Talk:Rayuan Pulau Kelapa

Untitled
I have now supplied an introduction to the lyrics, and it seems to me that this warrants the article to be kept. I am not sure about the lyrics themselves: although they are to be found all over the Internet, it is quite doubtful whether they may be used freely, and hopefully colleagues will judge whether they should be deleted or not. Bessel Dekker 02:19, 15 November 2007 (UTC)


 * The most important question is when they were written. Given the rage of dates in the article introduction, I expect it is unlikely that that the song is in the public domain, but it is possible since pre-1971 publishing usually required renewal of the copyright term. The problem, however, is that in case of doubt we have little choice but to remove the text.  I'm going to remove them, but feel free to add them back if new information comes to light showing they can be used.  &mdash; Coren (talk) 14:45, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I have no problem with this, especially since the content has been briefly hinted at now. I am just wondering whether there would be any point in adding a brief quote for discussion purposes (which, as far as I am aware would be legal), but then, would it be any use quoting in Indonesian? I propose leaving the text as it is. The original writer has also been informed (discussion on my talk page). Thanks for your cooperation. Bessel Dekker 18:37, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Regrettable labels
The article started as a song text. After discussion as to the legality of this, it was altered and became a discussion of the song and its significance. As I speak Indonesian and know something about Indonesian culture, I added my two cents. However, soebody has now clapped so many tags on the article that they take up as much space as the text itself. Probably this editor knows more about the subject than I do, and therefore is aware of improvements which could be made. As I myself see no room for improvement on this sort of subject at all (a brief discussion, to my mind, is all that is required, and a brief discussion this is) I think it would be more elegant and indeed more generous to remove the article altogether than to let it exist, no doubt for years and years, encumbered with these labels. They do not contribute to the article's quality.

I would like to apologize very sincerely to the original poster of the article, whose intentions, I am convinced, were honest and constructive. It is a pity events have taken this turn. Bessel Dekker (talk) 14:28, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Referenced and YouTubed
Hi. This article's validity is complete. I have provided references for all the major points, plus a fair quality performance of the song at YouTube. Thanks. Ref (chew) (do) 11:49, 27 March 2008 (UTC)