This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
International Force East Timor 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 |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Removed 'attention needed' tag - no immediate attention seen as required. Buckshot06 09:19, 30 November 2006 (UTC) Operation Warden was actually a UN Chapter 7 mission (i.e., "peace enforcement", vice peacekeeping). Additonally, Operation Warden only entailed the introduction of coaalition peace enforcement forces into ET. Once that was accomplished, INTERFET transitioned to "Operation Stabilise," which was fundamentally a humantarian relief/peacekeeping effort.
This article was nominated for Australian collaboration. Nobody recorded it here, and its nomination will expire soon if there are no more votes, but just for completeness, I'll report it in the proper category. -- Scott Davis Talk 13:43, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
I've uploaded a PD image of INTERFET troops, which may be better than the Fair Use pic currently in use. I leave it up to someone else to make the decision, tho. – Scartol • Tok 22:50, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
I do find the VERY short paragraph on OP WARDEN quite funny, but not so funny is the complete lack of mention of the associated operations
They never happened?-- 124.184.92.15 ( talk) 01:40, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
There are no sources confirming several informations in this article. It says, the ships NRP Vasco da Gama, HMS Glasgow and USS Belleau Wood, USS Mobile Bay, and USS Peleliu participated in this mission, but this paper doesn't mention Vasco da Gama or Belleau Wood inside the INTEFET maritme forces. Australians Prime Minister Howard talked about 17 nations participating in INTERFET, which are listed on official INTERFET website of Australian Gov. The article mention 22 countries... -- J. Patrick Fischer ( talk) 10:22, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
I believe it would be informative to include the history on how Australia created this taskforce. Was it passed under any law in the country? Did the country consult the UN in the creation? etc. sentausa ( talk) 11:02, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
http://www.etan.org/et2005/march/20/26hushed.htm
http://books.google.com/books?id=sx1KAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA95#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,12655192%5E2703,00.html
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,12655192%5E2703,00.html
Rajmaan ( talk) 17:52, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
Did it happen? Report of combined Australian and NZ SAS raid on Indonesian unit at Atapupu in West Timor in late 1999 causing around 100 killed.
"SAS Bloodbath in Timor" by Ian Wishart and Ben Vidgen in Investigate Magazine (NZ) June 2000
http://www.investigatemagazine.com/june00sas.htm
Also Mentioned in The NZ Herald too on 28 Aug 2000 "SAS squad hunting killers of NZ soldier" by James Gardiner.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/indonesia-and-east-timor/news/article.cfm?c_id=589&objectid=149233
All seems a bit far fetched but it is fairly much common knowledge that there was covert recon occurring prior to INTERFET actually arriving so makes me wonder if there is some truth to it all. 101.168.127.243 ( talk) 11:54, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on International Force for East Timor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:14, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on International Force for East Timor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:06, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
G'day, a recent change was made in the article changing "International Force for East Timor" to "International Force East Timor", per this diff: [1]. However, the article title remains at International Force for East Timor. There is currently a redirect at International Force East Timor back to this article. Should this be corrected and this article moved? From what I can tell the IP's change was correct (for instance see here), but I do not know if there was consensus for "International Force for East Timor" for some reason. Thoughts? Regards, AustralianRupert ( talk) 00:35, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
The following line: "Despite relatively short lines of communication, low expenditure of ammunition, fuel and other consumables, and limited personnel and equipment casualties, the operation strained the ADF's limited logistic capability and it was questionable whether it could have sustained a more high intensity deployment" linked to David Horner's book, is not compliant with Wikipedia standards. If it's questionable, who are asking the question? It is just David Horner pondering, or was their an inquiry damning the ADF's logistics? It seems this sentence is more lick click-bait. Given that the issue was raised in the paragraph, this commentary is pointless. Travelmite ( talk) 06:47, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
These sources and also reading the body of the page you can conclude that at least 7 were killed and hundreds were captured [1] [2] [3] Germanator 19:17, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
The infobox is off topic. The article is about The International Force East Timor (INTERFET), "a multinational non-United Nations peacemaking task force". It is not about a military campaign/battle/war/crisis that has two sides.
If it is about a task force, why are we listing two opposing sides listing two lots of "belligerents", "casualties". Such an infobox is fine for 1999 East Timorese crisis or similar. But not here. -- Merbabu ( talk) 10:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
International Force East Timor 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 |
![]() | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Removed 'attention needed' tag - no immediate attention seen as required. Buckshot06 09:19, 30 November 2006 (UTC) Operation Warden was actually a UN Chapter 7 mission (i.e., "peace enforcement", vice peacekeeping). Additonally, Operation Warden only entailed the introduction of coaalition peace enforcement forces into ET. Once that was accomplished, INTERFET transitioned to "Operation Stabilise," which was fundamentally a humantarian relief/peacekeeping effort.
This article was nominated for Australian collaboration. Nobody recorded it here, and its nomination will expire soon if there are no more votes, but just for completeness, I'll report it in the proper category. -- Scott Davis Talk 13:43, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
I've uploaded a PD image of INTERFET troops, which may be better than the Fair Use pic currently in use. I leave it up to someone else to make the decision, tho. – Scartol • Tok 22:50, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
I do find the VERY short paragraph on OP WARDEN quite funny, but not so funny is the complete lack of mention of the associated operations
They never happened?-- 124.184.92.15 ( talk) 01:40, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
There are no sources confirming several informations in this article. It says, the ships NRP Vasco da Gama, HMS Glasgow and USS Belleau Wood, USS Mobile Bay, and USS Peleliu participated in this mission, but this paper doesn't mention Vasco da Gama or Belleau Wood inside the INTEFET maritme forces. Australians Prime Minister Howard talked about 17 nations participating in INTERFET, which are listed on official INTERFET website of Australian Gov. The article mention 22 countries... -- J. Patrick Fischer ( talk) 10:22, 15 May 2011 (UTC)
I believe it would be informative to include the history on how Australia created this taskforce. Was it passed under any law in the country? Did the country consult the UN in the creation? etc. sentausa ( talk) 11:02, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
http://www.etan.org/et2005/march/20/26hushed.htm
http://books.google.com/books?id=sx1KAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA95#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,12655192%5E2703,00.html
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,12655192%5E2703,00.html
Rajmaan ( talk) 17:52, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
Did it happen? Report of combined Australian and NZ SAS raid on Indonesian unit at Atapupu in West Timor in late 1999 causing around 100 killed.
"SAS Bloodbath in Timor" by Ian Wishart and Ben Vidgen in Investigate Magazine (NZ) June 2000
http://www.investigatemagazine.com/june00sas.htm
Also Mentioned in The NZ Herald too on 28 Aug 2000 "SAS squad hunting killers of NZ soldier" by James Gardiner.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/indonesia-and-east-timor/news/article.cfm?c_id=589&objectid=149233
All seems a bit far fetched but it is fairly much common knowledge that there was covert recon occurring prior to INTERFET actually arriving so makes me wonder if there is some truth to it all. 101.168.127.243 ( talk) 11:54, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on International Force for East Timor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:14, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on International Force for East Timor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 02:06, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
G'day, a recent change was made in the article changing "International Force for East Timor" to "International Force East Timor", per this diff: [1]. However, the article title remains at International Force for East Timor. There is currently a redirect at International Force East Timor back to this article. Should this be corrected and this article moved? From what I can tell the IP's change was correct (for instance see here), but I do not know if there was consensus for "International Force for East Timor" for some reason. Thoughts? Regards, AustralianRupert ( talk) 00:35, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
The following line: "Despite relatively short lines of communication, low expenditure of ammunition, fuel and other consumables, and limited personnel and equipment casualties, the operation strained the ADF's limited logistic capability and it was questionable whether it could have sustained a more high intensity deployment" linked to David Horner's book, is not compliant with Wikipedia standards. If it's questionable, who are asking the question? It is just David Horner pondering, or was their an inquiry damning the ADF's logistics? It seems this sentence is more lick click-bait. Given that the issue was raised in the paragraph, this commentary is pointless. Travelmite ( talk) 06:47, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
These sources and also reading the body of the page you can conclude that at least 7 were killed and hundreds were captured [1] [2] [3] Germanator 19:17, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
The infobox is off topic. The article is about The International Force East Timor (INTERFET), "a multinational non-United Nations peacemaking task force". It is not about a military campaign/battle/war/crisis that has two sides.
If it is about a task force, why are we listing two opposing sides listing two lots of "belligerents", "casualties". Such an infobox is fine for 1999 East Timorese crisis or similar. But not here. -- Merbabu ( talk) 10:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC)