Template:Did you know nominations/List of beaches in Indonesia

List of beaches in Indonesia

 * Did you know that people should not wear green clothes on certain beaches of Java due to the belief that the color may induce the wrath of the queen of the sea and cause the person to drown?
 * ALT1: ... that on certain beaches of Java, people are warned not to wear green clothes due to the belief that the color may offend the queen of the sea and cause the person to drown?
 * Comment: The hook is available in the beginning of the article, and also in West Java beaches where it focuses. Articles created from my sandbox and then transferred here. A week later, I expanded the article.

Created/expanded by Rochelimit (talk). Self nom at 15:48, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Reviewed: Mikey Way


 * Symbol possible vote.svg The hook isn't correctly formatted and contains typos. As for the article, much of it lacks references. Manxruler (talk) 20:02, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Also, no QPQ has been provided. Manxruler (talk) 20:06, 28 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Can you show me the typos and suggest me the correct hook for this particular article. I placed as many references as possible for the proposed hook (the prohibition of wearing green cloth), but for the other part of the contents I thought it is rather unnecessary since the article is more of a list (the other "list of beach" articles are also lacking of reference, being a list). If you have a better hook suggestion for the article, please, do tell! I will try adding more citation for the article.
 * As for the QPQ, I forget about it! I will start doing this after the next 3 hours. Currently busy in real life.--Rochelimit (talk) 09:27, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I've added necessary citations for the other contents as well as reviewing another DYK nominations. Could you explain the typo that I should corrected?--Rochelimit (talk) 12:42, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Re-reviewing following feedback:
 * 1. A correctly formatted version of the current hook would be: "... that people should not wear green clothes on certain beaches of Java due to the belief that the color may induce the wrath of the queen of the sea and cause the person to drown?".
 * 2. The typo: Believe -> Belief.
 * 3. I find the hook to be not very good. It sounds like people actually shouldn't wear green clothes on certain beaches, like that's a fact rather than a belief held by some.
 * 4. I see no basis for the statement that list articles do not need references. I've consulted the DYK rules, the supplementary DYK rules, the DYK reviewing guide and WHYCITE. This article needs references just like any other.
 * 5. The language of the article is not very neutral. For example, the article uses words like "... rich cultural value, rich geological history, and abundant marine biodiversity" and "sacred". Why is the value and history rich? To whom are (all?) the beaches sacred? Words like "pristine", "internationally famous", " abstract granite boulders and brilliant white sand beaches", "rare well-formed beaches" etc. sound like a tourist brochure.
 * 6. The language of the article needs a lot of work. It contains numerous grammar flaws and incomplete sentences.
 * 7. Source-wise, several of the sources used in the article are WP:BLOGS.
 * This article will need more work before it's ready for Main page exposure. Manxruler (talk) 17:37, 29 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your clear reviewing points. I am aware I have placed too many weasel words. Please bare with me as I improve the article during this weekend (less busy, more time for Wikipedia).--Rochelimit (talk) 12:15, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * That's cool. Take your time. I'll resume my review when you're ready. Manxruler (talk) 16:56, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Dear Manxruler. I've improved the article and provided alternative hook in ALT1. I've replaced blog-like citations with a better one and removed contents with bad citations. The language of the content has been "neutralized" and I've asked the ever helpful Elekhh to check my grammar. If other improvements should be made, please inform.--Rochelimit (talk) 05:36, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll get back to the review later today, after work. Manxruler (talk) 07:25, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Alright, I'm back.
 * 1. We'll look at that once the others things check out.
 * 2. Typo fixed.
 * 3. Looking much better.
 * 4. Several more references now included, but still a few more needed. I'll add the citation needed tags where appropriate. Also, it would be very nice if you could format reference no. 14.
 * 5. and 6. Language is better.
 * 7. Appears to be blog free.
 * Will continue once the ref question is rectified. Manxruler (talk) 18:28, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Wow, never thought I should cited every single beach name that is there for a DYK. OK I'll do this. I'll let you know once I finished, maybe in about 3 days (busy with real life).--Rochelimit (talk) 11:52, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
 * You know, you could place one cite per subsection, like you did with "Riau Islands". That would do it, if said cite covers the following beaches. Take your time. Manxruler (talk) 17:57, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I've fixed and placed more citations for the article. I think a comprehensive reference is useful for verification, so I don't mind with citations for every single beach. So 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. checked.--Rochelimit (talk) 16:08, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Point 4 is certainly taken care of. Good work. Now on to the reviewing. I'll get on it now. Manxruler (talk) 22:25, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry for mixing in, and not that this would affect DYK, but the article starts to look like a perfect example of citation overkill. -- ELEKHHT 21:28, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I beg to differ, but by all means, do elaborate on why that is. Manxruler (talk) 22:28, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * With regards to the lead, you might have a point. Not every sentence needs a separate citation. One or more per section is fine. Manxruler (talk) 22:33, 5 December 2012 (UTC) Seeing as I feel partially responsible for the overkill of refs in the lead, I'll help out with merging those. Manxruler (talk) 22:58, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Symbol question.svg Article: 1. New enough expansion. 2. Long enough. 3. Seems neutral. Cites sources. Appears copyvio free.
 * However, reference no. 6 (WWF Coral Triangle Program) does not mention the fact it is supposed to support, and it is not properly formatted either.
 * Reference 15 (John Search) likewise doesn't give any information on the sentence it is supposed to verify.
 * Link 20 (the Mail & Guardian one) is dead.
 * As for the surfing situation on North Sumatra slowly changing (to the better I suppose) the references doesn't really say that. The references (22 and 23) state that surfing is a big thing there, but nothing about an improvement on an earlier low.
 * In reference 29 (Jakarta Post) I can't find Gandoriah Beach, just Pariaman.


 * Further, there is still some language oddities. There are no such things as "sea bunkers" (bunkers near the sea?) or pillcases (you mean pillboxes, surely?) Manxruler (talk) 03:48, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
 * 1. I took ref 6 from a ref link in the article Coral Triangle. Fixed that one. More links may be needed to explain the words "Raja Ampat" and "Bunaken", but since those area are placed within the Cendrawasih Bay (as said by the WWF reference), and in the case of Bunaken, nearby; I decided to leave the "Raja Ampat" and the "Bunaken" in the cited sentence for now?
 * 2. replaced the fumarole link with 2 new citations, one from epoch, the other from a citation in the article Weh Island
 * 3. Took the ref from the article Nias. Decided to remove link [20] and leave it with one link (Bootsnall - strange day in Nias)
 * 4. Took the ref for "surfing condition slowly improved" from Nias. Replaced with a new ref.
 * 5. Gandoriah. I added a new link mentioning the name of the beach as part of the festival in the city Pariaman. (Sumbar online news, in Indonesian)
 * 6. My silly mistake on pillcases and sea bunkers. Fixed them (mentioned in the Eric Oey ref as "This is also the site of a World War II Japanese airfield with bunkers and concrete pillboxes still extant").--Rochelimit (talk) 07:04, 6 December 2012 (UTC)
 * 1. I don't see Cendrawasih Bay mentioned in the WWF reference. Or beaches generally.
 * 2. Seems fine now.
 * 3. Seems fine.
 * 4. Seems fine.
 * 5. I'll AGF on that, as I don't read Indonesian.
 * 6. Thanks for fixing that.
 * It appears that we're almost there. I'll fix some over-referencing for you now. Check point 1. before this article can be promoted, please. I'll check back in in the morning (Central Europe time). Manxruler (talk) 01:39, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
 * 1. Decided to change the wording into a much simpler one (turtles).--Rochelimit (talk) 03:19, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Pictogram voting keep.svg I think that should take care of that problem. I'll AGF the hook (which I've fixed so it conforms with the norms), as I don't read Indonesian. Manxruler (talk) 02:01, 9 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Symbol question.svg Neither source for Gandoriah indicates a train to Pariaman is available. This is not the original source, but another site hosting it (with or without permission, I don't know). The JP has old stories back to 1999 on their site, so this is inexcusable. Referencing format is an absolute mess. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:29, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Hook fact is true and easily verifiable, though, and actually one of the few I knew beforehand. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:31, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I think Gandoriah is a popular beach for festivals, both Tabuik and the Eid. I just add 4 more links about Gandoriah Beach and its connection with the Tabuik in case people are doubtful about it. One from a magazine (Tempo), one from Amazing Indonesia (unfortunately the host of the site is blog-like?), 2 from a Minangkabau Encyclopedia. I hope these are verifiable enough for the DYK.--Rochelimit (talk) 07:26, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The issue is not the festival, but the train. You say in the article that it is accessible by train, but nothing in the sources indicates that. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:31, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes I about to add it in your talk page, but you quickly replied my msg, it was an edit conflict. So, yes, I decided to remove the train part (I took them from id.wikipedia, which is uncited)--Rochelimit (talk) 07:40, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * You should still standardise your referencing format. Please check to see if anything else is not present in the sources. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:59, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I decided to remove the jpost / tmc net link. I don't know if I should standardized my referencing format for a DYK but I just standardized all the un-standardized referencing format as you explained (on veron2, allen, ngc, science journal, and some others). I replaced them using wiki's cite web, cite journal, and cite book. Is this what you mean by standardized formatting? I didn't change the formatting for ref 13 though because of the notes in the original ref. Could you help me with the ref 13?--Rochelimit (talk) 08:58, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * 102 is still a mess. Also, what makes pantai.org a reliable source? Doesn't sound too reliable. What article is this one --> Voice of Nature. 85-95. Yayasan Indonesia Hijau. 1990? How can we verify that it's a real source if we don't even have the article title and page number, or even a month? How is a book on women's issues (Belenggu adat dan kekerasan terhadap perempuan) relevant to beaches? There seems to be more issues as well. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:14, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Pantai.org may doesn't look like a reliable source, but the ref is there only to explain that the beaches exist. I don't use pantai.org to explain the facts of the beach, but merely the existence of the beach. If pantai.org is not a reliable source, can I use google map as a source to verify that the beach do exist?
 * Sorry for not placing the url for Voice of Nature. I placed the url there. The cited sentence appears in the search result but disappeares when you access the book. I think this is the only case where I have no idea the page number of the source (usually the page also appears in the search result)
 * Again, the reference is there only to explain that those beaches exist in Papua. It is not used to explain the fact. I placed an URL as well. I decided to use this reference because this is one of the few books that explain the existence of those beaches in Papua. I try not to use blog-like reference, so I decided to use this book instead, despite of it being somewhat irrelevant with the topic "beaches". It can be extremely hard to find a reliable source to explain the existence of some popular beaches in Indonesia, especially those beaches in Papua and Molucca.
 * 102 (now 101) fixed--Rochelimit (talk) 09:41, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * There's a reason we have google maps and cite map. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:56, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * WOW never realize about these! :D I will cite the article with these later. I am rather busy with the coming Monday, so this may be finished after 3 days max. Thanks for the info! For the DYK, is it OK to use the existing references? (the DYK has stayed quiet a while in nomination). If it's not OK, then my plan is to replace all the citations with google maps and move the existing reference to a new article dedicated for the beach. Can you help me identifying the references that is not worthy of a DYK so that I can proceed with the DYK first? For now, the priority is for the DYK.--Rochelimit (talk) 10:56, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The questionable sources should be replaced before DYK. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:06, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * 1. Removed the "belenggu" citation
 * 2. Replaced pantai.org with map coordinates or news link
 * 3. Standardized van Berkmoes refs
 * I've rechecked the references in the article and I hope there's no other problem. Please inform me with other references that need to be checked.--Rochelimit (talk) 21:04, 9 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Pictogram voting keep.svg Guess it's okay. AGF as I have not checked all 200+ references. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:10, 10 December 2012 (UTC)