Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Chinese Indonesians/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by Karanacs 17:07, 6 September 2011.

Chinese Indonesians

 * Nominator(s): — Arsonal (talk + contribs) — 04:47, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Chinese Indonesians are one of the most studied and most important Chinese diaspora communities in the world. Their tragic yet empowering story documents centuries of discrimination by the indigenous population of Indonesia and European colonial settlers. Even while faced with this challenge, they sought to create a new home in Southeast Asia and helped shape the history and culture of the nation which celebrates its 66th birthday today. This article is a high priority topic across multiple WikiProjects and would not be where it is today without the tremendous collection donated to the Commons by the Tropenmuseum in Amsterdam.

When I first took up the task of re-writing this article in January 2010, I knew it would be a lengthy and enormous task. There were months where I was conflicted on how to write certain parts of the article because of their topics were quite complex. If I had not restrained myself, the article could potentially be twice as long if it went into more detail. But here I am, 19 months later with the finished product which has received a diligent copyedit from Chaosdruid and the input of countless other editors. This is my first featured article nomination, and I look forward to your constructive review.

— Arsonal (talk + contribs) — 04:47, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Addressed comments from Crisco 1492 moved to talk. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 04:27, 29 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Support, although I'd prefer stating that they do not allow polygamy if an RS is found. Dare I say this article provides a better overview on the subject then some written by sinologues. Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:24, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Source review - spotchecks not done. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:27, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * FN 98: missing date
 * Missing bibliographic info for Dawis 1963
 * No citations to Skinner 2001
 * See also should appear before Notes
 * Foreign-language sources should consistently be identified as such
 * Compare formatting on FNs 63 and 103
 * "Ananta, Aris; Arifin, Evi Nurvidya & Bakhtiar" - is Bakhtiar one-named or are you missing one?
 * Why include states for US locations and not provinces for Canadian?
 * Be consistent in whether you include publisher locations
 * Retrieval dates are not required for convenience links to print-based sources like Google Books
 * Use a consistent formatting for multiple authors/editors. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:27, 19 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you for spotting all of these. I can't believe I never spotted them. When you've looked at them for so long like I have, you tend to miss things.  I've fixed  with the exception of these:
 * FN63 comes from Tempo's web only content. FN103 was in the print issue of Tempo but also has a web archive. You can see this by looking at the URL subdomain, where one starts with "www" and the other "majalah".
 * Bakhtiar is indeed only one name. This is common among Indonesians.
 * I can't seem to spot the inconsistency in multiple author formatting. Could you point it out for me?
 * Do let me know if you find other issues. — Arsonal (talk + contribs) — 03:50, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Never mind the third point. I found it. 06:12, 19 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Media Review + Oppose - Images are a mess here.
 * The use of images in this article is really poor. Images are supposed to augment the articles they are in by appearing in small numbers, one maybe two per section, nested with associated prose. Now I've done media reviews for warships and warplanes, which often cram in way more images than they should, but this is just absurd. It looks very much like you had a pile of pictures sitting around and said 'where can I stuff these?'. As a result you have far more images than the article can really hold (it looks very cluttered), and many of the images just don't tie into the prose they're near very well. My advice is that you go though and remove about half of the images. Don't just cut randomly, look though the article and keep the ones that best fit, add the most, ect. and cut the ones that don't. File:COLLECTIE TROPENMUSEUM Kali langs de achterzijde van huizen in de Chinese wijk van Semarang TMnr 60051223.jpg fits well where it is, File:COLLECTIE TROPENMUSEUM Chinese vrouw met kind in draagdoek TMnr 20017932.jpg adds very little. Keep the first, cut the second, that kind of thing.
 * I'm not sure if you can justify the use of the non-free image File:Great Tycoon, by Oscar Motuloh.jpg, although after you preform the cuts (above), it'll be easier to judge.
 * A large number of the files used do not have English descriptions on their file description pages. Please add them, (using the template). Note that you should not remove the Dutch descriptions when you do this.    S ven M anguard   Wha?  21:23, 19 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I will hold on the file metadata until we've finalized the images. Contrary to your impression, my initial image usage was not arbitrary. The images were carefully selected from the hundreds available in order to fill in gaps of coverage in the article. I am well aware that this article does not cover certain parts very well because they are difficult to convey in words and can only be observed through experience, which many Indonesians will find when they read this article. However, I see your point as well. My changes are available in . I will refrain from cluttering the nomination with my specific reasons for each image. We can also further discuss images in the article talk page if you wish. — Arsonal (talk + contribs) — 22:35, 19 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Oppose on images:
 * File:IndonesiaRaya-SinPo1928.jpg: (minor) Is this scanned by you or was it obtained from a website?
 * Scanned by request from the Cornell University Library Annex. I still have the original PDF of that specific magazine issue if needed. — Arsonal (talk + contribs) — 21:50, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * It would be best in this case to put down the link to where the article exists on the Archive (or to state the location and the catalogue number or some other ID). Readers should know where the scan came from per WP:IUP.  Jappalang (talk) 22:49, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * File:TMII Kong Miao Confucian Temple.jpg, File:Cheng Hoo1.jpg: Note that Indonesia grants copyrights to architecture and does not have freedom of panorama (ref: commons:Commons:Freedom of panorama). Who is the architect/sculptor?  Did he die earlier than 1945?
 * File:COLLECTIE TROPENMUSEUM Grote reclameaffiche voor het Ierse bier Burkes Guiness Stout TMnr 4884-36.jpg, File:COLLECTIE TROPENMUSEUM Reclame voor de film The magnificent chivalry TMnr 20018014.jpg: The copyrights of the subjects (underlying copyright) do not belong to Tropenmuseum. The permission of the subjects' copyright holders are required to make these images truly "free".  Ref: commons:Commons:Derivative works).  The problem with image donations from organizations is that they were mostly uploaded without considerations for freedom of panorama or underlying copyrights (museums are not experts on such issues and might view their photographs as totally their own creations).
 * File:Mega-Hasyim-CH.jpg: Similarly, what is the copyright status of the photographs used in the poster that is the subject here?
 * File:Chinese Indonesian origin distribution.png: From what source or data was File:Peta distribusi asal leluhur.jpg (geographical depiction and the distribution data) created from?
 * File:Great Tycoon, by Oscar Motuloh.jpg: This photograph does not really add to the content described (presumably native resentment towards the Chinese): "Property and businesses owned by Chinese Indonesians were targeted by mobs and over 100 women were sexually assaulted. In the absence of security forces, large groups of men, women, and children looted and burned the numerous shopping malls in major cities." It does seem to satisfy NFCC #8 to me; furthermore, Oscar Motuloh is a commercial photographer and use of his work could be construed as a violation of NFCC #2.  Is there no amateur photographs published in the papers of the riots (specifically targeting Chinese businesses and show the vehemance exhibited) that can be used?  Jappalang (talk) 07:21, 24 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Is Article 23 of the 2002 copyright law not a freedom of panorama, assuming Wikipedia is a public exhibition?
 * "Unless agreed otherwise between the Copyright Holder and the Owner of a creative work in the form of a photograph, painting, drawing, architecture, sculpture and/or other artworks, the owner shall be entitled to without the consent of the Copyright Holder to display the work in a public exhibition or to reproduce it in a catalogue, without detracting from the provisions of Article 19 and Article 20 if said work of art is in the form of a portrait."
 * The copyright holder would be the work's original creator. The owner is the person reproducing the work. — Arsonal (talk + contribs) — 21:50, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I would say no. "Publication" is only legal if done by the copyright holder (or authorized parties).  Furthermore, the quoted law grants the "owner" permission to display the work only; it does not allow other parties to reuse the work in any other way (further derivatives and modifications).  Jappalang (talk) 22:44, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Regarding the beer poster: Seeing as it was published prior to 1950, it would be public domain in Indonesia. Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:39, 25 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The basic demand of images uploaded to Wikipedia and Commons is that they be public domain in the US (PD in the country of origin is another requirement on Commons). Ref: Image use policy and commons:Commons:Licensing. The beer poster would have to be published before 1946 to be undoubtedly considered in the US public domain, due to the restoration of copyrights accorded by the URAA.  The poster does not qualify if it was published in 1946–1950, which is part of "pre-1950".  Jappalang (talk) 02:48, 25 August 2011 (UTC)

Have the image concerns been addressed? Ucucha (talk) 21:04, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I think to be safe the questioned ones should be removed. I am not sure how Arsonal feels about the issue. It seems they are the only thing holding this nomination back. Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:38, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.