This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Indonesian National Revolution article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1Auto-archiving period: 365 days
![]() |
![]() | Indonesian National Revolution has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Now that @ Eustatius Strijder: mentioned it, the "Supported by" section in the infobox appears to be somewhat bloated. As WP:MILHIST does not currently have a proper MOS for these things, examining it one by one:
Juxlos ( talk) 00:29, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Per Template talk:Infobox military conflict#RfC on "supported by" being used with the belligerent parameter, "Supprted by" is deprecated. Per the final sentence of the closure of that request for comment, "However, these circumstances would be rare, and considering the clear consensus in this discussion the status quo should be removal; inclusion would require an affirmative consensus at the article". So "Supported by" can be removed immediately as reflecting current consensus, and it would be up to those wishing to include to obtain a fresh consensus for inclusion. Kathleen's bike ( talk) 18:36, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
I know this topic has been discussed before but I just want to put my 50 cents on it.
I find the idea of this being a "Dutch military victory" for a lack of better term... is silly. Neither side had a military victory, nor defeat. Because neither side has actually defeated, and make the others capitulated. Honestly would be fine if "Dutch military victory" to be removed, which would make "Indonesian political victory" irrelevant, making it also removable. Wouldn't mind if:
Were just removed. Because I feel like the two results mentioned above are just there so that either side could claim "Victory"
imho. A better "Result" would look like this:
These are subject to change based on suggestion of course, so I'm all ears. So yeah, thanks for coming to my ted talk. - EvoSwatch ( talk) 09:39, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
Dutch forces were not able to prevail over the Indonesians, but were strong enough to resist being expelled. And
Given this stalemate, the Republic of Indonesia ultimately prevailed in the conflict. Any comment on this source? Ckfasdf ( talk) 11:58, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
@ Rembo01, Ckfasdf, Vif12vf, 139.192.162.29, and 111.94.67.181: You will find a discussion here about why it does not say "Indonesia victory" in the infobox.-- Toddy1 (talk) 17:04, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Either way, this and similar articles seem to burn a lot of editor's time discussing how to fill in the parameters of the all-important </sarcasm> infobox. -- Merbabu ( talk) 09:18, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Shouldn't the Darul Islam and People's Democratic Front have separate column from the Dutch forces? Currently it's being lumped together with the Dutch forces and only separated by a line. In my opinion, they being in the same column could cause confusion as some readers might interpreted it as they're co-belligerent, while the fact is that they're in conflict with both the republicans and colonial forces. Jauhsekali ( talk) 05:45, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
@ Cal1407, Toddy1, and Kathleen's bike: Please add page protection for this, persistent sockpuppetry and IP vandalism. 182.2.50.179 ( talk) 05:57, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Indonesian National Revolution article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1Auto-archiving period: 365 days
![]() |
![]() | Indonesian National Revolution has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This ![]() It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Now that @ Eustatius Strijder: mentioned it, the "Supported by" section in the infobox appears to be somewhat bloated. As WP:MILHIST does not currently have a proper MOS for these things, examining it one by one:
Juxlos ( talk) 00:29, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
Per Template talk:Infobox military conflict#RfC on "supported by" being used with the belligerent parameter, "Supprted by" is deprecated. Per the final sentence of the closure of that request for comment, "However, these circumstances would be rare, and considering the clear consensus in this discussion the status quo should be removal; inclusion would require an affirmative consensus at the article". So "Supported by" can be removed immediately as reflecting current consensus, and it would be up to those wishing to include to obtain a fresh consensus for inclusion. Kathleen's bike ( talk) 18:36, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
I know this topic has been discussed before but I just want to put my 50 cents on it.
I find the idea of this being a "Dutch military victory" for a lack of better term... is silly. Neither side had a military victory, nor defeat. Because neither side has actually defeated, and make the others capitulated. Honestly would be fine if "Dutch military victory" to be removed, which would make "Indonesian political victory" irrelevant, making it also removable. Wouldn't mind if:
Were just removed. Because I feel like the two results mentioned above are just there so that either side could claim "Victory"
imho. A better "Result" would look like this:
These are subject to change based on suggestion of course, so I'm all ears. So yeah, thanks for coming to my ted talk. - EvoSwatch ( talk) 09:39, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
Dutch forces were not able to prevail over the Indonesians, but were strong enough to resist being expelled. And
Given this stalemate, the Republic of Indonesia ultimately prevailed in the conflict. Any comment on this source? Ckfasdf ( talk) 11:58, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
@ Rembo01, Ckfasdf, Vif12vf, 139.192.162.29, and 111.94.67.181: You will find a discussion here about why it does not say "Indonesia victory" in the infobox.-- Toddy1 (talk) 17:04, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Either way, this and similar articles seem to burn a lot of editor's time discussing how to fill in the parameters of the all-important </sarcasm> infobox. -- Merbabu ( talk) 09:18, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
Shouldn't the Darul Islam and People's Democratic Front have separate column from the Dutch forces? Currently it's being lumped together with the Dutch forces and only separated by a line. In my opinion, they being in the same column could cause confusion as some readers might interpreted it as they're co-belligerent, while the fact is that they're in conflict with both the republicans and colonial forces. Jauhsekali ( talk) 05:45, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
@ Cal1407, Toddy1, and Kathleen's bike: Please add page protection for this, persistent sockpuppetry and IP vandalism. 182.2.50.179 ( talk) 05:57, 6 June 2024 (UTC)