Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sumitro Djojohadikusumo/archive2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dudley Miles (talk | contribs) at 21:38, 27 December 2022. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Sumitro Djojohadikusumo

Sumitro Djojohadikusumo (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Juxlos (talk) 13:34, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about an Indonesian economist/politician/rebel/oligarch/aristocrat/statesman, depending on when and who you ask (well except "economist", everyone agrees on that), who formed Indonesia's economic policies from 1950 to 1957 and 1968 to the 1980s and arguably to this day. Previous FAC failed due to general lack of interest (helps that Indonesian history isn't exactly common knowledge). Juxlos (talk) 13:34, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • Don't use fixed px size
  • Suggest adding a legend to the map caption, since the inbuilt one is unreadable at that size
  • File:Suharto,_Irian_Barat_dari_Masa_ke_Masa,_Preface_(cropped).jpg needs a US tag. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:32, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Addressed. Is the "legend" sufficient? Juxlos (talk) 16:09, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not quite: what represents the operations? The dashed lines, the arrows, both, something else? Nikkimaria (talk) 02:53, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The black arrows. Added. Juxlos (talk) 13:08, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Arsonal

  • This article could benefit from a thorough edit to comply with MOS:COMMA and MOS:DASHES.
  • Lead section mentions that Sumitro is Javanese, yet this fact and his family background are not mentioned or referenced anywhere in the article.
  • Added (and source)
  • "During his studies, he joined an Indonesian students' organization there which aimed to promote Indonesian arts and culture." The use of "there" is ambiguous, since the Netherlands, France, and Spain have been mentioned by this point in the paragraph, and may not be necessary.
  • Removed
  • "During the political wrangling and coup attempt that followed, the group was first relocated to Yogyakarta, and was brought to Sukarno while their kidnappers presented demands to Sukarno to remove Sjahrir and appoint a new cabinet. Due to a botched attempt to kidnap another minister, Amir Sjarifuddin, however, Sudarsono's soldiers failed to show up to Sukarno's palace. Sukarno refused the demands, Sudarsono was arrested, and Sjahrir along with his group were released." The first sentence reads awkwardly and may benefit from a rewrite to only mention Sukarno once. The information in the first sentence also conflicts with the second because it says that the hostages were brought to Sukarno, then they actually were not.
  • Better now?
  • "Sumitro was charged with bypassing it and on one occasion American cargo ship SS Martin Behrman carrying cargo from the Indonesian-controlled city of Cirebon was seized by Dutch marines. This is a run-on sentence.
  • Separated
  • "[...] Sumitro gave a press conference which was prominently featured in American media - The New York Times, for example, published in its entirety a memorandum [...]" Is there a reason these two sentences are not separated by a full stop?
  • The reason being my tendency to overuse commas and dashes. Changed
  • Please verify whether the debt figures specified by Kahin is using Netherlands Indies gulden rather than Dutch guilder. At first glance, I don't think Kahin clarifies this, though in my experience the Indies version of the currency is the one usually used in the context of colonial period.
  • I cannot find any statements for either case in either Kahin or Thee Kian Wie's statement. Though, since NEI's guilder is fixed at par to the Dutch guilder, and the NEI's government didn't exactly exist by late 1949, I imagine they meant the Dutch guilder.
  • "Sumitro also opposed deferring the Western New Guinea issue, but was again overridden by Hatta." This sentence may benefit from explaining what the "issue" actually is.
  • Done
  • A significant portion of the section titled "Minister of Industry" is dedicated to Sumitro's activities after he left the Natsir cabinet and his minister post. Perhaps the section should be titled differently.
  • Added the "UI" - any suggestions? It does still feel a little off.
  • The article never parenthetically associates UI with University of Indonesia, so maybe ===Minister of Industry and academic appointment=== is more clear. Speaking of which, are See also: Natsir Cabinet and See also: Wilopo Cabinet necessary if they are already linked in the prose? If they are removed, See also: Liberal democracy period in Indonesia can also be brought up immediately under the ==Cabinet Minister== header. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 05:11, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and academia"?. Also, changed up the see alsos.
  • Huh, in my defense, that article was created like last month.
  • "He was president commissioner of Astra in 1992, when the group faced a takeover, and Sumitro resigned in December that year." Who was attempting takeover?
  • Expanded the sentence
  • "[...] Sumitro still held considerable influence in policymaking circles due to many of his former pupils holding government positions during the 1980s, and his continued teaching at Universitas Indonesia." University of Indonesia is used throughout, but this sentence uses Universitas Indonesia.
  • Fixed
  • "Despite his previous Keynesian policies of extensive state involvement [...]" The characterization of his economic policies as Keynesian comes very late in the article, well after the sections about his ministerial career. Can this idea be introduced earlier?
  • Added in the first sentence of his ministry under Suharto
  • "[...] he continued to play a role in Golkar party politics [...]" Using "continued" implies he was already involved in Golkar. When did he start his involvement? (I presume since the start of the New Order's three-party system, but this needs further information about the extent of his party involvement.)
  • A little tricky since Sumitro didn't play much party functionary - and well, basically if not literally everyone in government was in Golkar back then. I think it's easier to simply cut off the Golkar part.
  • In the infobox, Sumitro's ministerial positions are listed in reverse chronological order, but within each ministerial section, his terms of office are listed in forward chronological order. I believe common practice is to display these in reverse chronological order as well. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 05:18, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • That better?

Coordinator note

This has been open for three weeks and has yet to pick up a general support. Unless it attracts considerable movement towards a consensus to promote over the next three or four days I am afraid that it is liable to be archived. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:54, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Mike Christie

Since this is short of reviews but had reviewers last time around, I'm pinging those reviewers in case they can take another look: Kaiser matias, Dudley Miles. Coords, I don't think I've done that before (pinged prior reviewers to someone else's FAC); let me know if you'd rather I didn't.

Reading through now; review to follow. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:28, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've copyedited; please revert anything you disagree with.

  • "According to British reports, Sumitro had been included in the delegation to provide a good impression for the Dutch government": does this mean the Dutch included him in order to make them look better at the UN because they included an Indonesian? If so I think it should be clearer, and perhaps also the reason why this mattered should be stated -- presumably because the independence war was well under way by this time. As the paragraph is currently laid out a reader can't see the two are connected (if I'm right in assuming they are).
  • "During the political wrangling and coup attempt that followed, the group was first relocated to Yogyakarta": why "first"? No other move is mentioned. Or is this intended to refer to "show up to Sukarno's palace"?
    • By 1946, Sukarno was based in Yogyakarta, so yeah the first is not necessary. Removed.
  • You mention the kidnappers' plans twice: " intended to remove Sjahrir from office" and "planning to force Sukarno to remove Sjahrir": can we eliminate the repetition?
    • Consolidated
  • "Sumitro was assigned to the Indonesian delegation to the United Nations": surely the UN had not recognized Indonesian independence by this time? So shouldn't we qualify "Indonesian delegation" -- presumably the Dutch also still claimed to represent Indonesia at the UN?
    • At that time, I believe, they were observers - not members, but definitely in the room. There are definitely pictures of them at the UN as the delegation. "Observer delegation", maybe?
  • Is the Indonesian-American corporation worth a red link?
    • Not really, no. I think it did not last very long.
  • Can we make the sequence of events in 1957 a bit more linear at the end of the first paragraph of "Joining the rebellion" and start of the second paragraph? "Throughout 1957" refers entirely to events after "Arriving on 13 May".
  • "He participated in another dissident meeting in the town of Sungai Dareh in January 1958, and a deadlock occurred": a deadlock implies an inability to reach a decision or take action, but we haven't said the group was trying to make any particular decision. You give Barlian's position, but what progress was prevented by it?
  • "to be based in Manado under the Permesta group": I assume the Permesta group was a part of the PRRI, just an organizational group within it? If so do we need to mention them here? If we do I think we should identify them in some way so the reader doesn't have to follow links to know what we're talking about.
  • "Additionally, due to Sumitro's involvement in the rebellion, many of his students who had pursued further education in foreign universities were excluded from government posts." Seems a non sequitur, I think because we mention it before saying the PRRI was defeated -- perhaps it would feel more relevant later in the paragraph.
  • "Despite its utilization in planning, the study was ceased when": suggest "use" rather than the unnecessarily formal "utilization", but I'm not sure what is meant -- what planning is being referred to here?

That's it for a first pass. Overall looks very sound. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:50, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Prose check from Airship

As always, these are suggestions, not demands. Feel free to decline.

  • Make sure you've standardised which variation of English you're using: favor/humor/behavior vs favour/humour/behaviour, defence vs defense, travelled vs traveled.
  • Decided to go with British English and did a couple passes - did I miss anything?
  • Is the occupation parameter necessary in the infobox?
  • No, not really, and honestly I don't even remember putting that in. Removed.
  • Done
  • "... which Sumitro was not part of took part in ..." grammatically sound, but perhaps not as clear as could be.
  • Maybe with parentheses?
  • "He also supported the transmigration program" could specify the subject for clarity.
  • Done
  • "This cabinet was the first to include the Berkeley Mafia, a group of Western-educated economists with Sumitro being a key member and some others such as Finance Minister Ali Wardhana being former students of Sumitro." the subordinate clauses are just slightly out of hand
  • Splitting into 2 sentences work well?
  • "The takeover was completed by January 1993, Sumitro having resigned in December 1992." you could just say "Sumitro resigned in December 1992 and the takeover was completed the following month."
  • Fair enough, fixed
  • "policies were due to his view that such policies were simply a continuation" waffly. "policies because he believed they continued" better.
  • Used a "simply" there, but fixed
  • "military general-politician" is unclear.
  • "And" better there? Also did some stuff with parenthesis
  • "his involvement in the 1997–98 activists kidnappings in Indonesia" you may want to pipe the link for increased clarity.
  • Piped
  • Combining the final two paragraphs of the family section would probably work better.
  • Fair enough

Leaning support currently. Look forward to your response. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:35, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AirshipJungleman29, I think Juxlos is ready for you now. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:28, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Dudley

  • I commented on the previous nomination, but it was timed out before I completed my comments, so I will start again.
  • "Sumitro served as finance minister in the cabinets of Prime Ministers Wilopo and Burhanuddin Harahap". As you mention below that he became an opponent of Sukarno, it would be more relevant that he served as finance minister under Sukarno than the names of the PMs.
  • "With the establishment of the New Order". You should mention that Sukarno was overthrown in a military coup and replaced by Suharto.
  • "a high ranking civil servant in the Dutch colonial government". Presumably of the Dutch East Indies, but you should spell this out.
  • "his children and grandchildren remained influential in Indonesian politics". Remained or remain? (as of date if the latter).
  • Is his mother not recorded?
  • "from ports under Republican control". Was part of the territory under republican control and part Dutch? You should clarify?
  • More to follow. Dudley Miles (talk) 21:38, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Sumitro_Djojohadikusumo/archive2&oldid=1129942769"