Talk:Community of Royalist People's Party

Conservatism Low‑importance

	Conservatism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Conservatism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of conservatism 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.ConservatismWikipedia:WikiProject ConservatismTemplate:WikiProject ConservatismConservatism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cambodia Low‑importance

Community of Royalist People's Party 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

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cambodia To-do:

Let us work in the best reference and presentation of archaeological sites of Cambodia beyond Angkor like Sambor Prei Kuk, Angkor Borei (Takeo), etc.

Should disambiguate Republican Party for Democracy and Renewal and generally try to link up social conscience with right-wing values.

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

Thankfull for this info. [Unsigned]

Community of Royalist People's Party has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society 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.
Review: March 15, 2016. (Reviewed version).

A fact from Community of Royalist People's Party appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 26 September 2015 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the Community of Royalist People's Party was a short-lived Cambodian political party that existed between April 2014 and January 2015?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2015/September. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Community of Royalist People's Party.

Wikipedia

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Community of Royalist People's Party/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Midnightblueowl (talk · contribs) 16:41, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take this one on. Looks like there's been a lot of good work here thus far. Midnightblueowl (talk) 16:41, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's great to see that web sources have been archived (far few editors actually bother to do this), but why are a number of the sources omitted from this process? Although not a requirement for GA status, it would be ideal to see all of the web sources properly archived. Midnightblueowl (talk) 17:14, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I was Webcit-ing little by little. All done. Mr Tan (talk) 14:24, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can we get citations to bolster the infobox claims that the party was centre-right, nationalistic, and Sihanoukist? Midnightblueowl (talk) 17:29, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Cited source quotes him saying "I want to mobilize nationalism and Sihanoukism to form my party and restore the royal family" as he announced plans to form CRPP. Mr Tan (talk) 14:24, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think that it would be worth providing an additional sentence giving a little background to Ranariddh's split from FUNCINPEC in that opening sentence in the "History" section. Midnightblueowl (talk) 18:54, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think a passing mention in the form a phrase will suffice, added in after checking with citation #1. Mr Tan (talk) 14:10, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Logo section

"party logo has". Should this not be "had"? Midnightblueowl (talk)

Fixed Mr Tan (talk) 14:10, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Brahman tradition". Can this be clarified. Would it be better to say "Hindu belief"? Midnightblueowl (talk) 17:06, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The source states: "The logo also includes the number 9, which represents power in Brahman tradition, and is surrounded by yellow, white and green circles, which represent the monarchy, peace and water, respectively." Mr Tan (talk) 14:10, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You are right about the source, but I believe that what is meant is not in fact Brahman, but Brahmin. Thus I would recommend changing this to "Brahmin tradition". Would that be okay with you, Mr Tan? Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:47, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've made the change myself. Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:49, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"three circles in the yellow, white and green colours, which represents the monarchy, peace and water respectively". This wording could be improved. "Around the logo were three circles; one was yellow, representing the monarchy, another was white, representing peace, and the third was green, representing water"? Midnightblueowl (talk) 17:06, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed Mr Tan (talk) 14:10, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"When Ranariddh returned to FUNCINPEC in January 2015, the party adopted a new party logo that has a similar design inspired from CRPP's party logo" Again, the prose could be improved here. "On Ranariddh's return to the party in January 2015, FUNCINPEC adopted a new logo that was inspired by that of the defunct CRPP" would read more smoothly, for instance. Midnightblueowl (talk) 17:06, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed Mr Tan (talk) 14:10, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy to pass this now. Congratulations, Mr Tan! Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:49, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]