Select Page

Talk:Indonesia omnibus law protests: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added
Tag: 2017 wikitext editor
Jim Michael (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{WikiProject banner shell |1=
{{WikiProject banner shell |1=
{{WP Crime|class=C}}
{{WikiProject Indonesia |class=C |importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Indonesia |class=C |importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Politics |class=C |importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Law |class=C |importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Law |class=C |importance=Low}}
{{WPLE|class=C}}
{{WikiProject Politics |class=C |importance=Low}}
}}
}}



Revision as of 11:06, 8 October 2020

Scope

Shouldn't the article just be about the bill itself? And then there would be sections on the bill and the protest? There surely is enough coverage on the bill and the context is needed to fully understand the protests. (not watching, please {{ping}}) czar 03:06, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Czar: Maybe both should have separated articles? Since the protests themselves already widespread, huge, & have enough coverage to became notable Nyanardsan (talk) 07:30, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Separating the bill and the protests

Gerald Waldo Luis Please refrain from adding stuff not related to the protests. If it's to do with the bill but not the protests, there's Omnibus Law on Job Creation. Juxlos (talk) 10:50, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Juxlos, These social media stuffs are responses to the protest, basically virtual protests. Sure it is relevant to the bill, but they are part of the protests, so it suits here. Plus, don't copy-paste to other articles due to copyright attribution. GeraldWL 10:52, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Gerald Waldo Luis CC-BY-SA 3.0. And aside from the TikTok mention, none of the section referred to the protests. It's all government influencers. Juxlos (talk) 10:54, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Juxlos, yes, "BY," which means the revision history must have attribution of the users who have contributed to the article, the time, the edit preview, all of it. CC doesn't mean public domain. And "It's all government influencers"? What? Not all of the "influencers" are from the govt, several are also content creators etc. Please discuss before a mass removal of the section. GeraldWL 10:57, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Gerald Waldo Luis Check the section again. It was all about government influencers paid to influence the public to support the bill during the deliberation process. No mention of the protests being related to the influencers directly - except for the TikTok, which had been readded. Juxlos (talk) 10:59, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Juxlos, again, it's best to discuss it here per WP:3RR, as I think we have been in an edit war here. That way we can get wider opinions on this. I definitely support the section to stay. Other editor inputs are welcomed. GeraldWL 11:02, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]