of a review by Yale University:

  • "Short is unable to read Khmer and keeps a distance from Cambodian victims. From his faulty pronunciation advice to his reliance on Khmer Rouge sources, Short's use of evidence at a remove does not stand up to scrutiny. There are too many factual errors to list, but more often he ignores existing documentation to privilege the unprovable." (see whole review here)

I reverted to the historically accepted version and included Short's "version" as an alternative account in a separate paragraph. I am tempted to remove all material taken from Short, as it is not reliable, but I will wait and see what others may think.--WilliamThweatt 15:40, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly disagree with you on several points.
  • First, the book has been very positively reviewed by others. For example, David Chandler who is at least as credible as Ben Kiernan and had his review published by a much more mainstream publication. [1]. David Chandler has the following to say about Short's sources and footnotes: "Mr. Short has made excellent use, for example, of Vietnamese, Chinese and French archives that were largely inaccessible to me. He has also profited from the newfound volubility of many former Khmer Rouge cadres who, since the demise of the movement in the late 1990s, have become eager to talk about their part in it - perhaps to sidestep their culpability for its horrors."
  • You have wrongly attributed the Kiernan review to Yale University. It is no such thing. The author is a professor at Yale and has used a website at Yale, but that review is from the Times Higher Education Supplement. The obscurity of his platform says itself something about the review. Kiernan is a very controversal figure based on his actions in the 1970s and the political viewpoint he brings to all his work. His most solid objections to Short are (unfortunately) related to the historical dispuates between the Vietnamese Communist Party and the Khmer Rouge. The flaws that Ben Kiernan lists are all to do with promoting the idea that Vietnam was always the friend of Cambodia and that the Cambodians involved in the Viet Minh in the 1950s were independent of Vietnam. Ben Kiernan's review is so obviously political and so obviously wrong in its thin case against Short that I find it difficult to take seriously. I further personally find Mr. Kiernan to be a utterly disgusting individual based on what he wrote and did in the 1970s with regard to Cambodia. He is an opportunist of the first order who suddenly changed his mind when it was far too late and then made a career for himself attacking what he had previously supported. In that regard, he shares much in common with Sihanouk.

To give an idea of what Mr. Keirnan is about, this is a quote from him in 1979. "(explaining why he was wrong) The brutal authoritarian trend within the revolutionary movement after 1973 was not simply a grass-roots reaction, and expression of popular outrage at the killing and destruction of the countryside by U.S. bombs, although that helped it along decisively. There can be no doubting that the evidence also points clearly to a systematic use of violence against the population by that chauvinist section of the revolutionary movement that was led by Pol Pot. In my opinion this violence was employed in the service of a nationalist revivalism that had little concern for the living conditions of the Khmer people, or the humanitarian socialist ideals that had inspired the broader Kampuchian Revolutionary movement." He was a supporter of the Khmer Rouge, an apologist for Vietnam's occupation of Cambodia and I don't find his criticism credible considering he makes broad claims about Short and then backs none of them up.

  • Can you produce a less controverisal/political source that Keirnan that denounces the book. Given Chandler's presence on the other side, your contention that the book is "seen by most" doesn't seem to hold up at all.
  • You seem to have an objection to the mention of Hun Sen's membership in the Khmer Rouge. Please elaborate on why you refuse to allow it to be mentioned on the page.
  • Please present your sources for your account of his 1976 resignation. What specifically is the source for the claim that he was forced to resign.
  • Please present sources that explain why Short's account of events in New York in 1976 was wrong or inaccurate or even offer an alternative view of what happened.
  • Please present an explaination or a source to explain why Short's description of Sihanouk's lifestyle in Cambodia which comes from the works of Sihanouk himself is wrong or inaccurate.

168.127.0.51 19:26, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, Ben Kiernan is probably the most respected figure in European/North American academia who works on Cambodia.
That the descriptions of Sihanouk's lifestyle in Cambodia originate with himself are reason enough to doubt their historical accuracy.
Oh, and by the way, the Times Higher Educational Supplement is anything but obscure. The THES "is essential reading for academics and researchers in tertiary, higher and post- graduate education. It reports on and debates the latest developments in the international academic community. Every week the THES’s international news features and opinion pages report and analyse everything from academic research and training to government policy, information technology and industry links. The letters pages provide a further platform for open discussion. There are up to twelve pages of book reviews, focusing on a different subject area each week."
It is home to significant book reviews on academic works, and where controversial topics are thrashed out between academics. It is an honour for an academic to have their book review published in the THES. Cripipper 21:54, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ben Kiernan is a controversial figure because of his vocal support for the Khmer Rouge in the 1970s. Even after they fell, he continued to claim that humanitarian socialist goals had inspired the broader Khmer Rouge movement. As a controverial figure with a strong political view. Using him as the sole source to discredit and denounce Philip Short's work is not acceptable.
Your "logic" that we should distrust Sihanouk's own account of how he lived under the Khmer Rouge is beyond sense. A man who writes, while his country is starving about shortages of Rum for his deserts should be taken at face value.
As far as book reviews go, the THES is a backwater. The purpose of the THES isn't hostile book reviews or debates about the history of Southeast Asia. Ben Kiernan's "review" is sloppy, makes sweeping claims he doesn't offer any support for and would not be accepted for publication in many other places.
But back to the main point, David Chandler who is a published historian of at least equal weight to Kiernan wrote a very positive review of the book. So the claim that Kiernan in his review is speaking for all historians or even most historians cannot be maintained. 205.188.116.199 01:16, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'm back from a short Wikibreak and I see the conversation has carried on nicely. First of all, I've never said anything about Hun Sen, it is well known that he was Khmer Rouge. Likewise, I'm not too concerned about Sihanouk's lifestyle. Knowing his proclivaties, there's no doubt he tried to lead as lavish and careless a personal lifestyle that he possibly could. However, I'd like to redirect the discussion to my main point. While I have read all of Chandler's books and deeply respect his work, he isn't infalible, and his praise of Short is misplaced, or at best, better condisered in light of Short's main topic, Pol Pot. I will admit that Short's book is well-researched (though one-sidedly so) regarding Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge (and, where praised by others, it's just for the depth of interviews with former Khmer Rouge...his conclusions are controversial and rejected by most). My objections are not with his content is this area. My main objection is with using Short as source for Sihanouk as Sihanouk's life was neither the topic of his book nor his research. Expecially suspicious are his accounts of Sihanouk's "resignation" and the "deal" between China and the US. Anybody who believes that, under the Khmer Rouge regime, Sihanouk was in a posistion to voluntarily resign (or do just about anything else for that matter) is just ignoring the facts. Likewise, Sihanouk had always had good relations with Bejing, it didn't require a deal with the US to allow him to remain there. Sihanouk had courted Bejing's favor since probably the early 60s (if not earlier) to counter Soviet influence in Vietnam. And here are just a few of the other that gave this book a negative review:
  • Nayan Chanda - Washington Post
  • Warren I. Cohen - Los Angeles Times
  • Scott McLemee - Chicago Tribune
  • Elizabeth Becker - Boston Globe
I could list many, many more if these aren't enough for you. If these specific events transpired the way Short claims, you should be able to provide other sources, especially ones directly related to the topic (Sihanouk), especially considering the amount of books that have been written about him.--WilliamThweatt 20:27, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Silly details[edit]

"Sihanouk continued to live in luxury in Cambodia after he resigned. He was provided with an air-conditioned residence and complained in his memoirs from the period about running low on rum for his bananes flambles desert." That second sentence adds nothing to the article, and actually sounds a bit silly. So his luxury residence was air-conditioned - so what? He ran out of rum for desert - come on.... this is an encyclopedia. Silly details like this have no part in a biographical article. Patiwat 01:12, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

though Wikifans want very much for this to be an encyclopedia... your point suggests that in fact it is something other. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.79.62.19 (talk) 06:59, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sure that to Americans living in the South of the USA 'air-conditioning' is the height of opulence and something only the most Neronic dictators and Kings luxuriate in, symbolizing their selfish anti-democratic decadence ! Claverhouse (talk) 17:17, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Political Views?[edit]

I am wondering about his political position. Seems to alternate between pro and anti-left (China?). He gets first installed, then deposed by the Khmer Rouge, and, after being re-installed as king in 1993, seeks medical treatment in Beijing and takes up residence in Pyongyang. Both China and North Korea didn't strike me as very monarchy-supporting, generally speaking. Maybe someone could elaborate on his (many?) political positions over time? -- megA (talk) 19:37, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sihanouk was originally appointed ruler of Cambodia by Vichy France in 1941, presumably because they thought he was safely pro-French. The only time it mattered what his political views were was when he was in power in the 1960s. He refused aid from the U.S. from 1962 on, although this had accounted for 15 percent of Cambodia's budget. He thought that if he was anti-American enough, the communists wouldn't bother him. He turned to the Non-Aligned Movement, especially France and India, and the army confiscated massive amounts of rice from the peasants. But these tactics could not replace the refused aid. As the condition of the economy and the army deteriorated, the country became low-hanging fruit. China broke with Russia and Vietnam in 1968 and began sponsoring the Khmer Rouge. After Sihanouk went into exile in 1970, his true colors became clear: He was for sale to whoever offered him the nicest palace. Kauffner (talk) 04:31, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

number of times prime minister[edit]

Rulers.org gives him 10 separate terms as prime minister, but we say at the beginning that he had only two. john k (talk) 05:36, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ancestry[edit]

If each group of (8, 10, 28), (16, 20, 24) and (17, 21) indicates the same person, I think they should be properly labeled. --128.122.53.15 (talk) 23:29, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Foreign Honours[edit]

This is a minor matter, but the article Order of the Queen of Sheba says that it was for ladies. J S Ayer (talk) 16:17, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help with stub: Kingdom of Cambodia (1975-76)[edit]

Hello, I noticed there was a gap in the former states of Cambodia so I created Kingdom of Cambodia (1975-76); any help in expanding this stub would be much appreciated. Cheers, walk victor falk talk 04:42, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On the Title Section[edit]

A lot of Cambodia-related biographies, especially for royalty, have excessive translations for titles. I have removed part of it here in a recent edit. This article is not for teaching what every single word in his title means. The problem with this also is that they are literal translations too. I think Wikipedia provides the name in the native language in parenthesis for a reason, that is so that it can be looked up in a dictionary or Wiktionary, if one wanted to learn more about that language. --Dara (talk) 06:12, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dap Chhuon plot[edit]

"The Tragedy of Cambodian History" by David P. Chandler ISBN 0-300-04919-6; pp. 99-107 "The Sam Sary and Dap Chhuon Plots" - Full source posted by Facebook user: https://www.facebook.com/BhddhiKnowledge/posts/328102793980981

War with the CIA https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/soc.culture.cambodia/bikcCCUVz4g

Removed content[edit]

  • Hi, I have removed the following paragraph:

"On November 28, 2012, King Father Norodom Sihanouk was anointed by Royal Decree of HM King Norodom Sihamoni with the title Preah Karuna Preah Norodom Sihanouk Preah Borom Ratanakkot (Khmer: ព្រះករុណាព្រះនរោត្តម សីហនុ ព្រះបរមរតនកោដ្ឋ) (literally meaning The King who lies in the Diamond Urn)."

I tried to Google search the title in Khmer and English, but no results from credible news agencies (AKP, Kohsanteap, Phnompenhpost etc) turned up on the exact term and date reporting the news. Removing this sentence as per Wiki guideline Wikipedia:Citing sources. Would appreciate if any editors can find and provide URL link, book or other reference material to this. Mr Tan (talk) 05:23, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this source should be sufficient. Khmer kings traditionally have up to three different names at different times: 1) their birth name (from the time they're born until they take the throne), then 2) they may take a Regnal name upon being crowned king, then 3) a Posthumous name is often bestowed after their death by the succeeding king. Sihanouk's posthumous name is ព្រះបរមរតនកោដ្ឋ. If you want more sources you can google "ព្រះបរមរតនកោដ្ឋ" and narrow the results to November-December 2012 like this.--William Thweatt TalkContribs 05:55, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I"ll re-include this in the "Titles" section. I found a Cambodian government source here [2]. Mr Tan (talk) 10:03, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Works section[edit]

Hi, I have removed the list of material from "Works". I am re-pasting the content here below.

I do not feel it would be appropriate to chunk in the whole list of such works into the main article, and I would feel such content would be more appropriate for other sister projects such as Wikisource or Wikibooks. Alternatively, a specialised list article maybe created to accomodate the content below, taking "List of events during the Silver Jubilee of Elizabeth II" as an example. My take is that the content structure of Elizabeth II would be a good example, and all list materials should be created in seperate "list" articles except for references and used book materials in the Bibliography section. One may also refer to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Layout as general guideline. Mr Tan (talk) 10:03, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Traced the article history, this removed section below was added around December 2011. Mr Tan (talk) 10:31, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Content[edit]

Works[edit]

  • The position of Cambodia in a dangerous world San Francisco : Asia Foundation, 1958
  • Speech delivered by His Royal Highness Prince Norodom Sihanouk, President of the Council of Ministers on the occasion of the inauguration of the Khmer-American Friendship Highway Phnom-Penh, 1959
  • Ideal, purpose and duties of the Khmer Royal Socialist Youth; interpretation and commentary of the statute of the K. R. S. Y., N.p., c.1960s
  • Address of H.R.H. Norodom Sihanouk, Chief of State of Cambodia [at the] conference of heads of state or government of non-aligned countries. New York: Permanent Mission of Cambodia to the United Nations 1961
  • Address of H.R.H. Prince Norodom Sihanouk, Chief of State of Cambodia to the Asia Society. New York: Permanent Mission of Cambodia to the United Nations 1961
  • Address at the sixteenth session of the General Assembly of the United Nations New York: Permanent Mission of Cambodia to the United Nations 1961
  • Articles published in "Realités cambodgiennes" 22 June – 27 July 1962. Washington, D. C., Royal Cambodian Embassy 1961
  • Speech by Prince Norodom Sihanouk, Head of State, at the opening of the sixth Asian Conference organized by the Society of Friends. [Phnom-Penh] Information 1962
  • Open letter to the international press Phnom Penh: Imprimerie du Ministere de L'Information, 1964
  • Interview with Prince Sihanouk. with William Worthy Phnom Penh: The Ministry of Information, 1965
  • Are we "false neutrals"?: editorial in Kambuja review no. 16; 15 July 1966 Phnom Phen: Head of State's Cabinet, 1966
  • The failure experienced by the United States in their dealings with the "Third World," viewed in the light of Cambodia's own experience, Phnom Penh? 1968
  • Brief notes on national construction in Cambodia Phnom Penh : Impr. Sangkum Reastr Niyum, 1969
  • Message and solemn declaration of Samdech Norodom Sihanouk, Head of State of Cambodia (March 23, 1970). [S.l.]: Royal Government of National Union of Cambodia; New York: Indochina Solidarity Committee, 1970
  • Prince Norodom Sihanouk of Cambodia talks to Americans, Sept.–Oct. 1970. [n. p., 1970
  • Message to American friends by Prince Norodom Sihanouk of Cambodia. [n. p., 1970
  • Letter of Samdech Norodom Sihanouk, Head of State of Cambodia, to their majesties and their excellencies the heads of government of non-aligned countries. [n. p., 1970
  • Cambodia today: an interview with Prince Norodom Sihanouk. (with Ken Coates and Chris Farley) Nottingham, Eng.: Bertrand Russell Peace Foundation, 1970
  • Prince Norodom Sihanouk replies to Mr Norman Kirk M.P., Leader of the Opposition (New Zealand) [New Zealand? : s.n., 1971
  • Prince Norodom Sihanouk of Cambodia speaks; January–February 1971. [S.l. : s.n., 1971
  • Third World liberation: the key: speech to the Algiers summit conference Nottingham, Eng.: Bertrand Russell Peace Foundation, 1973

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Norodom Sihanouk/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Calvin999 (talk · contribs) 20:38, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Hi. I'm Calvin999 and I am reviewing this nomination.  — Calvin999 20:38, 20 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lead
  • was the King of Cambodia, who reigned from 1941 to 1955 and again from 1993 to 2004. → was the King of Cambodia from 1941 to 1955 and again from 1993 to 2004.
  • Sihanouk became the King of Cambodia in 1941 → Sihanouk ascended to the throne in 1941 (repletion of the King of Cambodia)
  • favour of his father, Norodom Suramarit → Link Norodom Suramarit
  • Comma after Norodom Suramarit
  • into exile in China and North Korea and went on to form a government in exile, → I know it's a bit pedantic, but 'exile' is repetitious
For the first "exile", any alternative word that you can think of replacing or suggest a formula to rephrase the sentence in its entity? If the second "exile" word is removed, then the whole meaning of the text will be severely compromised. (You way want to read Government in exile). I agree repetitions can sometimes be reduced, but in some cases like this it is probably necessary Mr Tan (talk) 17:24, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
'fleeing' perhaps? 'escaped'?  — Calvin999 17:27, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
fled to China and North Korea and...  — Calvin999 17:38, 26 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • hostilities between the PRK → What is the PRK? Unabbreviate and link.
  • who succeeded him as King. → No needed to capitalise king as it's not followed by a name.
  • During his lifetime, Sihanouk was also known for producing many films and musical works. → Could you add another sentence about this? It's reads like a last minute brief add on.
Early life and first reign
  • Sihanouk was the only child born of the union between → Sihanouk was the only child of
I have a bit of reservations here with removing the "union" word - his father, Suramarit has children with other wives besides Kossamak. To my knowledge Kossamak had only one child, that is Sihanouk, and he is indeed Kossamak's only child. But he is definitely not the only child of Suramarit....there is something called "half-siblings". Anyway I have addressed most of the comments above, still considering a couple of them. Mr Tan (talk) 03:57, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ah okay.  — Calvin999 11:49, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sisowath Monivong died on → Comma after Monivong
  • and also assumed → I don't think you need 'also'
  • were also given → or here.
  • I know it's his name, but so far in the lead and this section, I've found the use of 'Sihanouk' to be very repetitive.
  • and campaign propaganda → and a propaganda campaign


More to follow...

I have addressed all comments, except the suggestion for last sentence in the lead. I agree in-principle that another sentence should be introduced. But would this need to be urgently addressed? I am thinking of expanding the Filmography section a little--I have some material, but would need some time to think of what appropriate material to add in that maybe relevant and add-value to the current content of the prose. (As per Wikipedia:Verifiability#Verifiability_does_not_guarantee_inclusion)
Anyway, I feel that one sentence should tentatively be fine as the size of the Artistic Works section is small in comparison to the body, as per Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Lead_section#Introductory_text. Sihanouk's artistic involvement in the arts is at most, a "sidekick", while his regnal and political careers are areas that carried much greater impact and significance. I will take this into consideration as further edits go along, but I hope this point does not need to be urgently addressed as yet. Mr Tan (talk) 15:35, 30 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Premiership (1955–1960)
  • In the first few years after → "First few" is a bit awkward. I'd just have "In the years after"
  • language as the sole official language → Remove the first 'language'
  • alternately resigned → I don't think 'alternately' is needed nor makes sense
  • in Stung Treng Province respectively. → I don't think 'respectively' is needed here
  • Ngo Dinh Diem also → Comma before also
Health
  • Sihanouk was given a clean bill of health → I think this is too informal

To be honest, the articles is really well written. I couldn't find anything else to fault really.  — Calvin999 16:40, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

All fixed except for the 3rd point. If you look at the infobox on his "Prime Minister"-ship, he served serveral short stints as Prime Minister--taking up the post and resigning several times. I feel that if the "alternately" word is removed, it result in some readers not able to sufficiently capture the idea in the prose sufficiently. I feel it is sometimes necessary to use descriptives or action verbs to bring across messages in certain instances. Mr Tan (talk) 05:54, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Okay yeah I see what you're saying. Passing.  — Calvin999 07:56, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Awards (in category)[edit]

Hi, just to inform you, I have removed the categories pertaining to Sihanouk's awards, as I have shifted them to List of honours received by Norodom Sihanouk. There was a category clutter of awards in the past and I created that list page. If you can find any awards concerning Sihanouk, feel free to add them to the list page. (For your reference see the state of clutter in old version at [3]) Thanks.

(Also posted to User_talk:1982vdven#Norodom_Sihanouk) Mr Tan (talk) 11:25, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 52 external links on Norodom Sihanouk. 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) 18:38, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The first paragraph literally repeats the second and third paragraphs of the article[edit]

I struggle to understand how did this become a good article by Wikipedia's standards.

Can somebody fix this? --193.34.160.162 (talk) 05:16, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

First sentence of lede[edit]

In the very first introduction to this person, how should we present him? The current lede paragraph is

Norodom Sihanouk (Khmer: នរោត្តម សីហនុ; 31 October 1922 – 15 October 2012) was a Cambodian royal, politician, composer and filmmaker who was twice the King of Cambodia. He was the son of King Norodom Suramarit and Queen Sisowath Kossamak. In Cambodia, he is also known as Samdech Euv (Khmer: សម្តេចឪ, father prince).

Although I'm not sure, I would think that his composing and filmmaking career is distinctly secondary to his political career, certainly to the wider world outside Cambodia, which is by far most of our readership (in Cambodia, I don't know). It's what he's famous for, and what's most important about him -- by far. (He did have an influence as a patron of the Cambodian pop music movement and Cambodian film industry) So I was suggesting a lede which dispensed with the artistic accomplishments (in the lede paragraph; they can be mentioned later in the article, and in fact there's a whole long section about them). Something like this (although the exact wording isn't important):

Norodom Sihanouk (Khmer: នរោត្តម សីហនុ; 31 October 1922 – 15 October 2012) was a Cambodian king and politician who was a leading figure in Cambodian politics and state matters in the second half of the 20th century. He was King of Cambodia twice (1941 – 1955 and 1993 – 2004), and also served as Prime Minister or Head of State (or both) at various times between 1945 and 1970.

An editor who was favoring the existing version averred that "Sihanouk is famous for 'fiddling while Rome burns', some the biggest criticisms against him involve how he was obsessed with the 'artsy stuff' and neglected his responsibilities as King/Prince leading to disaster in the following decades. It's a very relevant part of his biography."

So but the lede doesn't indicate that (the criticism), in fact I don't think its mentioned anywhere in the article. Anyway, colleagues, any thoughts on what a good lede paragraph would be? Herostratus (talk) 09:54, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure the 'fiddling while Rome burns' criticisms were ever that significant; Sihanouk was more often accused of political micromanagement than of neglect. Svejk74 (talk) 10:54, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:37, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:36, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:22, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:23, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Norodom_Sihanouk&oldid=1195788790"