Jump to content

Talk:1999 East Timorese crisis

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Eustatius Strijder (talk | contribs) at 12:07, 15 January 2023 (→Supported by?: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Vital article

organic armour?

reference in final paragraph to "organic armour". Couldn't find any reference to this through google.


During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 23:08, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on 1999 East Timorese crisis. 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.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:10, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusion of Indonesia as belligerent in the infobox

Eustatius Strijder insist to add Indonesia and its military as part of belligerent. His initial argument are as follows 1 soldier and 1 police officer died, 2 Indonesian UN Soldiers died. That means the Indonesian Police and military participated in this Conflict, albeit most of the military forces have been withdrawn by September 1999. However, refer to the reference [the soldier died due to "undisciplined behaviour" in wandering near the border without uniform and without clearance]. I don't think action of "one rouge soldier" will be sufficient to justify inclusion Indonesia and Indonesian Army as belligerent. Afterall, Indonesia standpoint are "Habibie announced on 12 September that Indonesia would withdraw its soldiers and allow an Australian-led international peacekeeping force to enter East Timor."

Then he said Sources says INTERFET and East Timor pro-independence militia fought both the Indonesian Military and Pro-Integration militias, also Wiranto is an Indonesian military commander, not an East Timorese Pro-Integration militia, but I couldn't find any source that back-up his claim on the article. Since he is the one who add the content, then per WP:BURDEN, The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material.

If we look up other sources, the only clashes between Indonesian military and INTERFET happens at the border due to poor map that used.

Furthermore, paper on INTERFET authored by David Dickens [1], mentioned that how INTERFET successfully developing effective co-operation with senior Indonesian military officers, which is unlikely to happen if Indonesian military and INTERFET are the confronting parties. Therefore, Indonesia and Indonesian Army will be taken out as the belligerent in the infobox, unless any other editor can provide source that explicitly mentioned Indonesian military willingly engage INTERFET (not in the border area).Ckfasdf (talk) 08:03, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Supported by?

@Merbabu and Eustatius Strijder: Since there is somewhat heated discussion on "Supported By" issue. If we look up recent conflict (so there are many editors involved) as reference such as 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. On Belligerent parameter of the infobox, there is only the conflicting parties (Russia and Ukraine) and no mentioned of other countries that support (especially) Ukraine. Meanwhile, it was crystal clear that western countries openly support Ukraine by providing funds, aid, even military equipment. Why can we just apply the same standard here? Ckfasdf (talk) 08:09, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really not that interested in infoboxes. I detest the overly long ones full of "support/opposed by" trivia. Who cares if some random country expressed support. One should read WP:INFOBOXPURPOSE and WP:INFOBOXBLOAT. I'm here to write, edit and read well-written articles. Not silly boxes of unrelated info...most of which is not even important enough to put in the main article.
If we must have these long lists (note I'm not convinced), then I've added the collapsible lists to at least make the size reasonable (1999 East Timor Crisisbox was longer than the article in some renderings!). And as a minimum info should well referenced (and not misrepresented). (end of rant - sorry)
Re the Ukraine box, it's nicely done...a great standard to emulate. Even I can accept that infobox. haha. What specific standard though are you suggesting will follow? Stripping out all the support? --Merbabu (talk) 10:54, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Merbabu: My proposal? Removal of all "full list" on combatant parameter. For |combatant1=, only East Timor and INTERFET to be listed, afterall those countries come under INTERFET flags not under their individual countries. For |combatant2=, only pro-Indonesia militias to be listed. List of INTERFET contingent and pro-Indonesia militias can be found on their respective articles. And finally removal of "supported by", Since other article 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine also don't list them. For casualties esp on |casualties1=, we can just create dedicated section for details casualties, so infobox only shows total casualties. Hopefully it'll solved bloated infobox issues. Ckfasdf (talk) 11:20, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like a good approach. People can click on INTERFET and see who was part of INTERFET. regards, --Merbabu (talk) 11:24, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, refused. For the INTERFET and the list of countries being in the UN mission we will let it the way it is, as it is documented before our edits make way through. Eustatius Strijder (talk) 12:07, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:1999_East_Timorese_crisis&oldid=1133767415"