Talk:GRUNK

GRUNK 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

???

This article has not yet received a rating 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]

Military history: Asian / Southeast Asia

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Asian military history task force
	Southeast Asian military history task force

Request move edit

Latest comment: 9 years ago8 comments5 people in discussion

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Jenks24 (talk) 15:04, 4 June 2014 (UTC)Reply

GRUNK → Royal Government of National Union of Kampuchea – Official names are should be used for articles about historic states. --Relisted. ^walk victor falk^talk 23:23, 20 May 2014 (UTC) --Relisted. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 14:18, 13 May 2014 (UTC) Britannic124 (talk) 00:16, 6 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

Comment The nominator's rationale is flawed, GRUNK is not a former historical state, that would be Kingdom of Cambodia (1975-76) ^walk victor falk^talk 04:58, 21 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

Comment. If the acronym is better known then it should probably be used. Even if the full name is used it should be Royal Government of the National Union of Kampuchea, which is the natural English. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:41, 7 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
Support move to "Royal Government of the National Union of Kampuchea". Coreyemotela (talk) 20:33, 15 May 2014 (UTC).Reply

Oppose It's a perfectly cromulent acronym per WP:ACRONYMTITLE and WP:TITLEFORMAT. I think people are just a little jarred in the lack of decorum a (royal no less!) government something as prosaic as "grunk". It is the wp:commonname as shown by wp:rs and wp:v sources. ^walk victor falk^talk 23:16, 20 May 2014 (UTC)Reply
Support - relatively impenetrable and obscure acronym. Gouvernement royal d'union nationale du Kampuchéa should really be with "the" as User:Necrothesp. Grunk could mean anything and fails WP:CRITERIA to this User at least. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:16, 21 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

So do nato and nasa. ^walk victor falk^talk 02:19, 21 May 2014 (UTC)Reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Add topic