Talk:Indonesia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Featured article Indonesia is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 17, 2007.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Indonesia (Rated FA-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indonesia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Indonesia and Indonesia-related topics 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.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Southeast Asia (Rated FA-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Southeast Asia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Southeast Asia-related subjects 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.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Countries (Rated FA-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of countries 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.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject Islands (Rated FA-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of islands 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.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
edit·history·watch·refresh Stock post message.svg To-do list for Indonesia:
Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.5 / Vital (Rated FA-class)
WikiProject icon This article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
Featured article FA  Quality: FA-Class
 ???  Importance: not yet rated

RfC: Should this article be unlocked?[edit]

I started this RfC, and the subject line says it all. My argument is in favor, and is as follows: this is one of the most important, diverse countries in the world, and one of the most controversial in nature and history. You cannot simply lock it because of the actions of a few spammers several years ago. That is simply censorship, and a form not befitting Wikipedia. In its current form this article is completely inadequate. The length of the Wikipedia article on Papua New Guinea is roughly 7200 words long; by my count the total word count for Indonesia comes to 6,386. That is simply horseshit by modern standards of Wikipedia. As the article thankfully says, there are 300 ethnic groups, speaking more than 700 distinct, living languages in Indonesia. It is an archipelago of more than 18,000 islands. I calculate that at 1/3 of a word for each island. Disgusting. Granted only about 6,000 are inhabited, and only about 1,000 permanently so, but as far as I know that's still way more than any other country in the world.

I realize that there is also a separate article on Indonesian history. Let me point out that there is also a separate article on U.S. History. The part of the "History" section within the the main U.S. article, which spans only the time since European contact, is ~2,700 words long. The entire "History" section of the "Indonesia" article is only 913 words long. The part of that section which spans 2,700 years of well-recorded history in Indonesia contains only 672 words, vs. the ~400 year history of the post-European-contact-U.S.A. And incidentally, the English is terrible, and contains a HUGE mistake, substituting Sukarno for Suharto. It also makes no real mention of the slaughter of 1965-1966, or of the CIA (who likely backed and triggered the slaughter) report calling it "one of the worst mass murders of the 20th century, along with the Soviet purges of the 1930s, the Nazi mass murders during the Second World War, and the Maoist bloodbath of the early 1950s" (see Wikipedia article on Indonesian killings of 1965–66). The pre-history of Indonesia is quite a bit longer than the U.S. prehistory as well, but is about the same number of words, and makes no mention of Homo floresiensis. There is no mention of the genocide-like travesties committed in Timor Timur (Timor-Leste) and New Guinea, facts already mentioned by two different users on this talk page, but subsequently ignored.

While there a mention and link to the Wallace Line, there is is little elaboration on this extremely important feature. There is no mention or even links to Danau Kelimutu, or to the the Komodo dragon, even though there are articles on both of those subjects.

Neither is there any mention, in the tragically short description of Indonesian Culture, of the Minangkabau people. Nor, in the linked but poorly written "Indonesian Culture" article, is there any mention the Matriarchal Society of the Minangkabau, strange since the Wikipedia Matriarchal/Matrilineal societies list comprises only 39 groups throughout history. There is no direct link to the "Indonesian Cuisine" article, and in the "Indonesian Culture", Indonesian cuisine is described by someone who pretty clearly knows almost nothing about Indonesian cuisine, which, according to first sentence of the "Indonesian Cuisine" article, "...is one of the most vibrant and colourful cuisines in the world, full of intense flavour." To be honest I would have to say the "Indonesian Cuisine" article has a lot more relevant, practical, and honest information about Indonesia than does the "Indonesia"article. Someone actually decided to delete the words "religiously diverse" from the ways that Indonesia is diverse. Just so we're all aware, while the ethnic and cultural diversities of Indonesia may be more interesting to many, there is certainly no other country in the world that has so many major religions, independently flourishing under one roof. Granted that is a bit of a subjective statement, but it's true. In addition to the six state-recognized religions (Christianity x2, Islam, Confucianism, Buddhism, and Hinduism), there are also members of the Jewish faith, and several animistic belief systems. A lack of understanding on the latter issue may partly stem from the fact that "Because the government do not recognize animism indigenous tribal belief systems as official religion, as a result followers of various native animistic religions such as Dayak Kaharingan have identified themselves as Hindu in order to avoid pressure to convert to Islam or Christianity." (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Indonesia , "Other religions and beliefs"). But all this is completely immaterial to the concept of Indonesian religious diversity: in this world of globalization, it's hard to find a country without several different religious beliefs floating around. The point is in fact that several different religions have co-existed (not always peacefully, even today) in the area that is known as Indonesia for thousands of years.

Again, almost all of this information can be found somewhere on Wikipedia, but to force the casual or even fairly intrepid-if-uninformed reader to dig so hard for it is, again, indirect censorship. While this is one of my first visits to this page, and my first attempt to edit even the Talk page, from reading the Talk page of this article, I feel that the "dominant" established users on this page are censoring the article. The people who are editing this article are not qualified to do so, and apparently not pro-active enough to actually read the information others have put forth. So unlock it and give the rest of us a chance. Tear down this ****ing wall. Apologies, but I am very frustrated and disappointed with this article.

~T — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.171.146.53 (talk) 09:33, 23 November 2014‎ (UTC)

“… one of the most controversial …” That right there is a very good reason for protection. By the way, a request for comment is meant to be short and neutral, and the RFC bot didn’t pick up on it because you never signed it with ~~~~. —174.141.182.82 (talk) 13:53, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Should this article be unlocked? 149.171.145.145 (talk) 08:25, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

A few Papuan Languages?????[edit]

From the article:

"More than 700 living languages are spoken in Indonesia.[179] Most belong to the Austronesian language family, with a few Papuan languages also spoken."
A few lines later we have: "On the other hand, Papua has over 270 indigenous Papuan and Austronesian languages,[181] in a region of about 2.7 million people."

Granted, there are Austronesian languages spoken in New Guinea on both sides of the border, but the overwhelming majority is Papuan. So how do 270 indigenous languages, most of the Papuan, translate to "a few"????? Would someone rectify this on behalf of the Papuans, who don't seem to be having a jolly good time under Indonesian rule? All the best 85.220.22.139 (talk) 21:52, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Just an addendum. Have a look at the language map of Trans–New Guinea languages. Everything not marked especially as Austronesian is Papuan. Real numbers are regrattably hard to come by, but according to this there are 44 uncontacted peoples in the Indonesian occupied part of New Guinea. They may safely be assumed to be Papuan. All the best 85.220.22.139 (talk) 22:11, 1 May 2015 (UTC)
In case anyone finds fault with the wording "Indonesian occupied" please state your reasons and tell me whether East Timor was occupied or not. It was a military action in both cases. 85.220.22.139 (talk) 22:14, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Hence why this article needs to be unlocked. But since the moderators are incompetent idiots, that's probably not going to happen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.35.112.134 (talk) 04:31, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Soengailasi[edit]

COLLECTIE TROPENMUSEUM Studioportret van een bruidspaar uit Soengailasi TMnr 60048943.jpg What is Soengailasi? A place in Sumatra?OrganicEarth (talk) 06:29, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Soengailasi is old spelling for today Sungai Lasi, a kecamatan in Solok Regency, West Sumatra. Here is the link to the place in Wikipedia Indonesia Koto Sungai Lasi. Gunkarta  talk  13:18, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Great! Thank you very much Gunkarta. OrganicEarth (talk) 13:52, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Liberal democracy?[edit]

Should Indonesia be included in the "liberal democracies" category? According to Icarus the Great, since the province of Aceh has implemented sharia law, the country no longer qualifies. I'd disagree, for a few reasons;

  • We'd need sources stating that the passage of sharia law by democratically elected bodies makes a country no longer a liberal democracy.
  • Aceh's sharia law is based off a 2005 peace agreement, applies in only one province, and was passed by a local government, so I'm not sure it's adequate justification for making judgements about the country as a whole.
  • The seeming basis for the editor's changes - that laws passed in Aceh are undemocratic - is false, since they were passed by a democratically elected body.

What do other editors think? Rwenonah (talk) 18:09, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm agree with you Rwenonah, as an Indonesian living in Jakarta, we do enjoy democracy and freedom pretty much. Plus, making Aceh as the main case is missleading, considering the sheer size of Indonesia. Aceh is just one province that practicing sharia law compared to other Indonesia's 33 provinces that practicing secular law. In 2014 Democracy Index, Indonesia actually scored slightly well compared to Argentina and the Philippines. Gunkarta  talk  18:29, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Your premise assumes that Indonesia is a liberal democracy and that we'd need a source to remove the category...that's a bit backwards. In order to keep the category, we need multiple high quality reliable sources stating Indonesia is indeed a liberal democracy. I'm skeptical, myself. There's no doubt that, since the 1999-2002 reforms, Indonesia can be considered a legitimate full-fledged democracy, but that's not the issue here. The issue is whether the democracy is a liberal democracy. Read over liberal democracy, Indonesia fails the test on many levels, most importantly in the area of human rights. One of the hallmarks of a liberal democracy is that the government becomes the protector of human rights, rights which are enshrined in a constitution for all segments of the population. This isn't the case in Indonesia (see Human rights in Indonesia).
The case of Aceh is just one small problem out of many, but since you mentioned it, I will address it. "Democracy" is a process, "liberal democracy" is a philosophy of government...two very different things. The problem here isn't that "the laws passed in Aceh are undemocratic" since, as you point out, they were passed by a democratically elected body (i.e. a process). The problem is that the laws are not in keeping with the spirit of a "liberal democracy" (a philosophy). In a true liberal democracy, such laws passed by the majority to protect/benefit/appease the majority (also known as "mob rule") would be overturned by the judiciary to protect the minority.
Indonesia was considered a liberal democracy for a very short period before 1957. See Liberal democracy period in Indonesia. During that period, the Provisional Constitution of 1950 contained stringent constitutional guarantees for human rights. The current government is making great strides toward liberal democracy, but isn't there yet.--William Thweatt TalkContribs 20:13, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
That would seem like a much more logical basis for excluding the category. I'm not particularly committed to maintaining the category - indeed, in the context of human rights abuses in Papua and difficulties over religious freedom seemingly demonstrate the opposite. I'd maintain, however, that Acehnese laws aren't sufficient justification for excluding it from that category, since the laws in Aceh were passed by an Islamist local government granted special autonomy under a 2005 peace agreement, which the Indonesian government proper is legally barred from constraining - almost a separate entity from Indonesia itself. Rwenonah (talk) 21:44, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

I think instead of dwelling in issues of keeping or removing the category, we should established parameter of which nations deserved to be called liberal democracy and which are not. Yet editors might has their personal judgements. The Democracy Index might be a useful tool to determine this. I'm suggesting only full democracies (scoring 8 to 10) deserved to be called liberal democracy, while flawed democracies (scoring 6 to 7.9) are to be removed from liberal democracy category. This means not only Indonesia, but also Czech Republic, India, South Africa, Israel, Brazil, the Philippines, all the way to Singapore should not be called as liberal democracies. I do wish Indonesia evolved to be more liberal in the future, however I understand democracy is not perfect in Indonesia, but so with other nations. Actually I think Indonesia is not there (liberal democracy) yet, so I'm also not particularly insist on keeping the category. Gunkarta  talk  12:50, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Rather than focusing on the definition of "Liberal democracy", we should rather use the word used by Freedom House which categorize Indonesia as an Electoral Democracy. See page 3 of a report issued by Freedom House in 2015. [1] It worths noting that the report (on page 11) also says that election in Indonesia was "largely open and fair". rg_zap (talk) 12:36, 18 September 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.14.106.177 (talk)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 13 August 2015[edit]

180.191.122.112 (talk) 13:24, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: as you have not requested a change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 13:36, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Indonesia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

YesY Archived sources have been checked to be working

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 09:16, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Economy figures need updating and provided with clearer tone[edit]

The Indonesian economy performed strongly during the Global Financial Crisis and in 2012 its GDP grew by over 6%.[138] The country regained its investment grade rating in late 2011 after losing it in 1997.[139] However, as of 2012, an estimated 11.7% of the population lived below the poverty line and the official open unemployment rate was 6.1%.[90]

The last sentence above needs updating and maybe lack of perspective. The poverty line in Indonesia has been steadily decreasing from 13.3 in 2010 to 11.3 in 2014. [1] It is also not clear why the sentence has to start with "However" when the poverty line is considerably low in comparison in many large developed countries such as Canada, US, UK, Spain, Germany and Italy. [2]

The same goes for the open unemployment rate although I have not completed the research. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rg zap (talkcontribs) 12:04, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

References

Three and a half centuries of Dutch colonialism[edit]

I think the length of colonization was exaggerated, at the beginning of the arrival of Europeans, they are just traders who try to monopolize the trade at the time. No invasion to subdue a kingdom or remove the king authorities at that time. Dutch attempt to subdue the local ruler began only since the end of the Napoleonic wars and the return of Indonesia from English to Dutch Tensa Februari (talk) 02:44, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 April 2016[edit]

Puspita Nasution (talk) 16:17, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: as you have not requested a change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 16:23, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

Too many images[edit]

I learn that User:Dwi Chania and User talk:Rachman227 insist to add too many pictures. They are lovely I agree, but I think those images has overwhelmed the article, they just too much, and might harmed the featured article status of this article. The images should help the reader to understand the subjects better, instead of cluttering the page. Image should not sandwiching the article/body text. Wikipedia article is not an image gallery. Please learn more on Wikipedia:Manual of Style especially the section MoS:IMAGES. I will revert to a more stable and lean version with less pictures. Any suggestions, opinions, and objections are welcome and should be discussed in this talk page to reach consensus to avoid edit war. Thank you. Gunkarta  talk  16:32, 29 April 2016 (UTC)


Dear User:Gunkarta, from the west to the east, Indonesia is big. I'm sorry if I added too many images. But my intention is sincerely good, because I think if people are not represented enough in this Wikipedia article, some ethnic groups or people may feel left out. Many wikipedia pages have many images too. Take a look at New York's or France's. Having many images helps people understand.

But I promise I will fix the image sandwiching and will compact the images as possible as I can.

Sincerely, Rachman227 (talk) 02:09, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello. Indonesia and Jakarta are not the place to dump images. NY or France have nothing to do with here. Just because Indonesia is a diverse nation, ethnically, and with lots of islands, does not mean the main article gets so big and cluttered with images.

The Indonesia project - the separate articles about all the component parts of what makes Indonesia, is where the images should be, the main article is not where they should be. This is meant to be an online encyclopedia, not a photo gallery.

Rachman - please understand this is not consensus for you to add more, or to compact or keep images in the Indonesia article. Look further afield, there are articles about the compionent parts of what makes the nation - not just one overloaded far too LARGE article with too many images JarrahTree 02:29, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Dear Rachman, if we insist on such inclusive policy on images matters, this article will explodes into a huge photogallery rivaling those of wikimedia commons; as you see Indonesia is very diverse. I must agree with JarrahTree that these images would be better to be put in each specific article. And wikilink in this article will provide access to that specific article. It is impossible to put all of Indonesia's ethnic groups pictures, artform, foods, natures etc. all in this article. Please understand this and not insisting on more image inclusion. Gunkarta  talk  04:54, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Got it. Rachman227 (talk) 14:48, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

  • Have nixed something like ten images, and reworked some of the other images so they are more balanced. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:03, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Cinema of Indonesia: should we put The Raid: Redemption image in this section? Rachman227 (talk) 07:11, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

  • Rachman227, read WP:NFCC and tell me whether we should put any non free content in this article. You need to understand image policies. WP:CONSENSUS would be another good thing to read. Adding more images when everyone else has said "we need to cut back on the number of images" is not good. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:51, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

Can Indonesia be considered a transcontinental country in both Asia and Oceania?[edit]

Technically, Indonesia is partially in Oceania due to Papua and West Papua and is connected to Papua New Guinea. The Oceania Wikimedia map also shows Papau and West Papua in Oceania. However, it is usually considered completely part of Asia. Can Indonesia be considered a transcontinental country?68.5.169.216 (talk) 19:59, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

I think yes it can. Gunkarta  talk  21:57, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
And it's listed at List of transcontinental countries. Rwessel (talk) 23:24, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 June 2016[edit]

Bold text


60.49.72.129 (talk) 07:22, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: as you have not requested a change.
If you want to suggest a change, please request this in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ".
Please also cite reliable sources to back up your request, without which no information should be added to, or changed in, any article. - Arjayay (talk) 07:35, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Indonesia. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Question? Archived sources still need to be checked

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:15, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Misspelled word[edit]

Below where they say Indonesia's national motto, it says the ideology of Indonesia which is Pancasila but is spelled like Pañcasīla and not Pancasila but everywhere else in Wikipedia it is spelled like Pancasila so please change the misspelling from Pañcasīla to Pancasila202.62.16.78 (talk) 09:10, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Done — Andy W. (talk ·ctb) 21:43, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Geology_of_Indonesia[edit]

Link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geology_of_Indonesia is missing ("Geology" is not even mentioned on the Indonesia page). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.130.153.63 (talk) 09:52, 17 September 2016 (UTC)