Talk:List of state enterprises of Thailand

Thailand Mid‑importance

	Thailand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Thailand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Thailand-related articles on Wikipedia. The WikiProject is also a part of the Counteracting systematic bias group 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 Thailand-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.ThailandWikipedia:WikiProject ThailandTemplate:WikiProject ThailandThailand articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

February 2017[edit]

Context matters for the identification of reliable sources. The budget report is a reliable source for budgetary figures, but cannot be considered a reliable source for the identification of state enterprises, especially since the information was extrapolated from a table listing budget appropriations. The source originally used, a report by the Office of the Public Sector Development Commission, is specifically concerned with the identification of the various types of state agencies, and should overrule the budget table.

Also, TOT is 100% held by the Ministry of Finance, and is definitely a state enterprise under the inclusive definition used here. --Paul_012 (talk) 12:27, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much. I was right in the middle of trying to suss all this out. That is why I said the status of some agencies was ambiguous. BTW, the Office of the Public Sector Dev Commission report you ref was published in 1994. Think some things might have changed since then. E.g., TOT. I fault myself for not sandboxing this until done. Seligne (talk) 12:48, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The ideal way to deal with this would probably be to cite each item individually. Tracking down all the relevant proclamations in the government gazette would give the most official and reliable sources possible, but might be more work than it's worth. If you're thinking of reorganising this list, I think it would be best presented as a table, with details including type of organisation (whether it's covered by the Government Organisations Act, operates as a limited company, or something else), year of foundation, oversight ministry, and a brief description of its mission. Just a suggestion. --Paul_012 (talk) 13:16, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]