Talk:Indonesia omnibus law protests

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Indonesia omnibus law protests article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information.

Wikipedia is not censored.
Images or details contained within this article may be graphic or otherwise objectionable to some readers, to ensure a quality article and complete coverage of its subject matter. For more information, please refer to Wikipedia's content disclaimer regarding potentially objectionable content and options to not see an image.

Please stay calm and civil while commenting or presenting evidence, and do not make personal attacks. Be patient when approaching solutions to any issues. If consensus is not reached, other solutions exist to draw attention and ensure that more editors mediate or comment on the dispute.

This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Crime and Criminal Biography Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles 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.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Indonesia High‑importance

	Indonesia portal 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.IndonesiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndonesiaTemplate:WikiProject IndonesiaIndonesia articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Law Enforcement Low‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Organized Labour Low‑importance

	Organized Labour portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organized Labour, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Organized Labour 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.Organized LabourWikipedia:WikiProject Organized LabourTemplate:WikiProject Organized Labourorganized labour articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics 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.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sociology: Social Movements

	Society portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology 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.SociologyWikipedia:WikiProject SociologyTemplate:WikiProject Sociologysociology articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the social movements task force.

Scope[edit]

Shouldn't the article just be about the bill itself? And then there would be sections on the bill and the protest? There surely is enough coverage on the bill and the context is needed to fully understand the protests. (not watching, please {{ping}}) czar 03:06, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Czar: Maybe both should have separated articles? Since the protests themselves already widespread, huge, & have enough coverage to became notable Nyanardsan (talk) 07:30, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I created a separate article Omnibus Law on Job Creation, I'd like to ask for help to move paragraphs if necessary between the articles Germartin1 (talk) 21:00, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Separating the bill and the protests[edit]

Gerald Waldo Luis Please refrain from adding stuff not related to the protests. If it's to do with the bill but not the protests, there's Omnibus Law on Job Creation. Juxlos (talk) 10:50, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Juxlos, These social media stuffs are responses to the protest, basically virtual protests. Sure it is relevant to the bill, but they are part of the protests, so it suits here. Plus, don't copy-paste to other articles due to copyright attribution. Gerald WL 10:52, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Gerald Waldo Luis CC-BY-SA 3.0. And aside from the TikTok mention, none of the section referred to the protests. It's all government influencers. Juxlos (talk) 10:54, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Juxlos, yes, "BY," which means the revision history must have attribution of the users who have contributed to the article, the time, the edit preview, all of it. CC doesn't mean public domain. And "It's all government influencers"? What? Not all of the "influencers" are from the govt, several are also content creators etc. Please discuss before a mass removal of the section. Gerald WL 10:57, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Gerald Waldo Luis Check the section again. It was all about government influencers paid to influence the public to support the bill during the deliberation process. No mention of the protests being related to the influencers directly - except for the TikTok, which had been readded. Juxlos (talk) 10:59, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Juxlos, again, it's best to discuss it here per WP:3RR, as I think we have been in an edit war here. That way we can get wider opinions on this. I definitely support the section to stay. Other editor inputs are welcomed. Gerald WL 11:02, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Gerald Waldo Luis I urge you to actually read the sources:

Source #23: An article discussing the controversy of artists and influencers explicitly promoting the bill. No mention of the protests.

Source #25: An article about primarily Ardhito Pramono, plus a mention of a number of other artists. No mention of the protests.

Source #26: An article discussing Jokowi's relationship with influencers, touching on COVID-19 instead of the law. One can infer the relation, but that's WP:OR.

I ask you to remove the section with the exception of the TikTok. If the sources does not even mention the protests in passing, why would they be in the article about protests instead of the bill? Juxlos (talk) 11:07, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Juxlos, again, I can't remove it considering I need a wider opinion from other editors as I am involved in the edit war. Some sources may not mention it, but it's sure enough that these influencers use social media to take part in the protests. About the last source you put, that definitely is nonsense, so I'll go remove it, as it is blatant misinfo. But for the others, I need others' inputs and a consensus. Gerald WL 11:19, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Juxlos that source 23 and 25 should not be used here as they are not mentioning the protests, but they should be used at the law article. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 11:27, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the opinion. I looked for sources, all of them says that the influencers are paid. I think we can alter the section if this is the case, with the section changed to "Paid influencers" or something. Gerald WL 11:46, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nyanardsan: See above. The influencers weren't talking about the protests and their mention is more appropriate in the article about the law itself. Juxlos (talk) 13:05, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Anarchists[edit]

The issue of social media aside, is it really WP:DUE to include a couple anarchists being arrested as its own section? It's a single sentence that doesn't seem to have much potential to be bigger and it's basically a drop in the ocean. Juxlos (talk) 11:12, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have put it at the Java subsection, feels like that's the best I can do while still telling the information. Gerald WL 11:26, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ENGVAR[edit]

The original author of this article, @Nyanardsan: wrote 'labour', 'industrialization', and 'program', so, the article was originally written in Canadian English. I will add 'Use Canadian English' template for consistency of spelling per MOS:ENGVAR and MOS:RETAIN. Ivan Humphrey (talk) 12:05, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that! Gerald WL 13:37, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I didnt mean to do that, im Indonesian and my English is quite bad. I dont know it was Canadian English. Sorry. Nyanardsan (talk) 07:36, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nyanardsan: Relax pal, there is no need to apologize. My English is also not so good. Cheers! Ivan Humphrey (talk) 14:28, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, the template should not to be used to this article because neither a topic related to or places in Canada. However, per Ivan Humphrey, this article is allowed to use the "Use Canadian English" template due to some words exclusive to Canadian English. BengkelBerkah05 (Talks/Contribs) 04:00, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Protests section[edit]

I think the protests section need to be written in chronological order instead of separating it in locations. Enjoyer of World^💬 13:04, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also, make a distinction between protests before and after the passing of the bill. Enjoyer of World^💬 13:08, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Enjoyer of World, I think the island-divided outline is already good. The exact chronology of the protests are also unknown yet. All we know is that it started in Feb 2020. Gerald WL 13:38, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Pro-government influencers & ads notable?[edit]

Are pro-government influencers & artists notable enough to be included? As they clash with activists on the internet. This news article convinces me that they are notable enough to be included and even i think the article still lacks information about them.Nyanardsan (talk) 13:05, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have added infos on that link to the section. Gerald WL 04:04, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 9 October 2020[edit]

The following is a closed 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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael ^(marhata) 15:42, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Indonesia omnibus bill protests → Indonesia omnibus law protests – After the bill officially becomes law on 5 October, the English language name of the law become "Omnibus law on Job Creation" no longer as "Omnibus bill". Therefore, the name of this article shall be renamed as "Indonesia omnibus law protests" in order to reflect the bill that passed into law by parliament. In fact, many reliable source, whether English or non-english language source notably Indonesian language sources now refer to protests as "Omnibus law protest" (Unjuk rasa UU sapu jagat in Indonesian), not longer as "Omnibus bill protest" (Unjuk rasa RUU Sapu jagat in Indonesian). Indonesian language wikipedia now changes the title in order to reflect that the bill already passed by parliament as a law. 36.68.193.87 (talk) 20:58, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support. But note that undang-undang sapu jagat is not used colloquially. So don't use that as an example. Enjoyer of World^💬 21:56, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Nyanardsan (talk) 00:38, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. What about something with "protests and riots against omnibus law"? Enjoyer of World^💬 03:18, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. It also means the whole article should be changed extensively, as nearly all of the article called it a bill. Gerald WL 03:34, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done copyediting. Gerald WL 04:04, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support per WP:COMMONNAME. Ivan Humphrey (talk) 14:30, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support for short: this isn't a bill anymore. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael ^(marhata) 15:39, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above. An unimportant person (talk) 05:29, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Blue Sonic (talk) 10:10, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Today I feel bold and I have moved the article! Yeah Jimbo! Regards, Jeromi Mikhael ^(marhata) 15:40, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Controversy[edit]

The FPI reportedly drove an ambulance to help those hundreds of protesters who were injured, much to the vexation of a police, calling it the "Car of Dajjal" {Indonesian: Mobil Dajjal).

@Gerald Waldo Luis: This seems quite controversial, knowing that the reference used isn't a neutral reliable source (PKS Piyungan a.k.a Portal PIYUNGAN) and I haven't found any other reliable references that state this. Could you give another references for this or probably better if it's deleted? Symphonium264 (talk) 07:39, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I only find this primarily source: https://mobile.twitter.com/DPPFPI_ID/status/1315025011460116480 other than goriau, Portal-islam.id, and geloranews.Symphonium264 (talk) 08:08, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Symphonium264, found this from a Riau newspaper (https://www.goriau.com/berita/baca/viral-oknum-polisi-di-riau-teriaki-ambulans-fpi-sebagai-mobil-dajjal.html). Will replace it with this. Gerald WL 09:37, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerald Waldo Luis: Goriau's article is lil bit better but it based on geloranews article (not reliable source).Symphonium264 (talk) 11:50, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Symphonium264, a source I can find that does not have any mentions of Gelora is this, although I get a sense that the website has some Islamic theme, proven by its slogan, featured article, and first paragraph praising FPI. However there's a video clip of it, which could possibly back it up (did a check and it is not edited in any way). If that's still unreliable, I found this, also featuring a video from a different angle. Thoughts? Gerald WL 12:00, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

KAMI[edit]

In recent days, media outlets have reported that the police arrested several people from the "KAMI" group. Is it time for us to enter these groups into parties to the civil conflict? --Tensa Februari (talk) 07:10, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Front page?[edit]

How is this not on the Wikipedia front page on the news section? Can we make it as one? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.124.197.159 (talk) 15:57, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Most editors are pessimistic about this incident's coverage. Quite sad. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael ^(marhata) 09:43, 3 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Benny Kabur Harman[edit]

Who is Benny Kabur Harman and why is he in the infobox?Regards, Jeromi Mikhael ^(marhata) 02:55, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jeromi Mikhael, he's the only DPR member that openly opposes the law. Gerald WL 10:46, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerald Waldo Luis: Please integrate the fact by stating it in the article. The infobox serves it purpose as the summarizing tool for the article. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael ^(marhata) 11:44, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And I think it would be more proper to add the names of the opposition leader (PKS and Democrat leader in the DPR) rather than mentioning a MP whose mic happens to be shut by the speaker while talking. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael ^(marhata) 11:46, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Protest still ongoing[edit]

I heard from a friend that there are still protests every Tuesday in Jakarta

"protests have not been active for a concerning amount of time, it is considered dead, at least until we see a sruge of protests again" @Gerald Waldo Luis:, I do not agree, just because there hasn't been much news coverage doesn't mean it's over.Germartin1 (talk) 23:40, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you say the protest is still ongoing, please add sources because I searched news about the protest in Google, the last [major] protest was in 17 November 2020 (as in Indonesia omnibus law protests#Protests). BengkelBerkah05 (Talks/Contribs) 05:20, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Germartin1, Wikipedia relies on news or other reliable sources, and aggregates what it says. Hearing it from a friend means original research, which is not what Wikipedia is structured upon. Gerald WL 08:04, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerald Waldo Luis: Thanks Gerald, I never implied to use what I heard as a basis, just that it's likely that the demonstrations have not ended. Please change it back to the present tense, see https://kompas.id/baca/foto/2020/12/16/unjuk-rasa-buruh-menolak-uu-cipta-kerja/ and https://m.cnnindonesia.com/nasional/20201216135806-20-582900/buruh-akan-demo-setiap-mk-gelar-sidang-uu-cipta-kerja Germartin1 (talk) 05:18, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Germartin1, you could add it back to present tense and cite it with these sources by yourself per WP:BOLD. I can't really focus on this article for now as I have some stuff to do (seeable at my userpage "To do lists," so yeah. Gerald WL 12:29, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unless further sources can be provided that indicate the protests are indeed still ongoing, the article should probably be changed to reflect their inactivity. The Indonesian-language article says they stopped as of October 2020 and the sources listed in the English-language article indicate that the protests were only planned to last until 10 November 2020, with the last major protest being recorded as happening on 16 December 2020. Given the last recorded major protest happened over half a year ago, I think it's safe to say that these protests are over. I will be happy to change the article to reflect this if there are no objections.--Grnrchst (talk) 11:53, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Grnrchst, seems perfect for me. It's beeen (or at least it feels like) ages, and I think the protesters don't even bother to protest rn. Gerald WL 12:44, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerald Waldo Luis and Nyanardsan: ... and it is still ongoing as of right now? --Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 02:35, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I dont think we should consider smaller annual labour protests that so happened to also highlight the same demand as part of this one. We dont include 1998 protests as ongoing despite annual Kamisan protests. Omnibus law is not going away anytime soon and majority of labours & students seems dont even bother protesting it anymore. But I dont know, maybe others have opinion about this? Nyanardsan (talk) 07:20, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that it's stated as ongoing to the present day but the first sentence uses the past tense "were" is ridiculous. Maybe just choose 2021 as the end year. Neocorelight (Talk) 05:30, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]