Template:Did you know nominations/Gedung Kesenian Jakarta

Gedung Kesenian Jakarta

 * ... that Gedung Kesenian Jakarta ("Jakarta Art Building") was used as a cinema for Chinese movies during the 1970s?

Created/expanded by Rochelimit (talk). Self nom at 07:56, 1 September 2011 (UTC)


 * This article was created on August 30, not September 1. Please return to T:TDYK and move this nomination to the correct date. r ʨ anaɢ (talk) 13:40, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Oops, thanks for moving.--Rochelimit (talk) 06:57, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Date and length are OK. Leszek Jańczuk (talk) 19:41, 1 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Please note that Indonesia does not have FOP and as such this should not be used. Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:58, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * What's an FOP? I'm not very familiar with some terms.--Rochelimit (talk) 20:50, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
 * It stands for Freedom of Panorama. Some countries do not allow taking pictures of copyrighted advertising, buildings or artwork, even if the photo is taken in a public place. Froggerlaura (talk) 23:52, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Correct. I've tagged it as such on Commons. Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:08, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmm, in that case is it ok to remove that picture from the DYK? I think it is ok for me.
 * Instead, I'm rather confuzzled about the image being tagged with a violation tag. Actually, there is no strong policy about FOP in Indonesia. I have not seen any architectural photos of Indonesia being taken down because of FOP? There are literally hundreds of photograph of governmental buildings, monuments, etc in Wikipedia and everywhere, and people are ok with that. It's kinda ridiculous to remove every single photo of Indonesian buildings in Wikipedia don't you think? Also, the advertising image of the movie is low in resolution, which is ok. Indonesia is a soft country, our term for countries with a - not very strong - standardized law. People would just leave alone small infringements. Plus, this photo was uploaded by the Dutch as part of the Tropenmuseum contribution. It's a Dutch colonial building! And it's a 1970s photo! I say if it's not an obvious violation, it's okay, seriously! To be honest with you, Indonesia changed their law very often, as often as they change presidents! I placed my little note there in Commons....
 * Anywho, back to topic. I removed the image from the DYK, in case that's the main problem of the DYK.--Rochelimit (talk) 20:41, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Several images from Chinese Indonesians were deleted for FOP concerns during its FA review; the image used with this nomination was one of those specifically mentioned. Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:38, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
 * As a side note, I have been living in Indonesia for the past 4 years and am well aware of the copyright issues you have mentioned (just look at the Indonesian Wikipedia... FU images in galleries...) However, the servers are located in the US, which has stricter copyright laws. Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:20, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Didn't you discussed this issue with Arsonal? If you need to know, I am working for the urban planning department in Jakarta and very much aware of the copyright issues. I published photos of historic buildings for the government, NGO, and building conservation magazine. Which Chinese Indonesian image was deleted? is there a relevancy with historic landmarks? I'm sure it was deleted for reason other than having a landmark building.
 * We should discussed this in other page really, this is getting out of topic. How about my DYK?--Rochelimit (talk) 00:59, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The issue was discussed at the FAN. I will take a look at the article. However, to be safe I'd suggest removing the image from the article. Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:28, 10 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Hook: Not especially interesting. How about "... that present-day Gedung Kesenian Jakarta ("Jakarta Art Building") was used for law and economics classes in 1951?
 * Article: Needs a thorough copyedit for grammar (for example, lace is renda... doesn't make sense in context) New enough, long enough. Referencing needs work, as there are some paragraphs that are entirely unreferenced and others where a good portion of the paragraph is unreferenced; some references are also quite bare. It could use some more wikilinking, but I'll do that. Paraphrasing seems fine (I read Indonesian, so no need to AGF on that).
 * Summary: Symbol possible vote.svg Please fix the referencing. I will request someone from the Guild of Copyeditors to take a look at the grammar. Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:44, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The new hook is ok, I have no preference actually. I'll add more references with proper citing. Will try to finish this by Wednesday, a bit busy these days.
 * Removing the pic from the article is also ok.--Rochelimit (talk) 09:01, 12 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Symbol delete vote.svg Referencing is still not up to par. Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:22, 20 September 2011 (UTC)