Tonlé Sap is within the scope of WikiProject Lakes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of lake-related articles on Wikipedia, using the tools on the project page. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LakesWikipedia:WikiProject LakesTemplate:WikiProject LakesLakes articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rivers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Rivers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RiversWikipedia:WikiProject RiversTemplate:WikiProject RiversRiver articles
Tonlé Sap is part of WikiProject Cambodia, a project to improve all Cambodia-related articles. The WikiProject is also a part of the
Counteracting systematic bias group on Wikipedia, aiming to provide a wider and more detailed coverage on countries and areas of the encyclopedia which are notably less developed than the rest. If you would like to help improve this and other Cambodia-related articles, please
join the project. All interested editors are welcome.CambodiaWikipedia:WikiProject CambodiaTemplate:WikiProject CambodiaCambodia articles
I'm looking for the best picture or any informations about the KAF's U-6 (Beaver). It seem that the KAF had 3 aircrafts.
But in 1971, during the viet cong's sapper attack at the Pochentong Air Base,at least 1 Beaver was destroyed.In 1972
at leat 1 Beaver was refurbished with a new engine.
http://www.khmerairforce.com/AAK-KAF/AVNK-AAK-KAF/Cambodia-Beaver-KAF.JPG
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Climate change, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Climate change on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Climate changeWikipedia:WikiProject Climate changeTemplate:WikiProject Climate changeClimate change articles
If you are looking for ways to improve this article, we recommend checking out our
recommended sources and our
style guide
Rename
I think this article needs to be renamed to
Tonlé Sap, as Tonlé already means lake (or a very large, wide river). It's kind of a redundant title.
--
Dara 00:14, July 29, 2005 (UTC)
I think there's a problem, in that the Khmer and English terms aren't quite equivalent. In Khmer, as far as I can tell, there is one name- Tonle Sap- which refers to the lake and river together, while in English we differentiate them. However since the article actually discusses both, renaming seems a good idea.
Mark102:51, 29 July 2005 (UTC)reply
Why is there a Thai name for a lake wholly in Cambodian territory? And why is the name just a Thai pronunciation of Tonle Sap Khmer? —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
64.136.27.231 (
talk)
20:20, 6 April 2008 (UTC)reply
I just butchered this article, removing 60% of the images, plus infoboxen and silly cats - Siem Reap province? What on earth were people thinking? This monster takes up the entire middle of country, forget Siem Reap, baby - this thing is in NINE different provinces - the provincial borders go down the middle so everybody gets a piece of the fish. I'm quite happy to have images and dimensions deleted, changed, restored - I still don't think it looks very good now, just better than before. Feel free to restore images I removed. I just couldn't see why a picture of a small girl staring at a camera was relevant to an article on Cambodia's largest landform - mind you there was one of a small boy as well for equity purposes. :) Cheers,
Paxse (
talk)
14:25, 26 November 2008 (UTC)reply
Tonle Sap River
Should there be an article for the River? Cambodians do make a distinction between the Tonle Sap and the river that intersects with the Mekong. Also, requesting additional content on the reversal of the flow of the Tonle Sap River and it's significant occuring during the time of the Water Festival in Phnom Penh (
Bon Om Tuk). --
Dara (
talk)
16:15, 29 June 2011 (UTC)reply
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on
Tonlé Sap. 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: 5 June 2024).
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.
This article needs to be updated with more recent information about drought and climate change impacts. It has been in the news many times. There currently isn't a single mention of it on here.
Arcahaeoindris (
talk)
09:51, 10 December 2020 (UTC)reply
A bot will list this discussion on the
requested moves current discussions
subpage within an hour of this tag being placed. The discussion may be closed 7 days after being opened, if consensus has been reached (see the
closing instructions). Please base arguments on
article title policy, and keep discussion
succinct and
civil.
Tonlé Sap → Tonlé Sap Lake – The original name before renamed after the discussion
Talk:Tonlé_Sap#Rename above, due to possible confusion with the river that connect the lake and Mekong. The name "Tonlé Sap Lake" is NOT redundant at all.
In that discussion user Markalexander100 stated that "Khmer and English terms aren't quite equivalent. In Khmer, as far as I can tell, there is one name- Tonle Sap- which refers to the lake and river together, while in English we differentiate them." This is not quite right because the official name of the lake in Khmer is "បឹងទន្លេសាប" (Boeng Tonle Sap), where បឹង/boeng means lake. So clearly they still have the word "lake" in the name, to differentiate it from the river. ទន្លេ/Tonle means river and that's its only meaning, not "Tonlé already means lake (or a very large, wide river)" as stated by user Dara above. For example,
Mekong is "Tonlé Mekong",
Bassac River is "Tonlé Bassac",
Kong River is "Tonlé Kong". There's no known translation as Tonlé to "lake". Another similarly named geographic feature is the
Boeng Tonle Chhmar (a smaller lake next to the Tonle Sap Lake).
So to sum up, if we say "Tonle Sap" (without adding "Boeng") to the Khmer-speaking people, theoretically we are referring to the river (according to the meaning of the words). But then since the lake is too well-known, the term "Tonle Sap" will become ambiguous. However, as a matter of fact, they should be able to tell which one you are referring to, based on the context of the conversation.
My suggestion is to rename this article to
Tonlé Sap Lake, and have a separate article about the river. Two options for this separate article's name is:
Tonlé Sap (as per its literal meaning in Khmer) or,
The reason for having a separate article for the river is simply because not everything about the river can be merged into the lake's article. For example,
Phnom Penh, the state's capital, is located at the mouth of the river and there's probably something about the river related to Phnom Penh's urban planning that's worth writing about. And merging these into the lake's article would be inappropriate.
ទន្លេតូច (
talk) 23:27, 10 July 2024 (UTC) — Relisting.BilledMammal (
talk)
22:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose, and would strongly oppose removing the accent. The lake seems to be commonly referred to in English solely as Tonlé Sap (ie. without the "Lake", but with the diacritic), and would be the primary topic for that term even if we had an article for the river. But as we don't as far as I can see, I don't see a point in unnecessarily lengthening the name.
Turnagra (
talk)
06:22, 11 July 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Turnagra: "The lake seems to be commonly referred to in English solely as Tonlé Sap (ie. without the "Lake", but with the diacritic), and would be the primary topic for that term even if we had an article for the river." How exactly was this confirmed? If Google search is the tool you used to determine the primary topic for that term, or how common the term is used for each one (lake and river), then I guess I should mention the case of
Golden Gate. If you look up "Golden Gate", I think it's pretty clear which one is more common, the bridge or that strait?
I can only agree that in many researches, when the authors mention "Tonlé Sap", they are actually referring to the whole ecosystem (both the river and the lake). It is worth reconsidering which one of these two should be the primary term, or none at all (the term would a disambig). If you think that river is not as commonly known, then I will provide another fact that it is the site of the very famous
Bon Om Touk festival of Cambodia. The Phnom Penh Autonomous Port, one of the major port of Cambodia, is also situated on the river's side. And then within the articles
currently linked to Tonle Sap, a significant amount of them are referring to the river.
ទន្លេតូច (
talk)
07:48, 11 July 2024 (UTC)reply
If authors refer to the whole ecosystem, this article should be about the whole ecosystem. We don't need separate articles for the river and the lake if there are no sources that don't treat them separately...
EmeraldRange (
talk/
contribs)
19:24, 11 July 2024 (UTC)reply
EmeraldRange "if there are no sources that don't treat them separately..." Please don't get confused, I never said no sources treated them separately. I implied that "in many researches", not "in all researches".
ទន្លេតូច (
talk)
20:32, 11 July 2024 (UTC)reply
if there are enough sources that only discuss the lake or only discuss the river (geographical science or culturally), then the solution might be to create three articles
EmeraldRange (
talk/
contribs)
23:29, 11 July 2024 (UTC)reply
@
EmeraldRange: The point we are focusing on here is which one (lake or river) should be the primary topic for "Tonle Sap". Whether or not to have a separate article has more to do with
WP:Notability. And according to
WP:GEONATURAL, "Named natural features are often notable, provided information beyond statistics and coordinates is known to exist", both Tonle Sap Lake (បឹងទន្លេសាប/Boeng Tonle Sap) and Tonle Sap River (ទន្លេសាប/Tonle Sap) are two different named natural features, and definitely more than one source discuss them, so they are eligible for two separate articles.
Since you mentioned three articles, I guess you are trying to refer to the case of
Lake Michigan,
Lake Huron and
Lake Michigan–Huron, aren't you? Well, I think the Tonle Sap lake and river are not necesarily like that. The lake and river are studied together most of the time, simply because of the important role it plays to the lake: the river is the main source of water that carries flood from the Mekong to the lake. If you were to have three articles: Lake, River, Lake + River, you will likely find that contents of the Lake and Lake + River articles overlap (due to their close relation, as pointed out above). So my point is, two articles for Lake and River are enough.
Let me correct myself a little bit:
When the authors mention "Tonlé Sap", they are actually referring to the whole ecosystem (both the river and the lake) but then in the same study/research, they will also use "Tonle Sap Lake" and "Tonle Sap River" to differentiate which is which, where necessary. (see
this and
this)
The reason I brought up this argument is to reject
Turnagra's statement that "The lake seems to be commonly referred to in English solely as Tonlé Sap (ie. without the "Lake")". I don't think you can find any sources that studies the lake but completely ignores the river, due to the its important role. The river, on the other hand, is very well-known for its natural seasonal flow reversal. This unique hydrology characteristic has been been the subject of countless of studies and researches (which in this case, the flow reversal is the main subject of study, not the lake). When you mention "Tonle Sap's reversal", the term "Tonle Sap" in this context clearly refers to the river, not the lake.
So to sum up, the river can only be at least as important as the lake, which means none of them is the primary topic. And that's why I mentioned option 2 above.
ទន្លេតូច (
talk)
21:51, 12 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Right, so the Tonlé Sap article should be about the whole ecosystem if that is correct. I haven't looked at any sources to confirm, but if what you say is correct, Lake + River should be one article. Lake + River being separate articles with a smaller scope is not a problem as long as they don't become
WP:CONTENTFORKs, trying to split Tonlé Sap into a lake and river would do exactly that if there is no third article about it.
> I don't think you can find any sources that studies the lake but completely ignores the river, due to the its important role.
EmeraldRange Tonlé Sap is indeed referred to in sources as a whole system, I agree BUT as far as I can see, this reference should only be taken as a trivial mention (
WP:SIGCOV). When it comes to more in-depth discussion (in the same sources of that trivial mention), that's no longer the case, but instead they will use "Tonle Sap Lake" and "Tonle Sap River" to refer to the lake and the river, respectively.
I agree that if Tonlé Sap as the whole ecosystem has its own article, then it would be the primary topic. However, like I said above, it's just a trivial mention, and hence might not be notable enough. And even if we try to draft one, here's what I see. Since we have determined that the coverage is the whole ecosystem, we will have to stick to that and our subject will have to be the whole ecosystem throughout the article. This can probably make the whole article sounding too technical, which goes against
WP:TECHNICAL.
ទន្លេតូច (
talk)
01:12, 13 July 2024 (UTC)reply