Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indonesia/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

Looking for information on Prabowo and KOPASSUS

I am involved in trying to improve the Prabowo article, which has enormous NPOV problems and many unsourced statements, and is also missing many significant biogrpahical details which should be there. The same kind of problems, though to a lesser degree, exist in the page on Kopassus, the unit which Prabowo commanded. I would be grateful to anyone who could point out good online sources for information on Prabowo and Kopassus, and for recent Indonesian political and military history in general. Thank you!Adam keller 14:40, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Re-activating the project

Hi all. After the Great Creator of this project has left Wikipedia for good, tThis project seems to be abandoned. Only the Wikipedia:WikiProject Indonesia/Collaboration works, thanks to Merbabu. Improvements of Indonesia-related articles are still performed individually, but we can use this project to organize and speed up the improvement drive. Let's say it's the beginning of 2007, why don't we re-activate this project. I have several ideas to shape up the project page for easy access for (new) members and activating some useful topics: local A-class assessment, project-based peer-reviewed, guidelines of formatting and contents of similar articles (provinces, cities, islands, etc.) and standardize templates. Of course, we still continue our fortnight collaboration.

The WP:INA and its sub-pages are good, but it is somehow confusing to follow for new members especially. The layout was taken from WP:IND, but their project has a lot of members, so organizing into deeply sub-pages is feasible. How about if we make a one-stop page of WP:INA for important tasks (collaboration, peer-review and A-class nominations), so everybody can nominate/contribute directly? It is similar with more or less WP:MILHIST.

We may be small in numbers (< 30 members currently), but I think we can better organize our project. So, I need other comments. — Indon (reply) — 12:59, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Suggest
Hi, I've been doing random WPI tags (for the unititiated this means going to an article - finding no Wikiproject Indonesia tag on the talk page and putting it in) through a very large number of stubs or articles that are more or less stubs. They are almost all class=stub and importance=low, although a small percentage might be slightly higher in importance. Please note that I am not putting portal links on article pages at this point .
As a consequence I would like to suggest:-
  • No bot or awb work on the WPI tag at this stage - it needs carefull reading of the stubs - however short - to avoid disambig and other issues.
  • If you find an article that is Indonesia related - please - take the time and trouble to put at least the WPI tag on the talk page if does not have one - I am constantly finding articles with no tag at the strangest of places where we should expect them.
  • Anyone who wishes to do this as an exercise (ok I know its very low on interest in the part of some editors - thats fine - we all have our different talents - its ok if there is limited interest I am not worried) if you could alert me to your interest - as there are a couple of issues if we can have few who are interested.
  • Red links on lists - there a number of links full of red links - I would like someone to help to create stubs for these if possible.
  • Assessment for stubs in most cases are straight forward - for larger articles - I am hoping that our guidelines are well tested on mid and high importance - and in fact are double checked where possible.
  • Aspects of this sort of work is dull, boring, and not interesting to many other editors - I happen to find it very interesting - having read touism guide books and maps about Indonesia for over 20 years now - I am intrigued by the misinformation and outright incorrect rubbish that gets onto the internet - and into non-indonesian media about places in indonesia especially. Anyone who might wish to help out in thtis aspect of the project - I would appreciate any feedback on this part of the project.
SatuSuro 15:05, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
Thank you. I've also an idea about the assessment. I know SatuSuro has been working hard for tagging in Indonesia-related articles. We have know over 800 articles in the project. If you look into the statistics, none of them have been rated as A-class. How about if we activate this level? Any individual editors can freely rate an article they are working on between stub, start or B-class. An A-class is supposed to be an article that is ready to be nominated in WP:GAC or WP:FAC. It has to be rated by the project's community. So if an article to be graded A should be nominated first, much like FA, but reviews are only local to the project. So, an A-Class status is assigned after a formal review by the project as a whole, rather than at the discretion of individual reviewers. One excellent example is here: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Assessment#Requests_for_A-Class_status. — Indon (reply) — 17:10, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
I agree with Indon the site structure needs to be simplified. For example, can we delete Wikipedia:Indonesia-related_topics_notice_board? It would be also be helpful to newcomers to provide a section which lists resources for getting started, and in particular Indonesia specific resources whether they be on wikipedia or elsewhere. Lastly, in order for the project to prosper we are desperately in need of additional editors. Can we put in some effort to market wikipedia and recruit contributors from among people with knowledge of Indonesia - universities (both inside and outside Indonesia), bloggers who write about Indonesia, expat clubs/societies (both inside and outside Indonesia), newspapers in Indonesia, etc? (Caniago 09:13, 2 January 2007 (UTC))
Yes, i agree. The project's structure is not simple enough - at least it looks very complicated, even if it probably isn't. Although, to make things simple actually takes more work than to make them complicated!!
I also agree we need more REFERENCED CONTRIBUTIONS. Not just copyedits, and not just uncited translations from wiki id.
Yes, how to get expert contributors? Can we even approach universities maybe? The most active members here seem to be in Indonesia, Netherlands, or Australia - the three countries with arguably the most Indonesia expertise in the world. Let's think of ways to encourage some real experts to contribute.
That's it for now. I will comment again later, no doubt.Merbabu 11:17, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
How about trying to get an article into The Jakarta Post, as per the recent one in Kompas (?). It could coincide with the our Indonesia article getting FA status. Maybe they could include a profile on our prolific expat editor at Leiden ;-) As for getting expects to contribute, I would suggest finding the two-dozen most important academics in the field of Indonesia studies around the world, and sending them an email asking them to invite their students to contribute to wikipedia as part of their learning process. I read on the wikipedia signpost newsletter that some academics are even setting assignments which involve contributing to wikipedia. (Caniago 12:16, 3 January 2007 (UTC))

A new main page

All right, I have been playing with the main page of this project. Anybody can look into my sandbox here: User:Indon/sandbox2. Please give me your comments in this talk page instead. The navigational infobox is still an old one, but will modify for better and simpler navigation through this project. BTW, can you believe that somebody has asked an A-class assessment since Nov. 2006, but nobody from this project ever touch that article?? It's because nobody knows such an assessment in this project. — Indon (reply) — 10:26, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Please comment. Somebody asked a new request now in the assessment, but nobody will take a notice because it is deep inside the subpage. Thank you. — Indon (reply) — 08:07, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

A new main page was replaced. The old version can be seen here: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Indonesia/old version 1. Basically what I did:

  1. No member names in the main page.
  2. Direct collaboration nominees, A-scale assessment requests and local Peer Review requests. It is better for somebody who wants to ask for our helps, a new member to start and also for us to know what's the new requests/nominees are.
  3. News section is removed. Nobody reads that. We are going to re-activate the newsletter again.
  4. Infobox is still needed to be modified.
  5. I removed also the banner. Sorry, it's too bright and not very useful.

Please give me your comments here. — Indon (reply) — 09:51, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Comment
  1. The colour of the page is a bit disconcerting - it does not seem to fit with any symbolism that might be relative to Indonesia
  2. Good that membership is on a sub page!
  3. Otherwise being simpler - it is better!
SatuSuro 10:39, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
I agree about the color, this was originally made by Imoeng. However, the color makes people calms down or relax to read, doesn't it? :-) — Indon (reply) — 10:53, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Calming is one thing - identifying a page with red and white in it would be more appropriate IMHO SatuSuro 12:50, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Newcomer

Hi all. My name is Calupict. I decided to join the assesment team because I think that the job suit me. I hope I can help in so many things. At my first day, I edited the log page which is supposedly edited by bot. I hope I did not do such thing anymore. --Calupict! 07:38, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Welcome aboard, Calupict. Glad that you can join in. — Indon (reply) — 09:09, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Naming conventions

Please note the Maluku Islands and Sulawesi talk pages have an issue to keep the project up to date with an issue that may well return in another form. SatuSuro 13:32, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Useful resources subpage (?)

Caniago has initiative to add resources in the main page, but I think we need to list more. Also important to put public domain image resources for Indonesia-related pictures and maps. Shall we create a new sub page? — Indon (reply) — 12:34, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes SatuSuro 13:04, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Yes, boss. Merbabu 13:09, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Hey, I'm only the servant. Has somebody read the 2006 Time's Magazine persons of the year? It's YOU, the WP editor, bloggers and other too-many-long-hours-in-front-PC sitting & (hopefully not pretending) working man. :-)) — Indon (reply) — 13:27, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
My work got smart. They used to block ALL wikipedia but too many complained. Now they seemed to have worked out how to make wikipedia main only available. So for me, i can see the articles, but no log-in, history, talk, contribs - as for edit - forget it. Just as well my wife hasn't worked out how to block it!! ;) Merbabu 13:33, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Hahaha. Right, I'm going to list some of the resources. — Indon (reply) — 13:38, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
We're all servants of the big snoopers who watch all this stuff....:) SatuSuro 13:29, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Wohoo, we have a philosopher here. ;-) — Indon (reply) — 13:38, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
You direct to a locked page? :( SatuSuro 13:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
Of course, to avoid a philosopher editor edits philosophically philosophical materials. ;-) — Indon (reply) — 14:22, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
OK I get it - its a wise wikpedian editor with wonderfully developed wikaholism wikiedits a wikipedia article in his sleep and taps his pillow four times for the four tildes  ? SatuSuro 14:35, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

For the multicultural amongst us

14 Problem at Malaysian There is currently a buildup of over 750 ambiguous links at the Malaysian disambiguation page. This is an extremely large number - actually, it is roughly double the largest number of ambiguous links of any other page on the English Wikipedia. Fixing the links requires the editor to distinguish between links that are intended to refer to Malay people from links that are intended to refer to the person's nationality or an aspect of the Malaysian nation (which should like to Malaysia. Can some editors who have a good understanding of the human geography of the region volunteer to correct the links?

There might be some amongst us with an equal geographic knowledge of the northern neighbour? Maybe, maybe not? SatuSuro 12:50, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I did some. I used the list from here: [1] Is that the list you mean?Merbabu 23:31, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Yes SatuSuro 23:49, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
I thought he meant [2], though both Malay and Malaysian need work. A change to Template:Malaysia-geo-stub has cut the incoming links to the latter to 300. --Henrygb 11:04, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Tourist Guide Books

Being suggested as a good checking device that is not online. Will update or clarify this section over time. SatuSuro 11:47, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

They can be good specifically for tourist related info, locations, etc. Also, some are very accesibly written on background info, history, culture, etc. They give a good initial "feel" for the topic. They should not, however, in my opinion be relied upon as a WP:RS, much less cited in most cases.Merbabu 11:53, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Exactly - I agree with that - I'll re-write to emphasise that later...SatuSuro 11:55, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Hmm... just to remind everyone to be highly selective for offline publications. Otherwise the resource page would be a book directory. It should be mentioned why the book is selected among other similar types. For instance, Clifford Geertz is a renowned scholar, expert for Indonesia, so his general book about Indonesia (if any) is preferred. So is for other guide books. (my-2-cents) — Indon (reply) — 13:05, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
To reiterate - only two guide books are being indicated here - because of notability and common usage by foreign tourists in Indonesia over the last three decades - - there are about 6 others that I will eventually have stubs/articles for. The emphasis is as further reading status and not as a primary source or reference - to confim and agree with Merbabu's comment - the very mode of compostion of these books is an issue of WP:RS - and almost $50 Australian in current first edition! SatuSuro 13:28, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

New Infobox Island

Hi all. I have renovated the {{Infobox Island of Indonesia}}. Please take a look and give me some suggestions (or perhaps rejection). We still need infobox of islands (kepulauan). — Indon (reply) — 22:09, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I really like it and would support it (unless someone thinks of an issue I haven't). My only concern it its width when actually filled in, as in the case of Java. Merbabu 23:38, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
In principle - excellent. However - I am confused by what you say we still need infobox of islands - do you mean where more than one island is involved? SatuSuro 02:39, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Looks great in general. A few comments... (1) I'd suggest following the lead of the city/mountain/lake infoboxes, and only show the english name and the native name (if there is one). I don't think there is a need for showing colonial or alternate names since this infobox is just a summary. (2) the need for the ports section is questionable. It should either be renamed "major ports" or removed. If you are going to list ports I'd also list major airports. (3) "Province" should be renamed "Provinces" (4) "Inhabitants" should be renamed "Population" (5) You could add an optional "Island Group" field which shows which group of islands it is part of. (Caniago 03:00, 13 January 2007 (UTC))
You could use the same template for both island and islands by adding an additional option field "Islands". (Caniago 05:25, 13 January 2007 (UTC))
Thanks for inputs. I'll be back & update it later after spending my weekends with my beloved one. ;-) — Indon (reply) — 10:37, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
It's cool. Can I pop in and do some adjustments? Imoeng 12:12, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Go ahead - terus terus - you shouldnt need to ask ! SatuSuro 12:20, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Of course, Imoeng. ;-) — Indon (reply) — 23:59, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

LOL maybe not this week, big day tomorrow. Wish me luck everyone! And thanks SatuSuro for the wishes! Imoeng 08:47, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I've made some changes based on Michael's & Merbabu's inputs. I am keeping "other names" and "native name" for Indonesian name as it is the case in {{Infobox City}} and {{Infobox Scottish island}}. I'm still thinking how to handle Islands option for kepulauan, but Imoeng's skill after his exam (I really wish you will beat the exams easily, Imoeng) will handle this problem. One question for islands shared with other countries (Borneo, Papua and Timor). Any idea how to make a consistent template with other islands? I'd expect there would be optionals countries and provinces/states per country (???) Should we create a separate "Infobox Island", but this would be general for other countries? — Indon (reply) — 15:01, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Agree with all the changes so far. Some additional comments: (1) would be good to add a coordinates field (should be called "coordinates" or "coords"), as per most geography related infoboxes (2) the precedent set by the country and city infoboxes is to list the English and native names right next to each other, so there is the potential to remove the "Name and location" heading and move location to geography (3) Regarding Borneo, etc. I would rename the province parameter "admin_divisions" (or similiar) and add an additional parameter "admin_divisions_title". For Borneo the title would be "Countries", and the "admin_divisions" parameter would list the countries, with the provinces listed in brackets. (4) I think this template should eventually be renamed Infobox Island, after making it generic enough to be used for non-Indonesian islands. This goal isn't too far away. (Caniago 15:50, 14 January 2007 (UTC))
Yeah, later on the template can be used for general island article. Why is there no Infobox Island? (or maybe I miss that?) Thanks, I'll give the update report later. — Indon (reply) — 16:58, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
No problem. I added the coordinates parameter to the infobox. The only other existing island infobox besides the Scottish one is Template:Country_infobox_data_Christmas_Island. It doesn't surprise me, since until recently there wasn't a lake infobox either. (Caniago 18:38, 14 January 2007 (UTC))
BTW, with ID having 17,508 islands, I hope you are not going to add them all :-) (Caniago 18:43, 14 January 2007 (UTC))
With the recent experience of List of volcanoes in Indonesia, I should create stubs for List of islands in Indonesia to be featured. Let me see, 17,508 / 365 then on average I should create 50 stubs each day to finish the list by the end of 2007! ;-) Just kidding. Hey, thanks for adding coordinates parameter. — Indon (reply) — 19:04, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Location image

Hi all. I have activated the Cartography section of this project. Who wants to contribute there? I also made the {{Location map Indonesia}} as standardization for city locator with Indonesia image; some countries has used this locator format. It uses only 1 image and take latitude and longitude information of the city to put the city marker in the image. So there is no need to create one image for each city article. Examples are given here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Indonesia/Cartography. I'm planning to create more blank maps of big islands for small cities.

However, when I wanted to update some city articles using the {{Infobox city}}, there is a conflict in the image map parameter. I want to propose to create infobox special for Indonesia, rather than modifying the infobox which will create havoc in WP. It's similar with the {{Infobox Indian jurisdiction}} which uses the Location map template. It's very handy and good for standardization. So, what's your opinion? — Indon (reply) — 10:41, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Simply brilliant Indon. Thanks a fantastic innovation! (Caniago 12:38, 20 January 2007 (UTC))
Actually, I didn't invent that. I was amazed also with {{Location map}} template. It's simply handy to use only one image and re-used for thousands articles. — Indon (reply) — 12:58, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
But you've still done the work to find it and set it up :-) Any idea how to get it to work with {{Infobox City}} Caniago 14:41, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Woops, I didn't read your comment above fully. Could we add an additional parameter to {{Infobox City}} to support the map? I would image there would be support given the wider potential for use. I'm reluctant to support creating project specific templates when there is a general one available which almost supports our needs. (Caniago 14:41, 20 January 2007 (UTC))
The infobox city is quite complicated and I don't want to add one small modification only for the image map. Mostly a lot of parameters in the infobox are not used for Indonesian cities. The generic locator image is also being discussed in Template_talk:Infobox_City#Red_dot_on_blank_map and I think it is good to separate country-specific cities. Besides India, German has a very good infobox city, see Template:Infobox German Location. — Indon (reply) — 16:13, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
..and also the specialized infobox city can be simplified and easier to use. For instance, by giving the "lat" and "long" parameters, the template can automatically define the coordinate of the city and also call the {{Location map Indonesia}} template. — Indon (reply) — 16:33, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Indonesian is disambiguation now

Once more, a disambig fan has made Indonesian into disambiguation page, which is practically empty. Hundreds of links to the original Indonesian language is now broken. Just to let you guys know. — Indon (reply) — 19:32, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

What's stopping us just putting it back? Merbabu 00:19, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Furthermore, it appears there are actually a few pages linked that refer to "Indonesian something" that is not the language. Ie, Indonesian food is linked to that DAB page. I've often tried to clean that up and always link the language to "Indonesian language" and never to "Indonesian" as I kinda knew something like this might happen. To link to the languge we need to type [[Indonesian language|Indonesian]] and to link to anything else "Indonesian" simply type [[Indonesia]]n which will direct to the country page. Better still, would be something more specific. Take for example "Islam in Indonesia". Don't link to [[Islam]] and [[Indonesia]] individually, better link like this [[Islam in Indonesia]]. Merbabu 00:30, 21 January 2007 (UTC) --Merbabu 00:30, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Update: OK, i fixed up a whole lot from here: [3]. Ie, made them either [[Indonesia]]n or [[Indonesian language|Indonesian]]. there is still a lot to do. Merbabu 02:29, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
I have left a message on the disambig persons talk page - felt it was the only thing to do. SatuSuro 04:00, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Well, in principle the dab page is not such a bad idea. Although many links to Indonesian language link to [[Indonesian]], if it is reverted back, there are many links to [[Indonesian]] which are not intended to be to the language. Thus, the best thing to do is to fix the links themselves. I've had a go, and Michael is doing so now. Merbabu 04:08, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
My apologies! I hadn't considered checking here before turning the page into a disambig; sorry for the trouble I've caused. From what I've seen (though I could be wrong) the number of links that don't concern the language is comparable to those that do, thus the change to a disambig page. In hindsight I probably should have fixed the links before doing the conversion, rather than the other way around. As such I've reverted my edit temporarily; when all (or at least the majority) of the links have been fixed, then I'll change it back, assuming nobody is objectionable to that. --Talon Artaine (talk) 10:59, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
I just found a nice toy to fix disambig links. It's fun. Since I know about the subject, I'm going to put back Indonesian into disambig page and then help you to fix that. Sorry for this mess, Talon. You don't have to apologize. You have reminded us to be a good WP editor. :-) — Indon (reply) — 11:19, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Status: I think all of the necessary articles link to the disambig page have been correctly linked. (I love the tool :-) — Indon (reply) — 14:10, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

So in the end it all turned out ok - apologies to Talon for sounding a bit bossy - thanks that you are able to join in the fun... SatuSuro 14:28, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Using Indonesian terms

How would you all feel about using Indonesian words and nomenclatures in all Indonesian administrative division article texts? eg, use provinsi or propinsi) instead of province in the text of all Indonesian articles, not just the titles? --Bob 04:02, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

I would strongly object - this is the English language Wikipedia. (Caniago 05:08, 22 January 2007 (UTC))
ditto - doesn't work like that. We don't call Germany 'Deutschland'. Why would you want to do this? Merbabu 06:30, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
There are already at id:Provinsi. — Indon (reply) — 09:37, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Because wikipedia should be normalised across articles. There is a heated debate at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_France#Anglicisation regarding this. I feel that if Indonesian articles uses English words then French articles should use English words. However, if French words remain in French articles then this debate must move to other projects so that they also conform to a single uniform style. If you want to keep using English words, make your voice heard on the above link. --Bob 17:59, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

If it is decided that French-related articles are to be in French that is unfortunate, but it is no reason that Indonesian articles should also be. Merbabu 19:14, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Es Chendol

A funny thing popped up on my change list... mmmm, yes please... (Caniago 11:50, 26 January 2007 (UTC))

mb 03:07 Chendol (diff; hist) . . (+14) . . Thijs!bot (Talk | contribs) (robot Adding: es:Cendol)

Could I please have a teh botol bot please SatuSuro 11:52, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

"robot Adding: es:Cendol" ? I wouldn't drink that. :-)) Thanks Michael. — Indon (reply) — 13:06, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
What are you guys talking about? Mabuk? I didn't know one could get drunk on es cendol! he he Merbabu 13:21, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Cendol seems harmless, but I've read that rice wine (or was it coconut?) was very popular in West Sumatra before the Padri Wars :-) (Caniago 13:26, 26 January 2007 (UTC))
Oh, I love cendol a lot, but not with a robot adding it. Merbabu should probably know about Cendol Elizabeth in Bandung. :-) (try G search: cendol elizabeth) BTW, it's a coconut milk. — Indon (reply) — 13:40, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Thats it, I'm booking a flight to Bandung now! :-) (Caniago 14:43, 26 January 2007 (UTC))
Well, you don't have to go all the way to Bandung. Try this. Merbabu 14:47, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
The good ones I know in the eastern suburbs are almost as far as Bandung from me. I have to live with Malaysian instead. :-) (Caniago 15:19, 26 January 2007 (UTC))

Google books

You probably already know Google Scholar ([4]]), but have you messed around with Google Books ([5]). Its been some time since I've used it, but they've been scanning book like crazy I'm really amazed by how many books they have on there now, many of which I've not heard of or seen before in my own interest areas. One good aspect is that they often provide a preview of content even for copyright books. So for instance, have a look at this search for Borobudur [6]. Just from looking at the content preview, I think the Hindu king related to Borobudur you might be referring to is King Indra (A.D. 782-812) - he seems to have a Hindu name, but he may have been Buddhist. The two books at the top of that search query have a lot of info. (Caniago 10:52, 28 January 2007 (UTC))

Cool! I've used also this google books a couple of times. If we peek the scanned book and found what we are looking for, then I guess it is safe to cite the book, isn't it? Thanks, Michael. — Indon (reply) — 15:58, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
I don't see any reason not to cite them. (Caniago 04:23, 29 January 2007 (UTC))

Wikipedia:WikiProject Endangered languages

Recognized contents section

Somebody added this on the main page. Do you guys think it is a good time to start a new sub-page called "Good contents" ? BTW, I am a bit reluctant to put formerly featured or good article pages. There is already {{ArticleHistory}} template that shows the milestones of each article, including formerly X status. — Indon (reply) — 08:50, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Look who's now showing at today's Picture of the Day?

No, it's not in Wikipedia. Here, at commons:. — Indon (reply) — 09:35, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Indonesia travel article in Washington Post

[7], [8], [9], [10] (Caniago 22:36, 1 February 2007 (UTC))

I am engaged in a project to rationalise the island-categories. I have run into a number of WikiPorjects along the way, and in applying myself to the Malay Archipelago, I have been told to discuss it here first.

I do not change anything of substance. I am only concerned with arranging the categories so that they function neatly and logically, and so they accurately represent the geography in a structured way. This will enable people browsing the categories to find articles easily, and learn about the islands of the world. Within articles, I add only an occasional internal link.

The islands are organised physically (by location in oceans and seas), by geo type (archipelago, island-chain, etc) and politically (by country), in separate category-trees. See main cat Category:Islands (which is improving), and in particular, Category:Islands of Southeast Asia and Category:Islands of Oceania (which is still quite disorganised).

So far, the main changes I have made to this region are -

  • creation of category "Greater Sunda Islands" < "Melanesia" < "Islands of Southeast Asia".
  • creation of category "Lesser Sunda Islands" < "Melanesia" < "Islands of Southeast Asia".

(they aren't actually in the Melanisa cat yet, - this was my next task)

  • add all of the islands in Indonesia, Malaysia, East Timor and Brunei, to tese 2 categories.
  • move other islands of the Malay Archipelago into "Melanesia" < "Islands of Southeast Asia", eg. "new Guinea".
  • various minor changes to prevent duplication of articles in both parent and child cats; and other details.

I will hold off the Malay Archipelago for a while. If anyone would like to discuss, go ahead. Bards 16:31, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Bards, thanks for posting your proposal. Some initial comments:- You might want to check your geography references again, because to my knowledge the Greater Sunda Islands are not part of Melanesia, and only some of the Lesser Sunda Islands are part of it. I'm a bit concerned about the categorization of islands, since there is quite a deep hierarchy (eg. Malay Archipelago->Sunda Islands->Lesser Sunda Islands->X Archipelago->Y Island). There are also overlapping classifications, so part of Melanesia overlaps with part of the Lesser Sunda Islands. If the construction of categories and the organization of islands into categories is not well thought out it will make islands hard to find. (Caniago 17:14, 4 February 2007 (UTC))
Yes, I have been deliberately flattening that hierarchy. Eg. skipping both Malay Archipelago, and Sunda Islands, so you get Southeast Asia > (not Melanesia, as you suggest) Greater Sunda or Lesser Sunda > individual islands. Another option is to group together all Sunda Islands in the same category. Regarding Melanesia, my proposals there were unverified, and no doubt my investigation would have uncovered what you say. But thank you for pointing it out. If there is overlap between Melanesia and Lesser Sunda, they will have to be positioned side by side in the hierarchy, and some islands assigned to both. Bards 17:41, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
A further point for discussion is the naming of the region under the "Islands by ocean or sea" category. Currently it is under "Islands" > "Islands by ocean or sea" > "Southeast Asia". But that refers to a land mass, and I would like a maritime classification in keeping with the others there, eg. "Maritime Southeast Asia. This region is unusual in that it forms the boundary between two oceans, and is not encompassed by one particular sea. I have not meddled with this, due to the proposed merger between article "Maritime Southeast Asia" and another article. Bards 17:41, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

The Sastrowardoyo Family

User:RahadyanS made so many entry related with Sastrowardoyo family. You can see at his userpage what are the pages that he made. Judging from his name, I became suspicious that he is Rahadyan Sastrowardoyo; see Hartriono_B._Sastrowardoyo. Doesn't it against wikipedia policy to write about our own family; eventhough I think that some member at Sastrowardoyo family is deserved to get a wikipedia article because their notability. Calupict! Speak to me 03:02, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Isssues of WP:COI and WP:N are interlinked on this one... SatuSuro 03:08, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Dictionaries

Why the deletions of links to other online Dictionaries? I see that Kamus.net is the only online Indo-English dictionary linked to from this page. Why is that? Moreover, why is my link to IndoDic.com continually removed? Do the autors have a financial interest in Kamus.net or is this just because of jealous vandalism? Do they think that kamus.net is the only online dictionary worthy of consideration? IndoDic contains 2 full dictionaries of 59,000 (eng-indo) and 51,000 (indo-english) words. Indo words are arranged in true alphabetical order, including most affixes. Word family listings are available for both English and Indonesain words. These dictionaries took 8 years to research and compile. They are freely available for learners of Bahasa Indonesia. Hard- and soft-cover books are published by Gramedia and available at bookstores all over Indonesia. The links to IndoDic.com need to remain. Otherwise, I'll have to continually re-edit this page. Tgilson 02:58, 10 February 2007 (UTC)tgilson

You should read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Caniago 03:05, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
And also WP:3RR SatuSuro 08:43, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

How many island in Indonesia

The first sentence of the Indonesia page says that "Indonesia, officially the Republic of Indonesia (Indonesian: Republik Indonesia), is a nation of 17,508 islands[2]." But the first line of the Geography section refers to "Indonesia's 18,108 islands." Which is it? Any way to get agreement on such a basic fact about the country? MylesCallum 08:22, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Good point - there are indeed inconsistencies on this issue SatuSuro 08:24, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
FYI, there was a story the other day which said Indonesia expects to loose 2,000 islands by 2030 due to global warming. (Caniago 08:26, 10 February 2007 (UTC))
I really think there need to be benchmark against a source that is very very very reliable - I will not accept the cia fact book, encarta or anything like that - we really need to be consistent in the project as to this as it is a perennial issue - we need to have a definitive answer! SatuSuro 08:42, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
The UN says 17,508 - see [11], and Indonesian government websites agree (eg. [12]) Caniago 08:53, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for that - In that case someone needs to cleanup our project pages that mention that number for consstency... SatuSuro 09:05, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the good responses. I agree with SatuSuro that it really needs to be fixed. Having two such glaringly discrepant figures in the same article is the kind of thing that sabotages the authenticity of these pieces. MylesCallum 04:42, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is failing

You guys might be interesting to read this Wikipedia:Wikipedia is failing and join in the discussion here Wikipedia_talk:Wikipedia is failing (Caniago 01:55, 13 February 2007 (UTC))

I've been thinking about the negative reactions my reverting of unsourced (too often large scale) additions and and I was starting to think that maybe I was being a bit too extreme. But, that article convinces me that I'm doing the right thing. We need quality not quantity and quality means verifiability, not just more "i wrote it off the top of my head" or "everyone knows it". Merbabu 11:35, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
I've no problems with bulk reverting if done at the right place and time. The higher the article quality the more careful we need to be about what goes in. (Caniago 15:40, 13 February 2007 (UTC))

Wikipedia overlay for Google Earth

There is a freshly updated dynamic overlay of Wikipedia entries for Google Earth available here [13]. Sumatra has pretty good coverage now (volcanoes, cities, provinces, lakes, national parks, etc), and Jakarta is starting to get interesting. Other parts of Indonesia are of varying quality. (Caniago 11:05, 13 February 2007 (UTC))

Category tagging

Please note that categories will be tagged with a non-article tag soon so that we can review what categories exist within the Indonesia Project - they will not affect anything else - any questions please check with me - please do not alter them - thanks SatuSuro 22:48, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Terrorism

It appears that a project-wide discussion is required on the subject of how this subject is developed within the project. It has been developed over time with articles that contribute towards an understanding - by looking at the components of the larger issues. However non project editors have broached the issue - and as a project we need to find a good wikipedian consensus - or even airing of ideas as to how to approach the subject - as we have been doing by developing articles that we can deal with - with no 'speculative;' non encyclopediac style or attitude enroaching on our articles. It is a sensistive subject - but we need to deal with it, specially as there are issues creeping into the projects domain from other areas.

Any comment at all would be appreciated as to how WP Indonesia should go on this - developing the project with good encyclopediac articles and sticking to wikipedia policies. SatuSuro 23:18, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Pagaruyung Palace destroyed by fire (again)

A fire caused extensive damage to Basa Pagaruyung Palace in Tanahdatar regency, West Sumatra, on Tuesday evening. Detik.com news portal quoted a witness, identified only as Andri, as saying the fire, believed to have been sparked by lightning, began at about 8 p.m. Some photos here:

[14] [15] [16]

I guess this is why ijuk has been replaced by corrugated iron as the preferred roofing material.

(Caniago 02:47, 1 March 2007 (UTC))

That's terrible. Merbabu 03:01, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh man, is it gone now? I am planning to go there during my vacation, oh dear! — Indon (reply) — 08:42, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Man, what a shame. --Bwmodular 09:05, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I remember reading that by the time Raffles visited Pagaruyung in 18xx it had already been burnt to the ground three times by the Padri movement, and nothing existed when he visited. It was also destroyed in 1966, and now in 2007. They really need to consult experts to help prevent it from happening again. I just hope the historic artifacts stored in the building have been saved. Indon, you can visit my wife's RG near Bukittinggi instead, it has just been renovated :-) (Caniago 09:40, 1 March 2007 (UTC))

Have we asked you why don't you put photos of your wife's RG on the RG article? I mean, you've actually put your wife in a few INdonesia articles, why not put her house on too. ;) Merbabu 09:43, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, thanks Michael, but surely I have to (obliged) to visit my wife's RG at Sungai Puar first :-). Oh why didn't you create that page yet. ;P — Indon (reply) — 09:50, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

There are other better examples, since it doesn't have any external carvings. Besides, there is already a whole website for it - http://bundohadjisah.org/ :-) (Caniago 09:53, 1 March 2007 (UTC))
BTW Indon, there are many West Sumatra articles without any photos yet, so make sure you visit the right places and take lots of photos ;-) (Caniago 10:52, 1 March 2007 (UTC))

Anyone speak German?

I'd like to ask the owner of the following Adityawarman image for permission to use it under the appropriate license, but my German isn't sufficient [17] (Caniago 13:50, 3 March 2007 (UTC))

barnstar deleted

Hey, I'm not a member of this project, but I was just looking at barnstars, and noticed the barnstar of national merit for Indonesia had been deleted because (apparently) someone forgot to fill out the licensing info. Dunno if you care or not; just FYI. --Ling.Nut 21:32, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

SEA Project

Please note that some Indonesian project editors have been concerned to see the possibility of what appears to be a start to joint tag Indonesian project articles with that of the SEA Project. There are compelling arguments for and against such a tagging project, please see the conversation there. SatuSuro 12:12, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

And here is the link: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Southeast Asia. — Indon (reply) — 12:13, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Help !!

Could you please (anybody from the project) take a look at the main page and assess Adam Air 574 request for A-class ? The editor, who is a non-member, has been kindly updated, managed and improved the article to its current state. Your opinion (oppose/support) is really needed and will be a good start for assessing other A-class articles in our project. Pleeeeaassee help !! :-) — Indon (reply) — 10:58, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm reluctant to rate it due to my involvement with the article. Maybe we should submit it for GA status? (Caniago 10:23, 5 March 2007 (UTC))
The editor has submitted to WP:GAC. I suggested him so, because our project is really small to assess A-class. BTW, should we close our A-class assessment page? — Indon (reply) — 11:01, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
GA has now been passed for the article. Blood Red Sandman Open Up Your Heart - Receive My EviLove 07:28, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your hardword in the article. I believe GA is higher than A-class in the WikiProject Indonesia case. Congrats! — Indon (reply) — 12:12, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Batik spammer

I raises this issue into the project. There is currently the same user with anon IP: User:205.167.7.18 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), User:87.88.195.205 (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) and registered User:Aberges (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), persistently added one specific external link. I suspect (s)he avoids WP:3RR being blocked. I have raised the issue in the Batik's talk page, but (s)he is still adding the same link in the article. Could somebody weigh-in there? Thanks. — Indon (reply) — 09:04, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Have alerted a friendly admin - just hope he turns up and has a squiz :) SatuSuro 12:14, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I just uploaded this logo Image:Bangka belitung coa.png for Bangka-Belitung to Commons. It is different from the logo shown in the Infobox on the Indonesian Wiki [18]. I downloaded the commons image from the Bangka-belitung website [19] so I think its probably right. Could someone with good Bahasa Indonesia please point the id page to the commons logo with an explanation, if you think I'm right about this. --Bwmodular 16:17, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Ben, if I am not mistaken, the logo you uploaded is for the Bangka regency, not for the province. I can't find the province website, one result from google is currently down. — Indon (reply) — 16:41, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
if I am not mistaken. That's very tactfully put, Indon! :) I read 'Propinsi Kepulauan Bangka Belitung' but didn't notice the 'Kabupaten' at the top. OK, I'll overwrite what we have in commons with the image from the id wiki, and also revert a couple of other changes I made.--Bwmodular 16:56, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Syahrir Wiki Page

Hello, Turning to Indonesian experts on Wiki to see if they can help in the cleaning up, or editing of Syahrir's page. I initially tagged it as a vanity page since it's very non-Wiki in style and it only seems that two people who are connected to Syahrir are maintaining it. Could someone with Wiki and Indonesian skills visit the page and add positive contributions?

NOTE: While I was typing this in, the page in reference was indeeded deleted. But if there is an admin here who can access the deletion and look it over, it would be appreciated. The related user talk for the user Syahrir page is here. Thanks! BaseballDetective 08:35, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

The article should be Sutan Sjahrir. I am going to redirect the page. — Indon (reply) — 08:53, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick response, but doing that might cause more confussion. We're talking about two different people. The Sjahrir in question in the article that was deleted was a political dissident jailed in 1974 and active in current politics [20]. Please see what we can do to give this Syahrir a valid Wiki pressence. BaseballDetective 09:12, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Coats of Arms

Lots of the Province pages have no 'logo' in their infoboxes. Is there any reason why I shouldn't take the images from the Bahasa Indonesia Wiki here and upload them to Commons with the PD-IDGov tag as used with Image:West_Sumatra_coa.svg? The ID one's are all uploaded under fair use rationale, but I don't think the source is listed. I suppose that could be a problem as I don't know where the original images come from. If I were to create svg versions of the ID images, would that be legit? Not much of an expert on these matters.--Bwmodular 15:54, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

In my experience the quality of the ones on the Indonesian wikiproject sometimes isn't too good. The provincial government websites often contain a page which has the logo (lambang) and an explanation of the meaning of it, so this is probably the best source. Being government websites I presume PD-IDGov is ok to use. (Caniago 20:03, 7 March 2007 (UTC))
The provincial govt websites were my first port of call (If you mean the 'go.id' pages, such as Bengkulu and Lampung) but the pictures on those pages aren't much better - pretty low resolution, and often with a multicoloured background which will take some editing out. (BTW Neither of these pages seem to be available at this moment, but they certainly were yesterday - West Java is there OK though.) I've also looked at the regional pages on the main govt website, such as Lampungbut again, the pictures are pretty low res. Are these the sites you're referring to? --Bwmodular 11:09, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Yes. I guess it depends upon the website, but you are right it is quite patchy. My experience is mostly with the West Sumatran cities and regencies. I think there are some which are ok to use, such as [21], [22], [23], etc. An additional approach would be to ask an admin to recover the previously deleted images on the EN wikipedia and slap the PD-IDGov tag on them? (Caniago 11:31, 8 March 2007 (UTC))
Were they any better quality? If so, do we have any friendly admins who we could ask? Or how does one go about making a general admin request--Bwmodular 11:47, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
I think from memory some were better here. SatuSuro should be able to provide advise on admin issues. (Caniago 11:54, 8 March 2007 (UTC))
reviewing the latest on this page i noted my moniker being mentioned - I have just the admin for you - I'll drop a note... :) SatuSuro 12:00, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Great - I've also found that a google image search for lambang produces some good quality images, although I have to sift through lots of irrelevant images to find the provincial ones. If we can restore the deleted ones and then I'll try and find better quality ones for any that need improving. And I'll give them all a transparent background if they don't already have one.--Bwmodular 12:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Presume that since I got the message I'm just the admin you need. Ok what are the images that need to undeleted I'll have have a look. Gnangarra 12:13, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
If you weren't doing it already, a Google search by site may be useful, eg. "site:go.id" (Caniago 12:53, 8 March 2007 (UTC))
Well, the only ones that I can safely say have definitely been deleted are these Image:Logo Sumut.jpg and Image:Logo Bengkulu.jpg, because they are referenced in the provincial image boxes. However there may well have been others. Michael do you know?--Bwmodular 13:36, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
That plus Image:Logo Nad.jpg (Caniago 14:09, 8 March 2007 (UTC))
OK, as you can see from my sandbox we now have a copy of every provincial logo except for Papua Barat. If you can find one for there, do upload it. The West Sulawesi logo is very poor quality, so keep your eyes open for a better quality copy of that one also. --Bwmodular 22:10, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Will try to find the logo. BTW, here's a useful site I found which has details on provinces, cities and regencies of Indonesia: [24], [25] (Caniago 23:17, 16 March 2007 (UTC))
V useful, thanks for that. Interesting that even this page has a 'no image' notice for logos of Sulbar and Papua Barat! --Bwmodular 10:05, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I've just added an infobox to the NBT province page. No matter how I try, I can't get the capital to display as Mataram, but to point to Mataram (city). If you use the normal syntax, Mataram (city)|Mataram it displays as Mataram (city). I've tried all sorts, but can't get it working. Am I being dumb, or is this a problem with infoboxes in general? Never noticed it before.--Bwmodular 12:26, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Its a problem with this specific infobox. I will fix it, but it will mean that all the existing capital names need to be enclosed with [[ ]] characters. (Caniago 13:08, 23 March 2007 (UTC))

Wake up!!

Somebody has jut put {{inactive}} on our project because of only four edits in a month. Wake up guys!! :-) — Indon (reply) — 07:44, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

How to deal with low level activity time - there is probably a need for the more active members to at least put something in at least every week... simply to keep the project from becoming stagnant. There is still so much to do in the project SatuSuro 13:45, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Whats needed is a hot coffee, discussion with a programming guru from NY Gnangarra 13:51, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Friends, a little baby boy (our second) arrived two weeks early yesterday, so I'll be out of action for the next few weeks. Mother, baby (and dad) all doing fine. Very happy. --Bwmodular 12:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Congratulation, Bwmodular!! Loads of sleepless nights are waiting for you, hehehe.. Anyways, guys. I'm sorry if my following questions would make me sound sooo stupid, but I'm a noob, so spare me. I want to have some special categories on "Traditional Houses of Indonesia", "Traditional Weapons of Indonesia", "Traditional Musical Instruments of Indonesia", "Traditional Costumes of Indonesia", etc. How can I do that? Do I have to ask for someone's permission first or what?
Basically what I'm trying to ask is: Where should I ask questions concerning new articles and/or categories in this project? Thank you in advance! Salam, Matahari Pagi 07:53, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Permission? Of course not. I don't think you need that permission in Wikipedia. :-) However, it should be inline with another articles, for instance, Architecture of Indonesia, Music of Indonesia, etc. — Indon (reply) — 07:59, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Thx for your reply, Indon (BTW, do you know that your name is offensive for some Indonesians, especially if it is uttered by Malaysians?). I am aware of those articles, but how about articles? Like the Architecture of Indonesia for example, it is too general. Wouldn't it be better if we have a special category regarding our rich architectural heritage? I would love to contribute, especially for my hometown South Kalimantan ;) Matahari Pagi 08:31, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
What I meant is that to create that specific article about Indonesian traditional houses, but in conjunction with the more general article. So that it would not overlap/redundant or even contradict to each other. For instance, in the Architecture of Indonesia it is given in the section Traditional vernacular architecture. So it might be good to create a sub-article from that section but to expand from it. (Re. my username, yes, that was my intention to pick the name. The association comes from M,S,P and A countries and they are used even in press for bad association. I'm an Indonesian and I don't like people using that name to offend others. Search on Google, my username is on the first page. Not the top result yet, but let's see. :-) — Indon (reply) — 08:41, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
We already have started creating the individual articles. We have Rumah gadang, Omo sebua, Tongkonan, and there are many others i intended to create. I also think there is value in the general articles that you cannot get from having individual ones. Merbabu 08:51, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
So you are the one who is responsible for all of those articles? Thank you so much, I feel so much pride for our Tanah Air after reading your articles! Now, wouldn't it be better if we have a special category for them? You know, like Indonesian Cuisines where all the cuisines from all over Indonesia is united under one category?Matahari Pagi 09:14, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, the category is Category:Indonesian architecture. — Indon (reply) — 10:17, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Oh, so there's already one. Stupid me. I've already started my project in that category. It won't be easy, as my internet connection is super-duper slow. But I will do it once at a time. Nasantara jaya! Matahari Pagi 09:34, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
Watching this conversation - "please' always check the possible 'close' named articles dont already exist - try a number of variant names before starting - in the project we do have 'double articles' which have happened - it is well spending time checking first. SatuSuro 09:07, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
Okie-dokie!!Matahari Pagi 09:14, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Historic Indonesian photos

I've found the most wonderful collection of historic Indonesian photos - [26]. The site is a bit painful to navigate, but there is a large number of photos there organized by both photographer and also by place name. The photographers include Adolf Schaefer, Isidore van Kinsbergen, Kassian Céphas, Charles Kleingrothe and Christiaan Benjamin Nieuwenhuis. The photos I've checked are scanned at a high resolution, but it takes quite a few clicks to drill down into the high res versions. You may see me adding a few to my pet articles. (Caniago 16:31, 4 April 2007 (UTC))

Actually a better link to it is [27]. It is divided into the following collections:
  1. The Dutch East Indies in photographs, 1860 -1940: Some 3000 photographs present an image of colonial life in the Dutch East Indies from 1860 to 1940.
  2. Moluccan history and culture in pictures: Nearly 10,000 images of the Moluccas and of the Moluccan community in the Netherlands from 1900 up to the present.
  3. Pioneer photography from the Dutch Indies: A number of photographers from the early days of photography travelled through the Dutch Indies capturing images of life in the colony.
  4. Indonesia independent – Photographs 1947-1953: The decolonisation of the Dutch Indies in more than 4500 photographs by Cas Oorthuys, Charles Breijer and Lex de Herder.
  5. Colonial World Fairs: Objects collected in the Netherlands East Indies between 1870 and 1940, and photographs illustrating life in New Guinea.
(Caniago 14:01, 5 April 2007 (UTC))

Flora of Indonesia images

I intend to write articles about endemic plants of Indonesia. I have started with the Javanese Edelweiss (Anaphalis javanica). Does anyone have a picture of this plant, that I can use? I could also need another images of endemic plants of Indonesia. Thanks. Acaramoy 07:24, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Go for it. A very undeveloped part of the project. Are you aware of Flora of Indonesia and Category:Flora_of_Indonesia? Please, don't forget everything should come from reliable references. Merbabu 08:57, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Collaboration

It has been a while since Sidoarjo mud flow has become our collaboration project. Ummm.. How about changing the subject? There are still 4 nominees waiting. Acaramoy 06:47, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Yes, you are correct - well and truly time. Is there one in particular that you can (and will) contribute to? I am happy to nominate that one. I will then notify all interested parties of the new collab, and ask them to select the following collab, which this time I think we should choose from the list of stubs. Up until now, collabs have been on articles that already have a fair bit of info thus it is harded to add to. What do you think about trying indonesia stubs? Merbabu 08:55, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
I am ashamed to say that I haven't been able to contribute anything on Sidoarjo mud disaster. It;s just that I have little knowledge of it. I hope I can give my contribution in the next colab project Matahari Pagi 08:59, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
I would say central Java is the perfect nominee, isn't it? Acaramoy 21:41, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Military History task force

A Southeast Asian task force within the Military History WikiProject has finally been created. If there is anyone here who is interested in the subject - stretching from the origins of civilisation up through today - I invite you to please come and lend your support, questions or comments, here. No serious responsibilities or obligations connected to signing up, only another way to meet one another, to work together to expand and improve Wikipedia's coverage of these subjects. Thank you. LordAmeth 06:15, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Very very interesting in view of the relationship between Indonesian project editors and some military history editors some time back over templates, and articles. Nevertheless - thanks for the good faith invite - if you are indeed moving into this territory - I would strongly suggest some exceptionally hard work on maintaining good faith and positive consensus building in editing in this area (for instance before creating templates or categories - actually putting it to this Indonesian project in a responsible and sharing manner before creating over the heads of the Indonesian project) - it will have to be evident (good faith and willingness to listen to others points of view with some receptivity) to create an environment where there is a genuine intereste in collaborating! Lack of local knowledge of Indonesian subjects seems to be no problem for some milhist editors - it is hoped that they work in this area with the highest level of intelligent wikipedian civility and co-operation. Here is hoping something positive comes from such an adventure. SatuSuro 06:28, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
I endorse SatuSuro's opinions. Good faith collabration, consultation and respect for the opinion of all is vital.
Further, I hope we don't see attempts to paint very broad issues over long periods of time forced into a military conflict prism. Ie, this was the case with Indonesian National Revolution (but now improved) which only focused on the Indonesia vs. Dutch military aspects, which was only one aspect (albeit a very significant aspect) of this period, and is way too simplisitc and narrow. This was not a milhist group problem, just anticipating potential issues. Hope this is not viewed as non AGF, but I've seen similar before.
I wish the new taskforce every success, and would love to contribute where appropriate. Please keep us informed. kind regards Merbabu 06:42, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Bilateral relations discussion

I would like to invite you all to participate in a discussion at this thread regarding bilateral relations between two countries. All articles related to foreign relations between countries are now under the scope of WikiProject Foreign relations, a newly created project. We hope that the discussion will result in a more clean and organized way of explaining such relationships. Thank you. Ed ¿Cómo estás? 18:11, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Regencies

All trouble aside: Lots of regencies have names coinciding with towns or sometimes other things, like mountains, maybe ethnic groups, subdistricts, old historic states or things outside Indonesia. These articles will probably all get the word "regency" appended. Maybe 50%? I don't know. Doing this one by one is not the easiest way. I see two main other approaches:

  1. append to all one-word regencies the word Regency. These are the most likely for dab-needs
  2. append it to all

What do you think? best regards Tobias Conradi (Talk) 04:22, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Do we even need to create little stubs for seperate peices of closely related info? WOuldn't it be better to just to state in one article that Demak is a town, regency, and historic sultanate in one place? I haven't had a strong case for such division of articles explained to me.
We certainly do NOT need to call it (for example) 'Demak regency' if this is either the only page with the name Demak, or it is overwhelmingly the most common. Adding 'regency' is clumsy and should be avoided where possible.
Although, i do appreciate being asked even if changes already made would require an admin to revert (if needed). Merbabu 13:03, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm more supportive of appending Regency to articles on a case-by-case basis to minimize the work required, and the number of links which need to be fixed up. However, if you have a bot which can perform the required work (including fixing broken links) I wouldn't be too opposed to doing it for all articles. Merbabu's point below needs to be considered too. (Caniago 13:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC))
Yes, i think a case by case basis is important. Obviously not every case is the same. Thus, perhaps we need to agree on a few different scenarios and how to thus manage the articles. my point was, i just hate having to chop between two or more small articles when they could just be one - ie, similar to the Banjar architecture issue. Merbabu 13:27, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Why do you think this is important? BTW Michael seems to talk different now, compared to what he did himself [28] Tobias Conradi (Talk) 21:38, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I am founder of Wikiproject Country subdivisions. I saw a lot of them, I would even think that I visited 95% of the pages. For the Argentine provinces there once was the word Province only appended to some. Only for those that had naming conflicts. But I tried my best to find more naming conflicts. And I could find them. So the WP Argentina was fast in changing to use Province for all. The same policy is applied to the departments of Argentina, the word department is appended everywhere. Now, when you work in the project you _allways_ now how to reference departments and provinces. I can be on a page whereever and see imediatly when something is linked wrongly. Everybody can fix without visiting the target article. Now the people have a much easier time in linking correctly. I would really like, that here in WP Indonesia you would be able to enjoy the same benefits. I think in the long run, there will be indeed full articles for every regencies. Case by case takes much more time. You have to go to the footer template, to lists, to related articles. I think it would be better to minimize the workload and making a joint effort (uuuh Tobias talks of joint effort :-))

Michael asked whether I have bot. I have not, but I could change lists and templates. I would also fix double redirects, something I am allways looking to do. Normal links will in most cases still work, but in cases where dab pages are created there are people running through all links that go to dab pages. They will probably help. And on every edit on related pages one can keep an open eye on links that seem to _want_ to link to a regency but do not have the "Regency"-suffix. What do you think? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 20:40, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

A seperate but related issue to the naming of regency pages, is actually how we present these names. I do not think we should write in articles "Bangkalan Regency" - we just need to say 'Bangkalan' especially when it is already mentioned that it is a regency. This change shows clearly my point: [29] (intermediate edits not shown). Merbabu 13:03, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, when a list of regencies is presented and described as such, it is preferable to hide the regency suffix. (Caniago 13:22, 11 April 2007 (UTC))
just like it is done here:
Merbabu 13:35, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
of course agreed! I just was kind of lazy to hide the suffix. My proposal would be [30]. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 20:12, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Weighing in. When there is disambiguity, then we should make a point whether it is "regency" or "city" or "province", etc. Just like New York city or New York or New York County or New York, Lincolnshire, etc. But if it is clear that there is no other disambiguity or if it is only just a small stub to create, I don't think we need to add additional "regency" in the name. Not until the stub is expanded or if there is disambiguation. So I agree with no suffix when it is already clear. — Indon (reply) — 19:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Naming conventions for ethnic group articles

Guys, what are you thoughts about how we should name our ethnic group articles? Wikipedia:WikiProject_Ethnic_groups says "As of January 2006, there is no strong consensus on naming of articles about ethnic groups.", and it lists the exiting naming variations:

  1. Elbonians
  2. Elbonian people
  3. Elbonian
  4. Ethnic Elbonians
  5. Elbonians (ethnic group)

User:Tobias Conradi is moving articles around so that the ethnic group name (ie. Madurese) becomes a DAB page listing nothing but the ethnic group and their language. My opinion is that this incorrectly elevates the language to the same level as the ethnic group instead of the language article being a sub-article of the ethnic group article. If we decide to choose a convention like "Elbonian people", I would at least like to see "Elbonian" and/or "Elbonians" redirect to "Elbonian people" rather than being a DAB page, as per Javanese.

(Caniago 05:25, 10 April 2007 (UTC))

for me Elbonians and Elbonian people is equal in value. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 16:26, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Tobias, we all know about WP:OWN and that's why we are communicating each other to mantain articles. You just can't move hundreds of pages without being discussed first. It's what I call disruptive edits. — Indon (reply) — 18:30, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
You may know WP own, but you have to respect it. Non members of WP Indonesia do not need the permission to fix things. I did it again, I moved Sampang to Sampang Regency. WP Indonesia members have to respect that WP is more than only their project. Thank you. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 03:20, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
The issue is that when any susbstantial amount of change occurs within the range of Indonesia project articles - it is a very simple courtesy that does not take much to do - (which a considerable amount of time has been spent to encourage editors to utilise WP Civility, and courtesy when editing) - to alert Indonesia project members at this talk page first, before makjng substantial changes. The project might not 'own" (And this line of discussion is quite deliberately creating a misunderstanding) anything - the project has a talk page - and it is the place where the process by which editors who do not belong to the project - or who appear to not even know Indonesian geography - that they can check/share/discuss about a possible change - to check that it is something that is relevant, or agreed by consensus to be a positive and constructive change to contents of the project. It must also be noted that the above user is now blocked from editing. SatuSuro 05:14, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Indonesian stub prodded

If this sets a precedent - we could lose up to 700+ Indonesian stubs if this gets away -

Please take note - Datadawai Airport - has been prodded - please take to time to either review whether the project really wants geographical stubs like this to be prodded or deleted., or whether project members are prepared to take time to save or defend stubs - or not SatuSuro 00:49, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

As for that specific airport, I don't even know where Datadawai is. I note there is no Datadawai article. Thus, prodding seems like a reasonable measure on behalf of non-Indo-project member, but not sure if I'd support it.
But what about alluding to 700+ stubs? Where is the connection? Merbabu 01:12, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
Non Indonesian project enthusiast trawls the project and there indeed about that number, would you like to be led down the scary path?
The issue is precedence (as in law) - one gets easy or speedy delete and the project has categories, stubs which could be singled out just like that. If someone dosnt dream up an Indonesian prject template for geographical stubs defending low info stubs - it would be a field day for the deletionists - SatuSuro 03:44, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Papua Barat province

It's been confirmed that West Irian Jaya name is now West Papua (province). Somebody has made a move but alas to Papua Barat. This region name is very confusing. Can somebody fix it please? How can we make a redirect of page A to page B, where page B has been a redirect to page A? I prefer West Papua actually, instead of West Papua (province), but the name is used as redirect for Western New Guinea. — Indon (reply) — 10:33, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Well I do prefer West Papua (province) instead as West Papua is indeed the name of the western half of the island. Besides, West Papua (or Papua Barat) is also the proposed name of independent Indonesian Papua. Meursault2004 10:41, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
I will then request WP:RM move from Papua Barat to West Papua (province). — Indon (reply) — 19:47, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
I think a West Papua (province) page should mention at the start the independent WNG concept of West Papua - it's a very widely used term in that respect (Incidently, some even suggest that the renaming of the province was an attempt to hijack the use). Merbabu 03:28, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
We will fix all of these disambiguities of Papua's names after proper name of the province. I have filed it at WP:RM#Uncontroversial proposals. — Indon (reply) — 08:04, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Done. An admin has made a move. The article is now West Papua (province). Others:

— Indon (reply) — 17:27, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Religion in Indonesia on GA

Hey guys. Just to let you know that I've given the article another shot, it's been awhile since the last GA. Cheers - Imoeng 11:57, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Catholicism in Indonesia

I have fully translated the article Catholicism in Indonesia a month and half ago, with such a bad English, and bad writing structure. I was very tired when doing that after Human Biology lecture all day. Needs somebody to tidy it up.--w_tanoto 22:12, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate the effort, but could somebody think about sourcing while translating? It's better to add sources while adding new materials, than finding the sources for the materials already written. — Indon (reply) — 08:24, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I might look at it and provide some sources one of these days. However the article needs to be rewritten slightly. Meursault2004 13:36, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Any work, particularly referencing, would be great. :) --Merbabu 00:42, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
I'll see what I can do. Adolf Heuken SJ has written many works about Catholicism in Indonesia. Meursault2004 01:07, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
...adn I have some general Indonesian history texts (like the Ricklefs reference I put there some time ago) - I'll see what else is there. :) --Merbabu 01:10, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
I just pust some titles in the article. It appears that the Indonesian article from which the current English article is based, was written by an anon who just copy-pasted some text from the website of the Cathedral in Jakarta. Meursault2004 02:50, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Administrative & geographical names standardization proposal

Okay, we have to straight it right. Otherwise somebody will start to move articles with their own naming standard. So here's my first humble proposal for naming of administrative & geographical places:

  1. Province stays the same. There is no ambiguity except for the recently changed name of West Papua (province).
  2. Regency. I found a lot of inconsistencies, especially in East Java province. While I'm trying to make the master list of List of regencies and cities of Indonesia, it is better if we have an agreement about the regency name. I propose X Regency for all regencies including ones that have no ambiguities.
  3. Cities. This is a bit hard because there are a lot disambiguations for this.
    1. If there is no disambiguation and the primary name is the city then it is written without any additional terms. Examples: Bandung, Surakarta, etc.
    2. If there are disambiguations, then there are already defined names: X (city) as in Bengkulu (city), or X, Indonesia as in Padang, Indonesia, or with the province name as in Kediri, East Java. Which one do you like?
  4. Islands. For all islands we should put the island term as in Java Island.
  5. Mounts/Volcanoes. I prefer Mount Agung, except for such already defined singular term as in Krakatoa.
  6. Rivers. Similar with islands, as in Kapuas River.

Any comments? — Indon (reply) — 16:02, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

  • These sound pretty reasonable to me. I prefer X, Indonesia to X (city), and that seems to be more typical of uses in other countries (though there are lots of exceptions). There are also situations where a city/town of the same name exists in more than one province/regency (probably - I don't know any off the top of my head). In that case we should use the name of the highest level that distinguishes them (i.e. provinces if they are different, otherwise regencies). We may also want to look at discussions on the Wikiprojects for Islands, Mountains, and Rivers (I'm pretty sure they each have one) and see if they have suggested naming conventions.
We need to get this standardized. I suggest somebody writes up Wikipedia:WikiProject Indonesia/Naming conventions once we settle on something. We should also address spelling concerns there (which have been discussed here recently as well). Rigadoun (talk) 16:12, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Rigadoun, what a quick answer. :-) I am going to setup the subpage. And you're right, we should limit ourselves into specific Indonesian names (administrative places) and leave other generic geographical names similar to other places. — Indon (reply) — 16:14, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

The new subpage: Wikipedia:WikiProject Indonesia/Naming conventions is ready. Feel free to contribute there. — Indon (reply) — 16:24, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the proposal Indon, its great the project is discussing this finally. A few points:
  • For islands there needs to be at least some exceptions. I don't think islands which are well known, such as Java, Sumatra, Borneo, Sulawesi, Bali, Lombok, New Guinea, etc should have Island postfixed. There are also some interesting cases, since some islands are also provinces and others are regencies. In such a case I think the information about the island and province/regency should be merged in one article, and so the name needs to be suitable for this merge.
  • For archipelago I would suggest a convention X Islands, as in Mentawai Islands
  • I think X, Indonesia is generally preferable for cities. An exception might be the Benkulu, Jambi, Yogyakarta cases where we already have a province with the same name, and so X, X or X (city) is more suitable.
Agree with everything else. (Caniago 00:59, 2 May 2007 (UTC))
Re:Caniago: Except for Java of course :-)
Re:Caniago: How about as in Indonesian Wikipedia. X, province, Indonesia or even X, regency, province, Indonesia. Otherwise X (Indonesia). For example how about "Glenmore" in East Java? Should it be called Glenmore, Indonesia or Glenmore, Banyuwangi, East Java, Indonesia or Glenmore (Indonesia)? Meursault2004 01:10, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
My first question would be is Glenmore notable enough to warrant an article here? :-) For towns, a more specific convention is probably best to avoid ambiguity, such as Glenmore, East Java. I'm not in favor of deeply nested names, so the Indonesia part is unnecessary I think. (Caniago 07:31, 2 May 2007 (UTC))
I am happy with the proposals so far. I would though to stress the importance of exceptions as appropriate - although there does need to be a degree of consistencies there should not be a 'one-size-fits-all' approach enforced in all cases. Also, please consult other editors (here is a good idea) if a change/s are needed. I can't imagine that there would be the need to change something so quickly that we cannot wait for the opinion of others. nice work people. --Merbabu 01:17, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

(unindent) I think everybody agrees with "X Regency" names, right? If we are agree with this consensus (as I have put in the new subpage), then I will start to make some name modifications, starting from East Java province. — Indon (reply) — 07:50, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

What a relief there is some standardisation - the sooner it is up as a consensus policy - on its own page the better - makes life easier for taggers as self to answer back to intruders with odd ideas :) SatuSuro 13:22, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Important qualification

Although I agree with standardisations of article names to the form 'Karo Regency', i don't think we need to write 'Karo Regency' religiously at all times in the articles when the context makes it obvious we are talking about a regency. Ie, simply write 'Karo', or if wiki linked [[Karo Regency|Karo]]. Thoughts? --Merbabu 13:42, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes of course we will write [[Karo Regency|Karo]] in editing, but the article name should be "Karo Regency", IMO. I think all regency name are derived from other, so they are not the primary name. Most of the cases, a regency name is derived from the capital name, as it mostly happens in Java. In the Karo case, the regency name is derived from the Karo people name. Again, IMO. — Indon (reply) — 13:59, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
Agreed - IMO. ;) --Merbabu 14:00, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

City names

Okay before I update the new subpage, we need to resolve this name standard one-by-one. I propose the city name first. Let's have a straw poll on this then we can move on.

  • According to WP:DISAMBIG, if the primary meaning has been defined to the city name, then we will use the name without additional term. I think everybody agrees with this.
  • If there is disambiguation, then there are options:
    1. X (city) as Rigadoun mentioned that this name applies to other countries. If there are other cities with the same name, then we use X (city), <highest_level_without_disambig>; it can be country, province or regency name.
    2. X, Indonesia is the preferable, unless if there are other names then it can be X, <highest_level_without_disambig>.
    3. X, <regency>, <province>, Indonesia or X, <province>, Indonesia.

Let's have a consensus here. Oh, and other proposal is welcomed. — Indon (reply) — 07:24, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Poll
  • Comment - some Indonesian project articles have had editors choose to use cerita rakyat or folklore explanations for the origins, and etymology of the names of things and places - in some cases with literally no possibility of a reliable third party source to verify as such . So I support what Indon has suggested - it needs to be separated - this is an encyclopedia - and 'forms of information' need to be clearly and unambiguously separated. Otherwise - very clear indications within articles about what is verifiable 'fact' versus 'popular/cerita rakyat' folklore. SatuSuro 09:52, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

New Article bot

I've attempted to set up a feed by User:AlexNewArtBot to sift through and find new articles related to our WikiProject. I believe once there are ones found they will be added to User:AlexNewArtBot/IndonesiaSearchResult. Once there are items there, we may want to include a link or hyperlink from the mainpage of the project (a number of other WikiProjects do this). The formula for determining relevancy may have to be tweaked, you can look at it yourself at User:AlexNewArtBot/Indonesia (there's an explanation of some on the user's page, but mainly I took ideas from other projects). Rigadoun (talk) 22:38, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Kalimantan history

The Kalimantan article's history section only has one sentence, it should be expanded --AW 19:07, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Agree, but please regard the difference between Kalimantan and Borneo history. — Indon (reply) — 07:42, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Regencies & cities

User:Tamaneden redirected List of regencies and cities of Indonesia to Cities and regencies of Indonesia. I objected this and I would like to raise this issue to the other project members. According to WP:LIST, the name of list article should start with List of and this is already the consensus. Therefore recently I made List of regencies and cities of Indonesia as the master list for regencies and cities in Indonesia. Other articles and lists below:

These titles are redirects to the master list. Although later I would like to have a plan to make a separate article about history and politics of regency and cities, but not the list. — Indon (reply) — 18:23, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

altered above slightly SatuSuro 02:53, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

I FIRST created this article, and took 12 hours to develop the first article, and somebody just redirected my article in a few minutes? I plan to expand this article, not to redirect to a so "specific" article.

TamanEden the initiator

Good idea to be reminded of (a) WP:OWN if you do not understand about that - ask, check, get help on understanding what it means, (b) About bold editing, and (c) communicating on project talk pages first about issues before spending too long on any one article idea SatuSuro 04:25, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Tamaneden, perhaps you could explain why we need two articles? What is the difference between the two and why can't the differences be merged into one? Merbabu 04:29, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

(unindent) Tamaneden, before you can answer to Merbabu's question above, I wouldn't mind if the layout format of the list looks like the article you are working on it, as long as we only have one list article about regencies and cities of Indonesia. We should not make two articles of the same information, which further will confuse the readers. Worse that you created Template:List of Regencies of Indonesia and Template:List of Cities of Indonesia in the template space which are never used and I don't know why did you create it. It's all a mess that we (as the project members) need to clean it up. — Indon (reply) — 09:22, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Monitoring categories

I have an idea on how to improve the monitoring lists. On the WP Indonesia template, we could add another parameter (in addition to class and importance), let's call it category. The categories are the ten pages at Wikipedia:WikiProject Indonesia/Monitoring. So if you type in the template"category=core", say, the talk page (where the template is) it will be added to Category:Core Indonesia articles (similar to Category:Start-Class Indonesia articles. Then I'm sure there's a way to create a computer-generated log of the articles, like Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Indonesia articles by quality log (which includes both the articles and their talk pages), except a separate page for each category. Who set up our automated stuff and would they be able to help us do this? Anyway, I think the advantage of this is all you would have to do is add the parameter to the WikiProject template while assessing the article, which is easier than adding them manually to a list. Rigadoun (talk) 17:13, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

(1)The category thing is quite a number - best not to use that term for anything other than a real category or you are really in deep trouble. (2) Monitoring articles tagged for the project can be done in more ways than present - but I would strongly suggest/advise against creating any new device/measure that is not already part of the processes used by other large projects to keep tabs of things SatuSuro 23:42, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

General Development Needed: About the Internet in Indonesia

This is the one topic in Indonesia that is so badly developed, it might be considered non-existent. We have articles about most other parts of Indonesia, be it geographical or historical, but we have very little about the Internet in Indonesia. We need some work on these articles! Currently most of it is piled up in one article, the Indonesia Internet Exchange. That article can also do with some work. I'd nominate this for general collaboration, but I personally don't know enough about this and it looks like we need some experts to come along. --Steax 05:53, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

The whole topic of Communications in Indonesia needs expanding, which includes the Internet. (Caniago 08:21, 18 May 2007 (UTC))
Very importantly - due to the status of the article and the total lack of explanation or historical content or context at all SatuSuro 15:21, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Somebody started Internet in Indonesia yesterday. I agree that the Communications article is high priority; should we put it on the collab of the week? (Unfortunately it's not really something I'm interested in, though) Rigadoun (talk) 20:24, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
I see - but it needs a lot of cleanup. I'm horrible in this subject, can someone work on it?--Steax 10:07, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

spelling

There is no easy answer to the spelling question in Indonesian because applying any principle consistently will lead to anomalies. It's not good to have the same place spelled in two or three different ways depending on the period referred to; but it's wrong to impose the spelling of the present on people and places in the past. The problem, incidentally, is particularly acute with the spelling of Indonesian Chinese names -- there is a bit of a tendency now to use Pinyin, which often looks completely different from the old names (the names that the people themselves used). The Indonesian convention is to spell everything in ED, but that need not apply to English usage. The best solution is probably to use old spelling for names located in the past; new spelling for more recent names, with new spelling prevailing where there is a conflict. Incidentally, I think it's wrong to change Nusa Kambangan to Kambangan island. Although Nusa means 'island', where it is used it is part of the name in a way that 'pulau' is not. Robert Cribb 03:54, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

After this you might be interested in the non-debate at Krakatoa. SatuSuro 04:22, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I was the one who renamed Nusa Kambangan, based mostly upon the fact that it is the name Britannica uses. After further consideration I don't have any major objections to it being renamed back to Nusa Kambangan, as long as it is the name most English publications use. (Caniago 04:35, 8 June 2007 (UTC))

Krakatoa?

There is a user who has already been there before who seems to want attention. SatuSuro 08:54, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Kalimantan

There is a proposal to merge Kalimantan and Borneo. The articles are not clear on whether the term 'Kalimantan' applies only to the Indonesian part of the island, or whether it is the Indonesian term for the whole island of Borneo. But is not, 'Borneo', simply and old colonial anachronism? Merbabu 09:34, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it's too unclear: Kalimantan is the Indonesian name for the island known to the rest of the world as "Borneo". Thus, for outsider the meaning of "Kalimantan" is simply the Indonesian part of the island of Borneo. I believe that fairly represents how I've heard the word used in English. Borneo, whatever its origin, is certainly the most common name for the island in English, and I wouldn't say anachronistic. I oppose a merge, even if the articles are somewhat redundant, just because it clarifies what it means and then goes on to say some things about (Indonesian) Kalimantan. If somebody encounters the word "Kalimantan" and wants to know what it means, it would seem clearer if they read this than if they were simply redirected to Borneo. Rigadoun (talk) 16:42, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I don't know the etymology or the origin of the word "Kalimantan". But the name "Borneo" is derived from "Brunei". Personally I like Kalimantan better. Not because I am an Indonesian but because the name "Borneo" gives too much credits to Brunei. Meursault2004 17:34, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm not really sure, but my teacher used to say that "Kalimantan" is Indonesian part of the island of "Borneo". The whole island which contains three different countries (Brunei, Malaysia, and Indonesia) is called "Borneo", and the Indonesian part is called "Kalimantan". He could be wrong, who knows. I'm gonna find some info from history books, hopefuly I will get some clarification. HoneyBee 18:07, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
I agree on the merging of these articles. Borneo=Kalimantan. I still think that "Kalimantan" is the most appropriate term for the island, because my ancestors, the natives of this island, have been using that name for the whole island for ages. But I do know that "Borneo" is a more popular term for non-Indonesians, and we can't force them to use our term. Especially for English-speakers who are just plainly stubborn. Hey, if we can't force them to call Greenland "Kalaallit Nunaat", how can we make them use "Kalimantan" rather than "Borneo"? That being said, I agree with Meursault that "Borneo" is a derivation of "Brunei", when even in its golden era only covered a small part of Kalimantan (the northern part). Matahari Pagi 09:53, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Ashmore and Cartier Islands

This template mentions that Ashmore and Cartier Islands is a disputed territory between Australia and Indonesia. Is it true? wic2020talk bicara 05:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

It is not disputed as far as I can ascertain SatuSuro 07:11, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
I have no comments about that. I don't know. — Indon (reply) — 08:46, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
The article and sources dont refer to any dispute between Indonesia and Australia, the talk page discusses a CIA fact book comment about Indonesian groups, (it doesnt say Indonesian Government) the dispute is over fishing access not territorial ownership. caution opinion piece I'm sure if Howard could have said its disputed territory and as Indonesia claims it, Asylem seekers havent reach australian waters in Indonesias eyes so send them back. Gnangarra 09:15, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
note I have removed Ashmore and Cartier Islands from the template Gnangarra 09:19, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Jakarta Kelurahans

In the articles about Jakarta locations - a number have the kelurahans as red links. I am of the opinion that not one Jakarta kelurahan has sufficient notability or available material to substantiate these red links - and about to move them. If a blue link one is found with sufficient material - it remains - otherwise it is unlikely that the red links are justifiable as links at all. SatuSuro 13:56, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good. --Merbabu 14:15, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Second to M. Agreed. — Indon (reply) — 14:20, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
It seems that some west jakarta stubs are novels unto themselves - will probably take some dismantling - not simply stubs but small empires of links and redirects SatuSuro 14:22, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Important issue is - the creation of red links that are unlikely ever to be created (and with complex links of the blue links back to the article they are in) are basically bad practice - unless someone starts a Jakarta Project in which sufficient labour time and resources of info are located - it is very unlikely the current stubs will grow much - let alone subsidiary keluruhan stubs. The point is no information is being removed - just unfulfilled links being cleaned up. SatuSuro 14:29, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Siberut

The Siberut article has a map of Sumatra, on which you can just barely see Siberut. Could someone put up a better map that shows the island itself? Totnesmartin 17:42, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Sangir vs Sangihe

The articles Sangir, Sangir Island, Sangir Islands are completely inconsistent to whether it's Sangir or Sangihe. The Indonesian name of the regency is id:Kabupaten Kepulauan Sangihe (see also [31]), so I'd suggest renaming the islands to this, but keeping Sangir language where it is. Jpatokal 07:30, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Portal Indonesia

Our lovely portal is reviewed: Wikipedia:Featured portal removal candidates/Portal:Indonesia, to remove its featured status. Your comment is helpful there. — Indon (reply) — 07:54, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Evolution education in Indonesia

I'm trying to investigate what other countries besides the USA have had or have controversy teaching evolution in public education (see Evolution and public education). Is it taught in Indonesia? Since it's a largely Islamic country, it seems a possibility that it might not be taught or taught with some political controversies. If anyone can let me know that would be appreciated. Richard001 01:38, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

  • Hi, I attended school in Indonesia, I learned both actually, but it was like 10 years ago. So we learned the evolution theory in the biology class and the creation theory in the religion class. I don't know, if there are political controversies about it. There were not. But at the present? I don't know, since I don't live there at the moment. Acaramoy 06:23, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Infobox Regency of Indonesia

Hi guys, I'd like to propose another template change proposal. I am going to create regency stub articles, but I don't like the current {{Infobox Regency of Indonesia}} template. It's a bit ugly. So, I've been playing around, nicely sat in a beach, with beautiful white sand and came up with this new change. I'd like to be WP:BOLD, but I need your comments of the new template look.

The example on the right is the Kupang Regency (which is not yet available). I filled in the statistics from the official websites. For comparison, you can see Kampar Regency, Tanah Datar or Bengkalis Regency.

So please comment on the layout or give some additional suggestions. Other example of this new template can be seen in User talk:Indon/sandbox2. — Indon (reply) — 11:02, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

The white sand beach sounds nice, especially since its winter here :-) The changes in general look pretty good, especially the visual presentation. There are some things which could be simplified and tweaked:
  • I would remove the number of Subdistricts and Villages - does this information in itself say anything useful about the regency?
  • I think putting the logo and the regency name on the same line makes things too squashed - the logo is too small, and there maybe isn't enough room for the text.
  • The capital name and coords are too squashed together - on my screeen the coords are broken across two lines
  • Do we need a sources field - why can't the sources be listed in the normal section of the article?
A more important question concerns the forking of this template from Template:Infobox Settlement - ever since I created this template I've had second thoughts about whether it was necessary to do so. I agree with you about this template and Infobox Settlement being a bit ugly, but I'd rather see some investment in making Infobox Settlement prettier for the sake of the whole of wikipedia. Visual consistency across templates is a good thing and thats easier to do if there are fewer templates to maintain. (Caniago 15:24, 22 August 2007 (UTC))
Thanks Caniago, for the inputs.
  1. The number of subdistricts and villages, I think, are more important than, for instance, the motto. They show how big the administration is inside a regency. It's similar with the id:Templat:dati2 counterpart.
  2. I don't like showing off the logo. It does not show additional information. If a user wants to look at it more detail, a single click to the image is enough. About the text inline with the logo, I believe the table will expand automatically as the text is longer. I'm not sure yet in all browsers.
  3. I agree with the coordinate. I can move the coord below the capital. Actually, I was planning to put the cute meta:WikiMiniAtlas icon for the coordinate, but I don't know how to do it.
  4. The source is optional. You can omit it and it's fine. See other examples in User talk:Indon/sandbox2. It's just a field to avoid cluttering inline citations in the infobox. It happens in many infoboxes.
  5. Last about the Infobox Settlement. I don't want to touch that too complicated template. Let others do that, but the Infobox Regency of Indonesia is nowhere we can find in the template namespace. We need a special infobox for the regency. I am trying to make this infobox as simple as possible, for instance by automatically add Density if Population and Total area are available, so editors do not have to calculate it themselves. Other automatic calculations are: the percentage, the conversion from Rupiah to US Dollar, and sectioning.
— Indon (reply) — 16:10, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

(Edit conflict---I'll compare with Indon's reply in a second)

It's definitely better than the current template. Comments:
  • I'm not sure I agree with Caniago that the number of subdistricts is irrelevant, though since villages are so much smaller I agree that could be skipped.
  • I would discourage the abbreviation "Kab.", as people may not even understand that it's referring to the native title and not some obscure English abbreviation.
  • I don't know how to do map stuff, but I think a pinpoint map might be better, as it would provide a perspective of the whole country, which many users may find useful if they get the numerous islands in the archipelago confused. Actually, better still would be two maps, the whole country map and a quite zoomed in one, revealing its geographic shape, neighboring Regencies and so forth. If the maps are unavailable, it could still be set up in the template in hopes that they get added later.
  • Coordinates should be in degree-minute-second, as that is far more common. I don't see the point of the picture of earth except to clutter up and possibly cause the squashing Caniago saw (it's ok in my browser).
  • I think Caniago misunderstood the sources field. They are footnotes that then would appear at the bottom of the screen, and justify the contents of the infobox. That seems reasonable to me. Rigadoun (talk) 16:21, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Okay, ignore what I said about the Earth image, that's an interesting feature I hadn't seen yet. I think the logo and motto are fine as they are. I agree it's probably appropriate to separate this and the general settlement template, as Regencies are of larger size than most settlements (a subdistrict seems more about the right size). Rigadoun (talk) 16:26, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Hey, thanks Rigadoun. Just a little comments before further misunderstanding: (1). the Kab. abbrv. is only an example. It's an option if the native name differs with the official (see e.g. Limapuluh Koto). (2). I don't like pinpoint for an area, just like Regency. Where should we pin a regency? A map is better than just a pinpoint. (3). The coordinate format depends on how you use the {{coord}} template. So this infobox is independent from the coordinate formatting, and (4). The earth feature comes from MediaWiki by default. — Indon (reply) — 22:17, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Javanese people

Someone's playing silly buggers with Javanese people. They are saying the info box info re distribution thru Indonesia should be removed - and then suggesting those who want to keep it (rather than those wanting it removed?!?) should take it to talk. --Merbabu 13:29, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I saw that and think it should stay as it is; unlike the Germans, Koreans, and Arabs he cites, they are not a majority in any country and thus a regional breakdown seems useful. I'd say continue reverting it unless the reverters provide a cogent argument why it shouldn't be included. Rigadoun (talk) 16:21, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Indonesian History Template

Part of a series on the
History of Indonesia
Timeline
Prehistory
Paleolithic
Java Man 1,000,000 BP
Flores Man 94,000–12,000 BP
Neolithic
Toba catastrophe 75,000 BP
Buni culture 400 BCE
Hindu and Buddhist kingdoms
Kutai kingdom 350–1605
Tarumanagara kingdom 400s–500s
Kantoli 400s-500s
Kalingga kingdom 500s–600s
Melayu kingdom 600s–1347
Srivijaya Empire 600s–1025
Shailendra Dynasty 600s–900s
Mataram kingdom 716–1016
Bali kingdom 914–1908
Sunda kingdom 932–1579
Kahuripan kingdom 1019–1045
Kediri kingdom 1045–1221
Dharmasraya kingdom 1183–1347
Pannai kingdom 1000s–1300s
Singhasari Empire 1222–1292
Majapahit Empire 1293–1527
Islamic sultanates
Spread of Islam 800–1600
Peureulak Sultanate840–1292
Aru kingdom 1225–1613
Ternate Sultanate 1257–1914
Samudera Pasai Sultanate 1267–1521
Pagaruyung kingdom 1347–1833
Brunei Sultanate 1368–1888
Malacca Sultanate 1400–1511
Sulu Sultanate 1405–1851
Cirebon Sultanate 1445–1677
Demak Sultanate 1475–1554
Aceh Sultanate 1496–1903
Sultanate of Ternate 1486–1914
Sultanate of Bacan 1515–1946
Sultanate of Tidore 1500s–1967
Sultanate of Jailolo 1496–1903
Banten Sultanate 1526–present
Banjar Sultanate 1526–1863
Kalinyamat Sultanate 1527–1599
Mataram Sultanate 1586–1755
Johor Sultanate 1528s–1877
Kingdom of Kaimana 1600s–1926
Palembang Sultanate 1659–1823
Siak Sultanate 1725–1946
Surakarta Sunanate 1745–present
Yogyakarta Sultanate 1755–present
Deli Sultanate 1814–1946
Riau-Lingga Sultanate 1824–1911
Christian kingdoms
Larantuka kingdom 1515–1904
Kingdom of Bolaang Mongondow1670–1950
Chinese Kongsi federations
Heshun Confederation1776–1854
Lanfang Republic1777–1884
Santiaogou Republic1777–1853
European colonization
Portuguese 1512–1850
Spanish 1521–1677
Dutch East India Company 1602–1799
British 1685–1824
French and British interregnum 1806–1816
Dutch East Indies
1800–1942
1945–1949
Emergence of Indonesia
National Awakening 1908–1942
Japanese occupation 1942–1945
National Revolution 1945–1949
United States of Indonesia 1949–1950
Republic of Indonesia
Liberal democracy 1950–1959
Guided Democracy 1959–1966
Transition 1966–1967
New Order 1967–1998
Reform era 1998–present
Regions
By topic
flag Indonesia portal

Hi all, It seems to me that the Indonesian History Template is a bit disjointed - particularly the post-independence period. And the heading "Independence (1945–1965)" is rather odd. Did independence end in 1965?! Could I propose the following reorganization:

  • Independent Indonesia (since 1945)
    • Revolution (1945-1949) (up to the Round Table conference)
    • Liberal Democracy (1949-1959) up to the 1959 return to UUD45
    • Guided Democracy (1959-1965)
    • Transition to the New Order (1965-1967) - including a separate article on G30S
    • The New Order (1967-1998) - from the appointment of Suharto as president by the MPR
    • The Reform Era (1998-present)

Any thoughts? Davidelit 06:45, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Support. (note: I put the template here for easy discussion) — Indon (reply) — 08:17, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Other inputs:
  1. Replace (2004-presents) for the earthquake to only (2004).
  2. Put [hide]/[show] link for each sub-history section.
— Indon (reply) — 08:20, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
It needs the change - yes go ahead - and I must say your headings/titles are more accessible and intelligble than what has been in it so far! well done! SatuSuro 12:34, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Generally support: I like the divisions/periods. We probably need to reconsider the actual titles (and eventually even change article names) but the general idea is really good. Another point I'd make is that the revolution goes from 45-50. Sure, the Netherlands recognised Indonesian sovereignty in 1949, but the dissolution of the Dutch states did not actually happen - and hence RI not complete - until 17 August 1950. --Merbabu 06:28, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Ricklefs table of contents

I think the Ricklefs book has an excellent chapter structure and we could learn from it. Certainly some good ideas there. This could help make the template, and even get us thinking about how to re-organise some articles. This structure tends to cover periods, whereas our template - at least in the first half - covers entities such as empires, the VOC, etc. Both have advantages and disadvantages. Using periods, it is possible to better cover the interaction between entities and transitions.

I have written it out below...

I - The Emergence of the Modern Era

1. The Coming of Islam
2. General Aspects of Pre-Colonial States and Major Empires (c.1300-1500)

  • Considers influence of landforms and climate on state formation and rulers.
  • Looks at Malacca Sultanate and Majapahit in some detail - ie, as symbols of the transitional nature of Indonesia at this time

3. The Arrival of Europeans in Indonesian (c. 1509-1620)

4. The Rise of New States, c. 1500-1650

5. Literary, Religious and Cultural Legacies

II - Struggles for Hegemony, c. 1630-1800

6. Eastern Indonesia, c. 1630-1800
7. Java, c 1640-82
8. Java, Madura and the VOC, c. 1680-1745
9. Java and the VOC, c. 1745-92

III - The Creation of a Colonial State, c.1800-1910

10. Java, 1792-1830
11. Java, 1830-1900
12. The Outer Islands, c. 1800-1910

IV - The Emergence of the Idea of Indonesia, c. 1900-42

13. A New Colonial Era
14. The First Steps towards National Revival, c. 1900-27
15. Repression and Economic Crisis, 1927-42

V - The Destruction of the Colonial State, 1942-1950

16. World War II and the Japanese Occupation, 1942-5
17. The Revolution, 1945-50

VI - Independent Indonesia

18. The Democratic Experiment, 1950-7
19. Guided Democracy, 1957-65
20. Creating the New Order, 1965-75
21. The New Order since 1975

--Merbabu 06:49, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Title change for "Overthrow of Sukarno"

Please discuss a possible new article name and page move >>here<<. thanks. --Merbabu 06:43, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Assimilation

Hi neighbors. Apa khabar? Im looking for an article on Assimilation policies in Indonesia. First of all, did such policy ever existed? Or anything similar? If so, is there already an article about it? Itu aja. Makasih! kawaputratorque 06:14, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

The closest thing i found are New Order (Indonesia) and Anti-Chinese legislation in Indonesia. Just a suggestion: how about moving the 2nd article to Indonization or Cultural assimilation in Indonesia? The title is less POV, and is not limited to assimilation of ethnic Chinese, but can include assimilation of other ethnic groups around Indonesia. kawaputratorque 15:47, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
The article is about anti-Chinese legislation, not about assimilation. There is no such Indonization term you suggested. Please see WP:NOR. — Indon (reply) — 21:17, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
U may b right. But Indonization or Indonisation still gives (<20) search results in google n yahoo. Would it still be original research? Perhaps the better terms would be Indonesianization or Indonesianisation which gives more search results (200-600) in google. Btw, wasnt the aim of those anti-chinese legislations to assimilate the Chinese? kawaputratorque 02:09, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
The number of google hits does not relevant with wikipedia policy. Our policy is reliable sources to support verifiability, no original research and neutral point of view. — Indon (reply) — 14:08, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
I just wanted to make an inquiry and get some feedback. I didnt ask about wikipedia policies. I guess i came to the wrong place. kawaputratorque 05:34, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Kediri, East Java

Hey - can someone fix the map. Kediri is shown as being in Sumatra. Thanks! --Merbabu 13:18, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Done. — Indon (reply) — 13:52, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
thx --Merbabu 03:10, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Another hoax?

Actually, Wajo probably isn't a hoax, but it badly needs references. Any ideas? --Merbabu 03:07, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I heard about that when I'm improving Southeast Sulawesi province. Let me try to find some resources. — Indon (reply) — 07:48, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
On my 2nd thought, how about redirect it to Wajo Regency. (Let me do it). — Indon (reply) — 08:07, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Update. Wajo is a disambiguation page now. There are two new articles: Wajo Regency and Wajo Kingdom. About the kingdom, I found some small notes about this agrarian chiefdom in some literatures about Luwu Kingdom, but the reference does not explain Wajo well enough. However, the Wajo Kingdom is valid, it is absolutely not a hoax. — Indon (reply) — 09:58, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Adam Air Flight 574

There is currently a large collaboration effort going on with this article. When I was working to keep the article comprehensive and ultimatly bring it to GA in the months after the disapearance this project was very supportive (I am still grateful to Indon for presenting me the Indonesian Barnstar of National Merit as a result of my work there), and I thought that members here might be interested in joining the collaboration, the ultimate intent of which is to bring the article up to FA standard. Please head over to the talk page, and see what needs done! Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 18:53, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Major upgrade (rebuild?) of "History of Indonesia" template

This article is part of
the History of Indonesia series
Timeline
Prehistory
Early kingdoms
Srivijaya (3rd to 14th century)
Sailendra (8th & 9th centuries)
Kingdom of Mataram (752–1045)
Kediri (1045–1221)
Singhasari (1222–1292)
Majapahit Empire (1293–1500)
The rise of Muslim states
The spread of Islam (1200–1600)
Malacca Sultanate (1400–1511)
Sultanate of Demak (1475–1518)
Aceh Sultanate (1496 - 1903)
Mataram Sultanate (1500s to 1700s)
Colonial Indonesia
The Portuguese in Indonesia (1512-1850)
Dutch East India Company (1602–1799)
Dutch East Indies (1800–1942)
The emergence of Indonesia
National Revival (1899–1942)
Japanese Occupation (1942-45)
Declaration of Independence (1945)
National Revolution (1945–1950)
Independent Indonesia
Liberal Democracy (1950-1957)
Guided Democracy (1957-1965)
Transition to the New Order (1965–1966)
The New Order (1966-1998)
Revolution of 1998 (1996–1998)
See also:
Timeline of Indonesian History
[Edit this template]

History


Carrying on from Davidelit's work, I've done some more major work on our history of Indonesia template. Now it is based more on themes and periods, and articles on specific and arguably not as important events have been removed. I've also fixed up the use of colour (what a mess it was!), and I got rid of wiki-linked headings (which were annoying). I think it is important to have a shorter list of fundamentally important periods, rather than more that includes some less fundamentally important articles such as Act of Free Choice.

Here's a more detailed description of my changes (old template here:

  • Created stand-alone, non-linking section headings.
  • Added in pre and early history link - articles don't exist yet, temporarily points to History_of_Indonesia#Prehistory.
  • Added Portuguese in Indonesia link - article to be created, but for now links to History_of_Indonesia#The_Portuguese.
  • Separated out Dutch East India Company (1600 to 1800 approx) from existing Dutch East Indies (1800 to 1942)
  • Created new section heading - the emergence of Indonesia. This might be the most controversial change, but to me it makes a lot of sense. I based this somewhat on the chapter heading from the Ricklefs book I listed a few sections above - and of course on the previous template, which wasn't all bad.
  • Remove Act of Free Choice and Effect of the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake on Indonesia - these are events, and not periods/themes like the rest of the template - the relevance is arguable. As relevant as the New Order or Majapahit?
  • Fixed up the colour scheme which was all kacau before.
  • Added "Rise of Muslim States" section heading.
  • Cleaned up dates and their format.
  • I've hidden Padri War, Aceh War, and Anglo-Dutch War because they are more events and not themes/periods.

--Merbabu 10:23, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Dutch East Indies...

I've done some major work on the Dutch East Indies article. It is now more specifically about 1800 to 1942 - ie, post-Dutch East India Company (VOC). The VOC section had previously taken up about half the article, the discussion of independence took up about 1/3 to 1/2 of the remainder, with very little discussion on the 1800 to 1942 period - which officially is meant to be the point of the article. I took out most of the VOC info, and expanded the remainder. I have split the main body into (1) a section of how the Dutch expanded their territory including wars of resistance and (2) a section on social and economic aspects.

Nothing is really 'finished' and there is plenty of room for improvement and expansion. The writing no doubt needs a fresh set of eyes.

I also used it as a chance to improve the Cultivation System article.

--Merbabu 05:49, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Great work guys. Thanks to Merbabu & Davidelit, we have better history articles about Indonesia. Now it's time for me to read again those articles to understand the history of my own country that I didn't understand when I was in high school. :P — Indon (reply) — 10:08, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Category:History of Indonesia

Similar to the Fauna articles, I put all the Category:History of Indonesia articles in sub-categories, such as Category:Indonesian National Revolution. --Merbabu 14:36, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Category:Fauna of Indonesia

Category:Fauna of Indonesia had close to 1,000 articles in it by my count, and Category:Birds of Indonesia also had several hundred. A few weeks back I went through each one and made sure they were all in the Indonesia project. Most of them, however, I didn't assess. The fauna articles, I then created sub-cats:

Part way thru a bot came along and helped me out with the cats, but I still put each one manually into the project. If you come across any 'new' or untagged Indonesia fauna items - please tag and categorise--Merbabu 14:12, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

To reinforce the point - anyone reading this - if you ever come across any untagged category or article that has a red 'discsssion/talk' tag - please put minimally - WP Indonesia for the article on its talk page - and WP Indonesia|class=NA inside the double funny brackets - for the project please - as they give us an idea of what is out there - there are still articles and categories that belong to the project that have not been caught yet - thanks SatuSuro 15:21, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Most of those were probably stubs by User:Polbot, who has taken the entire IUCN list and made stubs for everything listed on it. They're all short stubs (but not useless, as they have references and conservation information). Probably anything that hasn't had an article yet would be classified as low importance, although I'm not exactly sure how to gauge importance for animals -- is it just a matter of how famous they are? The bot is programmed to automatically put them into the subcats if they exist for the country. Making sure they all have WPID tags would be a good job for a bot (or an AWB user). Rigadoun (talk) 16:04, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

New Current Collaboration

Hi guys, it's been a while since we changed the current collaboration article. The Fauna of Indonesia article has been vastly improved, but there hasn't been too many additions on it for the last few weeks.... maybe we should select a new one? Jakarta looked like a popular candidate. --Sepa 17:05, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, Jakarta looks like a popular contender. I'll update it. It seemed the collab fell out of favour for while there, but I'll try and get it going again. Later today, I will notify all project people it's now Jakarta, and ask them to nominate for the next page. I will strongly suggest we focus on a stub or undeveloped article - no point doing something that doesn't need much improvement. --Merbabu 23:33, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Support - if there is an underworked part of the project - it could even have project of its own (due to all the subsidiary articles connected) if there were the editors to work on it SatuSuro 23:45, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Villages and subdistricts

Until what level we can allow WP articles of regions? Somebody has actively created a lot of stubs for these. Should we stop until regency and its capitals? Need a consensus here. — Indon (reply) — 13:14, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

My opinion is that we're struggling to even bring our city and regency articles up to a a respectable level of quality and so anything below this level should be left as redirect for now to its parent administrative division. For Jakarta we also have articles at the subdistrict level, and perhaps in time we could decide to allow this for other large cities, but anything at the village level seems like a total waste of effort and a very costly exercise for us to maintain. The more articles we have in the project, the more thinly spread our resources will be. (Caniago 15:17, 7 September 2007 (UTC))
Agreed, we should not create village/suburb articles simply because they a village/suburb exists. Only notable villages that are famous for something should be created - and I would suggest the threshold for inclusion must be high. --Merbabu 15:20, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
Okay, then let me see what I can do to upgrade stubbies regencies and cities. They are hundreds! :-( — Indon (reply) — 15:22, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
How many villages are there in Indonesia, something around 70611? ;-) (Caniago 15:44, 7 September 2007 (UTC))

Utility of Indonesian Anti-communists category?

The category Category:Indonesian anti-communists has one page: Suharto. Probably ought to be expanded or deleted. Cheers, --Dylanfly 17:49, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Now it has no articles. I say delete. --Merbabu 22:48, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Insufficient process within the indonesia prokect to determine the life or death of single entry categories - needs to be discussed more - having tagged hundreds for the project - I would suggest a policy page re categories needs to be created for guideline and process.
Unless there is such in process or policy page- bit by bit finding one article category and putting it to the project will indeed be less reliable or methodical than having a dedicated page - similarly - the protocol for what gets tagged with the indonesia portal - will try to create something for both within a week or so. SatuSuro 03:02, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
The category is a subcategory of Category:Anti-communists, which has quite a few broken down by countries. If Suharto is the only Indonesian anti-communist, then the category should be deleted, but he should be moved to the parent category. I don't know, though, the entire parent category seems problematic for difficulty in defining who is one. There is quite a list of people there, though. Rigadoun (talk) 03:07, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Sorry - the project needs specific guidelines - otherwise the adhoc nature of things falls to the foibles of specific problematic editors - myself included - who have a particular agenda (I never ever believed there was a civil war in Indonesia in 1965 66) but I had to wait for a year for a belligerent editor to back down from the inappropriate title to the article.
Suharto was and is not the only anti-communist in Indonesian history - in the 1957 to 1962 period there were a significant number - and in the 1966 to 1998 there were others who specifically were open and public about this particular stance. I believe such a category would be populatable if sufficient knowledge of those individuals was evident from the editors involved in the project. But then considering we seem to have less than 10 active members working towards some good for the project - maybe a deletion at the moment may seem justifiable - but I consider that suggestions such as the one above re 'utility' misses the point completely about what the project and perhaps wikipedia is actually about. SatuSuro 03:14, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Totally agree. We need to come up with guidelines for categorising (and a few other things, like use of the portal template). The weekend is near. he he. --Merbabu 03:57, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

If we are to keep the (empty) category, I think we need to define very specifically what an “anti-communist’ actually is. There are many people who don’t like communism – does that make them an anti-communist? Suharto’s opposition to communism was not ideological, merely strategic. He didn't wake up thinking my mission in life is to oppose communism. Ie, the PKI was in the way of his ambitions, and then could be used for his ambitions – in many ways the same way that political Islam was perceived as a threat. Is he thus anti-Islam? Of course not, and thus I think using simplistic labels for to label someone an anti-communist is problematic – it makes it sound like being anti-communist was his mission, when communists were merely an obstacle and then scape goat. --Merbabu 03:34, 6 September 2007 (UTC)


Agreed - the specific example and the category are problematic - some of those that I could identify from 1958 to 1961 or so- were collectively anti communist, by membership of particular political groups. But the term and the label are indeed externally applied labels onto the project structure - bit like the old one of 'indonesian civil war':) SatuSuro 03:43, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes, categorising people thru simplistic labels is usually fraught with dodginess. Not at all professional/academic. Some cats are black and white no-brainers - ie, he was a general, and he was an Indonesian president - but attempting to sum up complex and protracted political dramas, and the motivations behind them, with simplistic one or two word labels doesn't cut it. sorry. --Merbabu 03:57, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
In this particular case it was a category that was specifically imposed from outside the project - as I have said before on other issues where we have to carry categories from outside - probably an editor with an agenda that lies outside of the project - where numbers of imposed ideas on this project come from editors with very limited knowledge of indonesian history or geography. SatuSuro 04:32, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Yes, that's what it seemed like to me. If you look at the other pages stashed somewhere in Category:Anti-communists, you'll find quite a range of reasons and situations in which people were considered anti-communist. To me, it makes the label seem vague, but since it's part of a huge international listing, it's not for us in this project to decide that it's inappropriate. I suggest discussion at Category talk:Anti-communists regarding the whole thing to see if there is a consensus on exactly what it means; otherwise we should just file people here, either in the parent category, or if we can dig up more than just Suharto (which, as SatuSuro points out, we surely could), in the subcat. Rigadoun (talk) 22:59, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
The whole thing is all rather silly really, isn't it? Although most of the pre-1965 Indonesian Army leadership, especially Yani and Nasution, were virulently anti-communist, given that from the mid 1960's it became expedient, then compulsory to be so, by extension, every single Indonesian alive during the 1965-1998 period was an anti-communist (if asked). This might make Indonesian Anti-Communists the biggest subcategory of them all! Shall we starting editing the articles? Davidelit 06:11, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Well put David. It's a meaningless category. Shall we make it collab of the fortnight? --Merbabu 06:18, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
Youre Right! I studied at Adik Irma Elementary School which made by General Nasution Family. The're anty communis

Fanatic terrorist 13:42, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Civil war in Papua?

I think this should merged with something - unless a reliable reference for "Civil War in Papua" can be found. Perhaps merge into Western New Guinea. --Merbabu 05:14, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm inclined to agree with Merbabu. "Civil War" is an incredibly strong descriptor: probably exaggerates certain aspects of the history and demotes others. In my opinion, most of the violent has been top-down, from ABRI, Freeport McMoRan, and the like. It's been violent, but I don't know if civil war is most appropriate. --Dylanfly 12:14, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
I would lean towards AFD. It's problematic because it's unsourced. If someone digs up reliable refs that use the term "civil war" consistently to describe it, then it might make WP:HEY. However, that's not the way I've seen it described, and if it's not accurate or NPOV, I don't see the point of a redirect. (Obviously non-controversial facts can be added to a relevant article). Rigadoun (talk) 02:54, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
I redirected it for now at least to Western New Guinea#Indonesian control and resistance. --Merbabu 11:07, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair use Pictures?

In the article Transition to the New Order, there is a picture of Suharto that is attributed to the Indonesian Department of Information, and is therefore allowed on Wikipedia as it "is published and distributed by the Government of Republic of Indonesia, according to Article 14 item b of the Indonesia Copyright Law No 19, 2002". Does anybody happen to know if the "30 Tahun Indonesia Merdeka" books, are covered by the same law? Or would that only apply to photos in the book specifically attributed to government departments? If we could use these pics, we could really do things with the Indonesian history pages. Davidelit 09:41, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

30 [i.e. Tiga puluh] tahun Indonesia merdeka. Jakarta: Sekretariat Negara R. I., [1978]. vol. 1, 1945-1949; vol. 2, 1950-1965; vol. 3, 1966-1975. - is what is being referred to SatuSuro 11:33, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

The law stipulates that it includes "publication and/or reproduction of anything which is published by and/or behalf of the Government, except if the Copyright is declared to be protected by law or regulation or by statement on the work itself or at the time the work is published." I think you're right in figuring that only those photos specifically attributed to the government would fall in that category, as the others probably declare a copyright by some individual, although it sounds like it would have to be explicitly mentioned in the book. Rigadoun (talk) 18:47, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

New article discovered - Kasepuhan...

I found this article and put it into the ID project. Could someone please give it a check. --Merbabu 05:39, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Centralised discussion

Could we please re-establish and confirm that issues central to an issue such as sources - and the issues arising from them is in a centralised place - the Bali Sea talk page is an example where any sense of credibility this project has has had a bit of a bump? - It would be appreciated if we realise that projects do have leigitmacy problems - and when outsider editors and admins come in and find discussions like that - they might wonder whether kalau semua orang disini gila or worse :) - cheers

Interesting...

This diff here shows an interesting addition. Long and references are just a list - not in-line. Any thoughts from project members? --Merbabu 10:04, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Eh? What's that article about? I bet the edit is a copy paste from some book/article/website. Wanna race to find the source of it? ;-) — Indon (reply) — 10:53, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
I think it's a school paper. — Indon (reply) — 10:58, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
It reads like a paper, not an encyclopedia article. It's also the eds first and so far only edit. --Merbabu 10:59, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
Has been shown to two milhist persons - not sure if they might have a clue or two - maybe we might hear from them later SatuSuro 11:00, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Prabowo

This article was a problem for a long time. I've done some cleaning up including removing unverified material, requesting citations for other material, and hopefully cleaning up POV language. Perhaps I have been too generous in not removing more info, and only requested in-line citations.

Please review and leaves your comments here on or Talk:Prabowo Subianto. cheers. --Merbabu 11:04, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Kedukan Bukit Inscription

After trying to expand Kedukan Bukit Inscription on the basis of the id: version, I am unhappy about my translation, by way of Bahasa Indonesia, of the inscription into English. (Shouldn't have attempted it in the first place, true, and I apologise.) Could someone very kindly give it a check? Thanks, Bessel Dekker 01:59, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey, it's already in a good shape. Good work BesselDekker! — Indon (reply) — 07:36, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks, and thank you very much for the subsequent improvements. Bessel Dekker 12:15, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

The {{portal|Indonesia}} link was splashed around many articles, in fact at one stage it was being put on any article that was remotely related to Indonesia (I was partly responsible!). I think it is time to work up some guidelines on how to use it more sparingly.

THus, i suggest we use it only for higher importance and higher quality articles. THe question is exactly how important and how high a quality an article must be. I propose only put a portal tag on if the article is either (a) "B-class" quality or higher or (b) "high" to "top" priority.

Or should we also include mid-importance? hmmm. Here is the project assessment table to help us decide...

Indonesia articles by quality and importance
Quality Importance
Top High Mid Low NA ??? Total
FA 1 10 58 69
FL 1 1 15 17
FM 105 105
A 1 1
GA 6 38 115 159
B 13 59 141 412 625
C 14 82 355 2,087 1 2,539
Start 11 108 734 6,926 1 7,780
Stub 3 251 9,871 1 10,126
List 4 16 94 548 4 666
Category 1 9,129 9,130
Disambig 1 2 63 66
File 311 311
Portal 27 27
Project 52 52
Redirect 2 38 318 434 792
Template 1 2 804 807
NA 9 15 24
Other 1 84 85
Assessed 43 279 1,663 20,365 11,031 33,381
Unassessed 2 2 4
Total 43 279 1,663 20,367 11,031 2 33,385
WikiWork factors (?) ω = 112,006 Ω = 5.26

Please put your comments here. regards --Merbabu 13:26, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

So - i think I will now go ahead and make these changes. Ie, ensure portal link is on all Top and High importance articles, and all B and higher quality articles. And, remove from any that don't fall within this category (although there may be exceptions either way). Any comments? --Merbabu 07:20, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Portuguese overseas empire

Bluedenim added links in Banda Island, Ambon Island, Ternate, Tidore, and many others, to {{Portuguese overseas empire}} entitled Portuguese Empire, which is a factual error. I have made a central discussion, because he got many complaints from other project, such as Macau's contributor. If anybody has a comment, please give it here: Template_talk:Portuguese_overseas_empire#Incorrect_template. Thanks. — Indon (reply) — 08:30, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Cross wiki translation

I noticed that User:Mimihitam has translated Mount Tambora from here to the Indonesian Wikipedia. Now that we've managed to obtain FA status for Indonesia, seems like this article would be a great candidate to do the same. What do you think, any volunteers? (PS. I would do it myself, but the result would be mostly incomprehensible  ;-) (Caniago 12:11, 16 October 2007 (UTC))

well, i would like to translate it, but recently i'm pretty busy :(, and i'm concentrating to help the WuA project (wikipedia for kids in Indonesian) Mimihitam 12:25, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
I think it's a good idea. However as long as it is not too Western-oriented :-) I saw it is well referenced. Some time ago the article about Soeharto was translated from English and we got some complaints as it is too Western-oriented. Meursault2004 12:48, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
What specifically does western-orientated mean? --Merbabu 12:54, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

its mean that the pov of the article comes from west, but i think its ok, the most important things is neutral and accurate Mimihitam 07:02, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

If it is POV then it wouldn't get featured. Could somebody point which part of the Indonesia article that has (so-called Western)-POV? — Indon (reply) — 07:17, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

4 example Religion in Indonesia Mimihitam 05:55, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I thought we're still talking about Indonesia. Okay, but which sentences in Religion in Indonesia which have the western POV? — Indon (reply) — 10:34, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Quotes from Meursault2004 in id:Pembicaraan Wikipedia:Artikel pilihan:

Religion in Indonesia article is good, but it has Point of View from western, for example, in the opening paragraph critizing Indonesian goverment and some other things.. (Artikel agama di Indonesia lumayan tapi dari POV barat. Misalkan di paragraf pembuka cenderung memojokkan pemerintah Indonesia dan beberapa hal2 lain.)

Mimihitam 15:03, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Well, what do you think? Or do you have no opinion? If you do, once again, please be specific. Otherwise, please drop the issue. --Merbabu 15:17, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
I read again the opening paragraph and they are beautifully sourced. They are not editors' opinion and editors did not try to critize Indonesian government. — Indon (reply) — 13:58, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Pontianak (folklore), Leyak and Vampire

Hi all, a couple of us are working up vampire to FAC, and there's a stubby bit on indonesian beings as well as separate subarticles. Anyone with books on balinese or indonesian folklore who can embellish or provide refs would be gratefully appreciated! cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:49, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, i can't help you on this one except to say, "vampire" = pemeras (maybe!). maybe some others might know? Indon, Satu, Caniago, Mersault? --Merbabu 15:21, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Done. — Indon (reply) — 14:26, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks a bunch -all helps. :) cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:35, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
No problem. This is what WikiProject discussion is used for. Glad to help. Good luck for FA! — Indon (reply) — 14:55, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Important: cleaning-up Silat

Angie Y. has modified Silat article a lot which is now revamped from SEAsia-view to completely Malaysian-view without mentioning other countries (see the country of origins, putting only Malaysian sources and removed parts that don't come from Malaysia). We need to clean up this article to get neutral POV. Worst, that Angie Y. has been blocked indefinitely for sockpuppetry. — Indon (reply) — 14:25, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

The problematic editor is actually Iijam, aka 60.50.147.56. In my view Angie Y. isn't a problem, at least on this article. (Caniago 15:40, 21 October 2007 (UTC))
You're right. Lijam is problematic. I'll dig sources for the article and see what I can do for it. — Indon (reply) — 17:18, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Indon, can't say I can help out. I know almost zip about the subject, and there are too many other wiki articles to spread myself too thinly over. Keep up the good work. --Merbabu 14:58, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
Me too. Ah, the article is revamped again heavily from one editor to another. — Indon (reply) — 13:59, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Your comments are needed

A user is really persistent to separate Silat and Pencak Silat, while others are trying hard to combine them. Proposal of merging has been made to make a consensus ground which avoids any unilateral acts. Your comments are needed here: Talk:Silat#Merge_between_Silat_and_Pencak_Silat. Thank you. — Indon (reply) — 08:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorting of Indonesian names

I've noticed that on the Indonesian Wikipedia categories with Indonesian people are sorted by last name. For example Eddy Santana Putra is sorted as "Putra, Eddy Santana", Megawati Soekarnoputri is sorted as "Soekarnoputri, Megawati" and Agung Laksono is sorted as "Laksono, Agung". Since I gather that most Indonesians do not have family names I was a bit curious as to why this alphabetization was used. I asked on the embassy over there[32] and was told that Indonesian names in phonebooks are mostly sorted by first name. That makes me even more curious. Can anyone here tell me? :) Haukur 21:20, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Well there used to be a discussion on the Indonesian language Wikipedia about this and it is now done like this according to western way. Meursault2004 21:48, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Indonesian Wikipedia

The Indonesian language Wikipedia would like to install 2 oversights. So if you have an account there and you have more than 30 edits, and you would like to vote, you can do that on the following pages: Wikipedia:Pengurus/Pemungutan suara/Meursault2004 untuk oversight 31 Oktober 2007 and Wikipedia:Pengurus/Pemungutan suara/Hayabusa future untuk oversight 31 Oktober 2007. Thank you! Meursault2004 23:48, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Cut Nyak Dhien

How about creating article called Cut Nyak Dhien based on id:Cut Nyak Dhien that is featured article in Indonesian Wikipedia? thx Mimihitam 02:00, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

It needs more reliable sources, preferably in English as Indonesian language sources on Indonesian National Heroes can be biased. Meursault2004 20:56, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

maybe this can be a source? http://asnlf.net/asnlf_int/acheh/history/tjutnyakdhien/tjoet_njak_dien.htm today i am also repairing Cut Nyak Dhien's quality in Indonesian, maybe after that i will try in English Mimihitam 07:11, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Ha! Funnily enough, I have the (unimproved) id article printed out waiting for me to translate! Unfortunately real life has taken over at the moment, so don't know when I can get to it... but let me know when you feel the id article is ready for translation, and I'll try and find the time to do at least some! Cheers, --Sepa 14:14, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

i think its ready :D because i cant find more sources in English, i can only find sources from Acehnese and Indonesian, do anybody here have source in English? Mimihitam 09:17, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Re Indonesian invasion of East Timor

I'm interested in working to make the article about the Indonesian invasion of East Timor into a Featured Article. However, I've been active for over ten years with the East Timor Action Network/US. I wonder if – In your opinion – this reflects a conflict of interest? My work with ETAN/US is entirely voluntary and is done exclusively on my own time. Furthermore, I have no personal agenda one way or another with this article; my only goal is to have the truth known about what happened.

Thanks in advance for your comments. – Scartol · Talk 22:06, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

What would you say to someone from the Indonesian military, or say the Indonesian East Timor administration, who had said, similar to you, that they would like work on the article with the "only goal to have the truth known about what happened", they had no personal agenda, and they were only volunteers? The WP:COI page does suggest some fairly rigorous guidelines for editors where a COI may be apparent (particularly the opening "In a Nutshell" Box). That you have declared your interest here is commendable, on the other hand, you've stated you want to present the "truth", and not what is "verifiable". Notions of truth are slippery, rather verifiability is what WP:V calls for - but I'm sure you are aware of this. :-)
Having said that, the article is of a particularly low quality and under-referenced. After quickly skimming through it, in my opinion, it focuses excessively on the involvement of foreign countries. Also, apart from introducing some more reliable and neutral sources, it would be good to include more on the occupation period, and even something from the viewpoint of Indonesia.There is certainly a lot of scope for improvement. --Merbabu 23:40, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
I certainly agree that verifiability is the goal here, not some nebulous pipe-dream of truth. (When I use the word "truth" here, I mean it in the most Wikipedia-esque way possible: a verifiable, neutral POV accounting of the facts.) I believe my work on Honoré de Balzac and Chinua Achebe can testify to my dedication to verifiability, reliable sources, and careful documentation.
As for the example about Indonesian military personnel: I think such a case is different from my own, insofar as they would be professionally aligned with the issue. However, in an analogous situation (someone who had volunteered for Apodeti, for example), I would welcome those contributions so long as they were – as you rightly indicate – verifiable and cited using reliable sources.
I agree that the article needs serious work, and I'm willing and able to do it. Perhaps you or other folks from the project could keep an eye on it and make comments as I go. (It will probably be several weeks, as I'm currently working on Harriet Tubman.) Thanks for your feedback. – Scartol · Talk 06:48, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

History of Indonesia A-Class review

History of Indonesia is currently under A-Class review by WikiProject History. I thought you guys might be interested. See Wikipedia:WikiProject History/Review/A-Class review/History of Indonesia--Phoenix-wiki (talk · contribs) 14:20, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Rename: Kelut › Kelud?

It seems from various media reports about the volcano's recent activity as well as from a simple Google hits comparison that the Kelud spelling is in a clear majority. Also the German Wikipedia article was created on 30 Sep this year from the English one, taking over the spelling. I would like to correct this but would like to put this to a discussion first. SeL 00:42, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

  • I agree in preferring Kelud. However, I cannot find any reliable sources to substantiate this: the "Nama Geografi" section of Kamus Besar Bahasa Indonesia unfortunately does not mention the volcano. Bessel Dekker 04:22, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

User:Indon's done it again…

Borobudur's been promoted to feature article status. Another fine effort from User:Indon. Congratulations – it’s a great article of a quality befitting of the magnificent structure and location. --Merbabu 22:54, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Damned! Busted. It's collaborative project, though. You shaped my lousy grammar, Caniago pushed more comprehensive materials, Sadamelik put a beautiful decoration of Java topology map, and others uncountable editors had helped the article to get featured. So thanks everyone. — Indon (reply) — 23:10, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
Wah, thats cool. Nice looking article. Congratulations! kawaputratorque 03:14, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

West Java...

Large additions have been made to this article - mainly about gamelan, the level of detail of which i think is irrelevant for this article. What do people think? I think it should be trimmed drastically. What do people think? --Merbabu 11:55, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

I think we need to trim it off a lot. To stress that the article is about the province, so it should only mention culture in general. Besides the new additions fit more appropriately in other article. — Indon (reply) — 11:59, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Yes, it's a more cultural aspect, so maybe Gamelan, or Sundanese people? --Merbabu 12:11, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
I'd say Sundanese people, as it discusses wayang, dance, and literature as well, which would only be tangential to the gamelan. The Sundanese people page has no discussion of culture, and could use it. Some of the material should probably be added to gamelan, but as that page isn't organized by cultural areas, it would take some thoughtful integration. Rigadoun (talk) 15:26, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Good ideas Rigadoun. Let's get it done. --Merbabu 21:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Community Portal

The collaboration appears to be inactive so I am removing it from the community portal. If this becomes active again just add it back.--Banana 04:52, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Bintang Beer

I just created this article. Please check if you can. And, provide links, cats, etc. What stub template should we use? --Merbabu 12:57, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

I would offer to help, but I worry that any of my edits would either be POV or original research :-) Davidelit 13:58, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
lol. --Merbabu 14:34, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Islands

I did read some scientific literature on Indonesian wildlife last month... And realized this:

It's completely impossible to understand much regarding smaller islands using Wiki (as well as other sources). The problem is changing names... and absens of articles/maps in the articles. I may conclude that Dammer is Damar, Baber is Babar etc. Nut still most as the existing island-articles in WP give no map no coordinates, they confuse east-west when describing 'what lies at the east', they didn't tell exactly from which island consists, e.g. the Barat Daya group... etc. Nowhere in the Wiki exists detaled map of the region, not to say the map with the island-names!

When the article gives the map of an island or group - this map doesnt show surroundings... or even does show 'blue ocean' where there IS neighboring big island (timor, Papua... see Maluku map)!! So i couldnt relate the detaled picture to the surroundings without comparing the shapes and combining to maps in my poor head:(( There're still exist other maps in the web then Wiki ones, but not without some troubles with names.

So ARE HAAAARDLY neded:

ONE big detailed map of Indonesia. As detailed(!) as possible.
Detaled maps of the regions, island groups etc. with _all_ (where possible) the names.

And more detaled maps of the subregions, smaller groups etc, whith more names where needed.

Maps and coordinates in the articles about islands.

either with some surroundings shown - or with possibility to go to the 'group' article and see the map of the group with the name of this particular island shown.

exact lists of islands in various groups (see Barat Daya Islands).

Also needed are various less known, old etc. names to be listed in the articles (as they are in Seram):(

Else it's impossible to find anything. E.g. I did find nearly anything i was needing in the Wiki... just after i spent some time, invented elaborated strategies etc. Although I dind find here Kisar (its location. The article exists) and some other places. I realized Sermatta is to be searched as Sermata... but couldn't locate it on the maps. The name 'Talaut' is absent here. I still have other sources than WP:) I was just curious 'may i use wiki for this purpose'. I 'evaluated' where does lie Solor and 'what is that curved island just south of Adonara. Just now i spent some time to find it agian...

I'm sure everybody knows the trouble with the local geography mentioned above. I, for my part, do know - there much work needed to improve it.

What I intend to propose - Let one of collaborations/'what to do's of Indonesia project will be focused on the whole geography rather then on some single article?

P.S. Well... another thing: in the articles about cities sometimes there's no mention of the island where the city placed. Why i do say this... seems without 'Indonesian geography' project there will pass many years before somebody sees some lesser island article and decide to provide it with the map, coordinates, or something. So what about starting the project? Sorry, i cannt participate for some reason:( And i'm not related too much to Indonesia. But i think it's reasonable... Please, regard this as an opinion of the reader rather then editor. And forgive my English after all! --83.237.110.25 23:30, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Folks, I do know - there are many other trobles. May be, if i did search for the local languages... i would be confused even more:) But... at least something is hardly needed to do with all the maps. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.237.110.25 (talk) 23:43, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Southeast Asian cinema task force

The Southeast Asian cinema task force was recently started as a joint project of WikiProject Films and WikiProject Southeast Asia. Editors who are writing about the Indonesian films are welcome to join the project, where they will find support for collaboration on new articles and the expansion and promotion of existing articles. — WiseKwai 11:31, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

template

just left a msg concerning the chief of stuff on one discussion page, but somehow cant c my comment. too many templates or whatever. just want to let u know one thing cheers --88.18.59.68 (talk) 15:47, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Soe=/Su

I have been having a conversation with a prominent australian editor who is in indonesia at the moment who is moving articles due to their spelling being in not what he is finding as he travels in Indonesia. In other words he is not finding the pre-1972 spelling in anything he sees while is in country - and is subsequently moving articles - Suharto and Soebandrio so far. I have tried to explain from my perspective where I think a non-indonesian speaking user of wikipedia needs help if they do not know about the spelling change - might just need the old spelling in the first sentence of the article at least. I would much prefer some of our other project members to offer their thoughts on the usage of the pre-1972 spelling in persons names (or not) as I am obviously just one user questioning changes - do all names in this Indonesian wikipedia project that have soe- get changed to su, do we acknowledge that some older names might still be known by the soe rather than the su? I would appreciate some feedback on this, as I might be wrong in my bothering the editor - and would like to see whether I need to apologise for my interfering with his cleaning up things, or otherwise find that we have indeed have an issue over the variant spelling issue... SatuSuro 00:13, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

For anyone not sure what I am on about or where to find discussion - see the spelling - orthography issue - at [33] is a good start... SatuSuro 00:33, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm not really expert in this. I don't have any particular preference, but yeah current spelling is usually used. Perhaps in the lead we should also mentioning former spelling, as in candi with chandi. It's also the same case with Nusa kambangan when Michael moved it into Kambangan island. Nusa is a former name of pulau, so it is correct from the outsider (non-Indonesian) point of view but it would not familiar by Indonesian people. That's only my 2 cents. — Indon (reply) — 08:42, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
if you try to write so officialy you must use EYD. any article who after EYD must use EYD any school in indonesia have priorty about language teach so there mean no people are not familiar with eyd. Like soeharto become suharto this more proper cause this after eyd even there conflict about that, if you want right that it must be use EYD right spell.Daimond 15:45, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
Personally, I think the use of Nusa Kambangan is still relevant. So is Nusa Penida. I would feel very weird to say Pulau Kambangan or Pulau Penida. Matahari Pagi 09:15, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

As for the spelling of proper names, I think one should also take into consideration the way the person self writes his or her own name. In the Indonesian language Wikipedia, names before 1972 should be spelled according the Soewandi spelling and before 1948 according the Van Ophuijsen spelling. Meursault2004 10:39, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

This is interesting: The United States Government spells both the first two presidents of Indonesia with 'oe' [34]. Actually this is also my personal preference :-) Meursault2004 22:33, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Which in turn shows that the now retired editor of February was in fact applying a principle that in fact does not fit well with usage. A very apt warning to any editor - regardless of apparent experience or notion of authority who seeks to apply a title or content which does not have adequate explanation of either the local usage or the possible available variations - in the first line of the article. The point still seems important 2 months later SatuSuro 04:54, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
Was this discussion ever concluded? I am working on Wikipedia:WikiProject Indonesia/Naming conventions and wasn't sure if there was a consensus one way or the other here. (I wrote that the 1972 spellings are preferred in general, since both Sukarno and Subandrio were where they are). Please help contribute to the naming conventions, where I have added other things. Rigadoun (talk) 18:15, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

"This is not right, don't make confusing note like this. It's okay if other nation use older spelling or version or depend on their tongue, no strict convention naming here, don't make your own difficulties" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.133.82.2 (talk) 09:29, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Rename: Malay World => Nusantara?

See the discussion on Talk:Malay world and offer an opinion please. --Merbabu 11:02, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Sumatran Rhinoceros at Featured Article candidates

I forget where we list these, so I'll put it here. Look at the article and comment at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sumatran Rhinoceros. Rigadoun (talk) 02:05, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Rename: Indonesian invasion of East Timor

I'd like to rename the above page to "Indonesian occupation of East Timor". Perhaps someone from this project would care to comment on the talk page? Thanks. – Scartol • Tok 23:19, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Adam Air Flight 574

The above article, which falls into the scope of this project, is up for WP:FA. Please leave comments at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Adam Air Flight 574. Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 23:23, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Indonesia/Archive_2&oldid=1146803193"