Talk:Java

Page one

The following paragraph is correct except for the 85%. "Java is by far the most populous island in Indonesia, with nearly 85% of the overall population of the country residing there [1]. With an area of 126,700 square km, and 124 million inhabitants at 981 people per km² it would, if it were a country, be the second-most densely-populated country of the world after Bangladesh, except for some very small city-states." 124 million is a little more than half of the overall population of the country.

Someone added the phrase "kathleen is a very sexyy girl and i love her in" to the article in the second paragraph

So remove it. You're not blocked. Be bold. ... discospinster _talk 18:32, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Something's wrong with the statement: "It is the most populous island in the world, and fifth most populous land mass after Eurasia, Africa, North America, and South America (see the list of islands by population)."

It would seem to leave out Australia... I'm no expert on Australia, but I'm pretty sure it's bigger than Java. I checked the included reference of Islands by population and it doesn't mesh with the statement either. I'm starting the talk simply becasue I'm not an expert on this topic or on Java so if people want to understand my upcoming rewrite and it's rationale there's something here. Gabe 02:51, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

OK, I'm a dummy... I got myself confused becasue the list of islands by population includes Antarctica as a land mass, which kind of boggles the mind, but joins North and South America and Africa and Eurasia. I'm gonna go look at the talk page there to understand what they did and then consider how to reconcile these two articles. Gabe 02:54, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

According to the continent article:

"Because of the perceived cultural differences by Europeans, it is conventional to subdivide Eurasia into Europe and Asia. They are more appropriately called regions, and neither is a geological or geographical continent. In the same manner, historians may subdivide Africa-Eurasia into Eurasia-North Africa and Sub-Saharan Africa.

These definitions give the following alternate models:

   * 7 regions: Europe, Asia, Africa, North America, South America, Antarctica, and Australia.
   * 6 regions: Europe, Asia, Africa, America, Antarctica, and Australia.
   * 5 continents: Eurasia, Africa, America, Antarctica, and Australia.
   * 4 continents: Africa-Eurasia, America, Antarctica, and Australia.

The 7-region model is usually taught in the United States, while the geological 6-continent model is taught in Canada and in East Asia. In Europe and Latin America including the United Kingdom and Mexico, they teach the 6-region model, which is shown in the Olympic Games flag as five rings, excluding Antarctica."

Therefore I've decided to rephrase the article such that it indicates that Java is the most populous non-contiental landmass, and indeed more populous than both Australia and Antarctica and not say anything further on the matter since any statement boils down to what you consider a land mass and the jury seems to be out on that. ;) Gabe 03:10, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

What About the Economy of the Island?

• I would have thought that there would have been some mention of the word "coffee", as in "cup of Java". Is this not indeed where the phrase comes from? "Dutch coffee plantations", or something. I'm sure the Dutch didn't come there to surf. (Oct.)

Announcing Wikipedia:Indonesia-related topics notice board

After some thought and consideration, I created an Indonesia-related topics notice board, along the same lines as other regional notice boards (such as those for Malaysia and Africa). This was established to coordinate efforts to improve Indonesia-related Wikipedia entries. If you've made contributions to Indonesia-related articles in the past, or would like to, please take some time to visit, introduce yourself, and sign the roster. --Daniel June 30, 2005 18:35 (UTC)

It seems somewhat silly to me to include Antarctica in the following statement "indeed it has a larger population than either the continents of Australia or Antarctica (see the list of islands by population)." Does anyone expect the population of Antarctica to be even close to substantial? Seems odd to use it to compare populations, to say the least. Just my 2 cents.

Proposed page move

A proposal has been made on Talk:Java (disambiguation) for Java (island) to be moved to Java. Please read and comment. –Hajor 15:08, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

A new proposal has been made on Talk:Java for Java (island) to be moved to Java. Please read and comment. Brz7 00:27, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

population

Surely something too is wrong with the statement "indeed, it has a larger population than either the continents of Australia or Antarctica". Australia has a population of 20 million - not exactly worth comparing with Java's 127 million. And Antarctica? Is this a joke? - Orecalimo

No, I don't think it was supposed to be a joke, but it is a really pointless, pedantic statement, especially to be in the introduction of the article. Thanks for pointing it out. I've rewritten the intro to try to describe (briefly!) why Java is important aside from its large population - there's more to it than that. CDC (talk) 22:08, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Hi CDC, thanks for the update. I agree that the comparisons were useless and unnecessary. I must object to your use of term "powerful Islamic kingdoms" though. The former Hindu/Buddhist kingdoms converted to Islam only as late as when the colonial powers were arriving in the region, and only when their powers have significantly declined. Hence I think your statement is inaccurate. Majapahit and Sriwijaya did at some point dominate the southeast asia region, but they are Hindu and Buddhist, respectively. Thanks, Julius.kusuma 22:40, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I was referring more to the Sultanate of Mataram and perhaps Banten - my impression is that both were important political entities for a while before the Europeans showed up on Java, and both were Islamic - maybe I'm wrong. But Majapahit is important - perhaps more important - maybe it should say "powerful Hindu and Islamic kingdoms" or something (is "powerful kingdoms" too generic?) Please do change it to whatever seems right. My knowledge of this early history is kind of fuzzy, so I sometimes have trouble deciding what things are worth emphasising. CDC (talk) 23:04, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

If I recall correctly, Mataram dominated Java the island, but was not able to project its powers outside of Java and Madiun. So if we were talking about Jogjakarta I would be comfortable in saying that "Jogjakarta is the site of the (powerful) kingdom of Mataram." Making a similar statement when talking about the island of Java is misleading, I think, because I would be expecting Mataram to project its powers outside of the island it is based on.

The use of "Hindu and Buddhist kingdoms" is also appropriate because even up to today, Indonesians like to refer to Majapahit and Sriwijaya when arguing for the legitimacy of an Indonesian national identity. That is, that there was a time when (arguably) all of Indonesia was under one banner. Julius.kusuma 23:23, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Java and Madura

Many forget to substract the data from the Madura Island when they show population and area for Java as an island. Political divisions include Madura with the province of East Java, so it makes Java bigger than it is as an island. From [1], I find 126,700 km2 for Java and 5,290 km2 for Madura (together: 132 000 km2). The other weird thing is that for the 2000 population census [2], I am unable to reach as many as 127 million (the number actually shown here) when I add the 6 Javanese provinces. Anyway, GeoHive give 2005 estimates from the 2000 census, and also, we can substract from the data there the population of the 4 kaputapens of Madura, giving finally 124 million for Java Island in 2005. LeQuantum 16:50, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Java Article is sanitized generic.

In the U.S. we all grew up with a boring history of dates and cameos of Generals, business moguls, and the undeniable grass roots humanitarian folk heroes. This article on Java goes two steps further in politically correct sterility by leaving only the mention of the business influence, and glossing past all other antagonisms and struggles. As in the more immediately urgent reporting in U.S. media about contemporary events in the Balkans which made no sense because of illogical nomenclature (e.g. an ethnic group clashed with a national group etc., as if those are mutually exclusive peopleagories) this Java article is slicker by omission. I imagine that if there is a library in Mr. Rodger's neighborhood, the history books have such ...ah... 'congenial' articles as this one. When reading such type of writing, it is up to the reader to fill in the background information and imbue it with a knowledge of motive and social dynamics because the 'hear-no-evil, speak-no-evil, see-no-evil' global genericists aren't going to make that judgment call, as obvious and true as they may seem to be.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.212.153.105 (talk • contribs) 29 May 2006.

That's as may be, but any perceived 'sanitising' here is not a product of any deliberate exclusion or intentional censorship, but rather and more simply a case of no-one has yet annotated such points to this particular article - all articles here are perpetual drafts, if you like, and the number and variety of topics and articles exceeds that of dedicated editors. Another reason to consider, this particular article is on a piece of geography, and not a state or other social-political entity more amenable to discussion of events of that nature. Other articles, such asIndonesia, History of Indonesia, &c. carry a little more of the stuff you see as missing. And as always, the article is open for you or anyone else to expand or improve, so if you see any deficiencies, you'd be welcome to make a start yourself.--cjllw | TALK 23:54, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Missing reasons for population density

The article doesn't explain why it is so densely populated. I guess the main cause is a mixture of fertile volcanic soils and plenty of rainfall, but that doesn't fully explain why the rest of Indonesia is so much less densely populated. Please add a full explanation to the article if you can. Thank you. Sumahoy 15:35, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Revert of rdir to Java

I've reverted the recent change which involved replacing the text of this Java (island) article with a redirect to Java, and the replacement there of its former disambig page format with text on the island taken from this one. Quite possibly there is a case to argue for the island's article having the title Java, with other meanings at Java (disambiguation), but a copy and paste exercise is not the way to go about it. If it is to be retitled, then it should be done by moving the pages, to preserve the respective edit histories and associated talk pages. It should also probably be nominated for moving first via the WP:RM process, to see if there is consensus for such an arrangement. It will have to go through the WP:RM process in any case since it will require administrator action to move the pages (if that is the outcome), as both have non-trivial edit histories.--cjllw | TALK 23:52, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

A new proposal has been made on Talk:Java for Java (island) to be moved to Java (and Java to be moved to Java (disambiguation)). Please read and comment. Brz7 00:27, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

java language

it's strange to me that there was a top link to Java (Sun) but not to Java programming language; i suspect the latter is far more popular. i just added the top-link, but i think we should actually remove the link to Java (Sun). Benwing 03:01, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Requested move

Java → Java (island) — Java clearly is a very ambiguous proper noun. I don't believe we should make assumptions as to which is the most popular Java, or the most relevant and thus think that Java should be moved to Java (island) and Java should point to Java (disambiguation). Dreddlox 00:55, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Survey

Add  * '''Support'''  or  * '''Oppose'''  on a new line followed by a brief explanation, then sign your opinion using ~~~~.

• Comment - we have been through this a few times before, but it has consistantly been rather split, lets give it another go --T-rex 02:17, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
• Support - Java is too commonly known as too many things. I don't believe the island to hold much notability compared to coffee or the programming language, thus an ambiguation page for Java seems best. --Wirbelwindヴィルヴェルヴィント (talk) 07:06, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose

• Notability: Home to 130million people world's most populated island, (on its own it would be the 9th largest country in the world) and it is the economic and political heart of the world's fourth biggest country. Being their home, and ethnic identity, it is very notable to the Javanese and other ethnic groups. There is even a wikipedia Javanese language version in addition to Indonesian [3] Remember, the concept of Java is more than just an island within another country - like say Hawaii (or Alaska, kinda like an island). It is very distinct chracteristc within itself - as do most Indonesian islands. Think of Indonesia more like Europe and Java as a country in Europe, that's how distinct it is.
• I doubt the IT meaning has that deep and broad notability with that many people - i suggest notability is reserved for IT "geeks", not a whole people. Wikiepedia should have be aimed at BROADER audience than just IT geeks. Off the internet, say Java and people almost always think of the island At least they do in Europe, Asia and Australia. Apparently in the US though they think of (Javan) coffee - so I am told. -i really think we should cater for broader audiences, who wants wikipedia just to be tailored for minority die-hard IT techs? See Wikipedia:WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias#The_origins_of_bias.
• Java island has been populated for thosands of years, and is likely to be so for even longer - how about Java in the IT sense? I think we know that in comparison it is more of a temporary thing.
• Wikipedia Direct links: Java the island has 402 pages linking directly to it and 537 indirectly. Sun's Java (Sun) has on the other hand 107 direct links and 8 indirect.
• Btw, the coffee reference is hilarious - why do you think it is called Java coffee? lol. I dont think it is coincidence that Java is full of coffee plantations. Etymology: Java island came first, after which the coffee was named (first by Javanese "Kopi Jawa", and later by Americans), then i suspect the IT sense takes after coffee. I have only ever heard Americans refer to coffee with the term.
• I will add more if i think of more.
• --Merbabu 07:43, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose. It's inconceivable that a programming language called "California", no matter how popular it became, would ever displace the US State from its primacy in Wikipedia. Java has at least twice the population of California. The fact that lots of poorly educated people have never heard of Java is something Wikipedia should be helping to fix, not to reinforce. -- Danny Yee 08:25, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose of course. I agree with the comments of above. Gryffindor 08:57, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose. This is getting repetitious - cannot something or somebody put the cat out and leave it out for once and all? SatuSuro 11:04, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

• Oppose When searching for the island of Java one would write "Java", where as when in search of the language Java one would write "Language Java", "Java script" or some other similar qualifier. Additionally Java (Island) doesnt follow any accepted naming conventions currently in use, the more correct naming suggestion would be "Java, Indonesia". Even if one is confused by that fact that Java can have alternative unrelated articles, the first sentence clarifies and links to the DAB and the language. As for the importance the java language like most computer langauges will have life of maybe optomistically another 10 years and then pass back into insignificance, where as Java the place, short of a major catastropic event (even that would warrant the prominant article naming anyway) is still going to be there for thousands of more years. Gnangarra 14:07, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose While this may seem an obvious move to someone who has worked with the Java programming language (of which I am one), it doesn't make sense for a general interest encyclopedia. With over 100 million people in Java (part of the 220 million in Indonesia) and, as of 2003, 3 million Java developers world-wide, I think that it's logical to infer that more people primarily associate Java with the island than the programming language. Further, the island has substantial historical claim to primacy, and likely will continue to in the future, when Java goes the way of COBOL. So far as disambiguation goes, I like the link at the top of the page. To me it's immediately obvious how to navigate to the programming language topic. ScottW 14:38, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

• Strong support, in the case of several likely and very common meanings for the same term, the disambiguation page should be at that name. Mercury, for instance, does not point to the Greek god after whom all of the meanings are named. Kusma (討論) 14:25, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Note that many pages link to Java that intend to link to the programming language. It is trivial to fix all the links if Java is a disambiguation page, but annoying to do so if Java points to one of the specific meanings. Why send people looking for the programming language (very many) through the page about the (completely unrelated) island? That's what disambiguation is for, just as with Georgia, where the non-decision which Georgia is more "important" helps to avoid broken links. Kusma (討論) 14:30, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Discussion

Add any additional comments:

• Please see discussion for two previous requested moves at Talk:Java (disambiguation). older ≠ wiser 01:52, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
• There has been alot of discussion on this preiviously as older ≠ wiser mentions. I seriously doubt that a new consensus can be formed and that it can be clear, given the history. Eluchil404 06:32, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
• I've just seen that the most recent debate over this was in June. Are there not policies about how often it happens? If one "side" doesn't get their way, what is stopping them from re-proposing say next week? --Merbabu 08:39, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

I am not aware of any policy or guide-line with respect to move requests. As with all processes thw wikipedia community has a small tolerance for sequential requests as they are seen as attempts to game to system. If less than a few months have passed I would expect many people to oppose the proposal on procedural grounds as too soon regardless of the merits. Under that understanding this proposal is not invalid on its face, but I do question its chances of succeeding given the (fairly) recent consensus in the opposite direction. Eluchil404 11:06, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

• There should be a box at the tope of the talk page with a 'Danger' or 'Warning' sign that the whole process of trying to impose narrow world views (in the case of those who havent any sense of notability of the island) should be dissalowed from proposing yet another time wasting debate on the disambig or shifting issue. Merbabu's point will be completely and utterly lost unless someone with a good knowledge of wikipedia mechanics finds the right policy page where this gets nailed for once and for all, and dosnt get put up by another individual with limited geographic knowledge beyond their own back yard next week SatuSuro 11:02, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

• I believe this is the malicious action of a troll, sockpuppet or a previously blocked person for their understanding of wikipedia policy, formatting enable a person with no previous edit history (User contribs) to create this section and nominate it at Wikipedia:Requested moves within a 3 minute time period. in the 6 hours sinced the account was created no other edits have occured. Gnangarra 14:35, 28 October 2006 (UTC)