Talk:Indonesia omnibus law protests: Difference between revisions

This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Crime and Criminal Biography C‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Disaster management C‑class Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Disaster management, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Disaster management on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Disaster managementWikipedia:WikiProject Disaster managementTemplate:WikiProject Disaster managementDisaster management C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Firefighting C‑class This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firefighting, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to firefighting on Wikipedia! If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.FirefightingWikipedia:WikiProject FirefightingTemplate:WikiProject FirefightingFirefighting C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Indonesia C‑class Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Indonesia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Indonesia and Indonesia-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IndonesiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndonesiaTemplate:WikiProject IndonesiaIndonesia C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Law C‑class Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Law Enforcement C‑class This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Organized Labour C‑class Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organized Labour, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Organized Labour on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Organized LabourWikipedia:WikiProject Organized LabourTemplate:WikiProject Organized Labourorganized labour C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Politics C‑class Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics C This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

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]

• I created a separate article Omnibus Law on Job Creation, I'd like to ask for help to move paragraphs if necessary between the articles Germartin1 (talk) 21:00, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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]

Gerald Waldo Luis I urge you to actually read the sources:

Source #23: An article discussing the controversy of artists and influencers explicitly promoting the bill. No mention of the protests.

Source #25: An article about primarily Ardhito Pramono, plus a mention of a number of other artists. No mention of the protests.

Source #26: An article discussing Jokowi's relationship with influencers, touching on COVID-19 instead of the law. One can infer the relation, but that's WP:OR.

I ask you to remove the section with the exception of the TikTok. If the sources does not even mention the protests in passing, why would they be in the article about protests instead of the bill? Juxlos (talk) 11:07, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Juxlos, again, I can't remove it considering I need a wider opinion from other editors as I am involved in the edit war. Some sources may not mention it, but it's sure enough that these influencers use social media to take part in the protests. About the last source you put, that definitely is nonsense, so I'll go remove it, as it is blatant misinfo. But for the others, I need others' inputs and a consensus. GeraldWL 11:19, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Juxlos that source 23 and 25 should not be used here as they are not mentioning the protests, but they should be used at the law article. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 11:27, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the opinion. I looked for sources, all of them says that the influencers are paid. I think we can alter the section if this is the case, with the section changed to "Paid influencers" or something. GeraldWL 11:46, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nyanardsan: See above. The influencers weren't talking about the protests and their mention is more appropriate in the article about the law itself. Juxlos (talk) 13:05, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The issue of social media aside, is it really WP:DUE to include a couple anarchists being arrested as its own section? It's a single sentence that doesn't seem to have much potential to be bigger and it's basically a drop in the ocean. Juxlos (talk) 11:12, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have put it at the Java subsection, feels like that's the best I can do while still telling the information. GeraldWL 11:26, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The original author of this article, @Nyanardsan: wrote 'labour', 'industrialization', and 'program', so, the article was originally written in Canadian English. I will add 'Use Canadian English' template for consistency of spelling per MOS:ENGVAR and MOS:RETAIN. Ivan Humphrey (talk) 12:05, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that! GeraldWL 13:37, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I didnt mean to do that, im Indonesian and my English is quite bad. I dont know it was Canadian English. Sorry. Nyanardsan (talk) 07:36, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Nyanardsan: Relax pal, there is no need to apologize. My English is also not so good. Cheers! Ivan Humphrey (talk) 14:28, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think the protests section need to be written in chronological order instead of separating it in locations. Enjoyer of World^💬 13:04, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also, make a distinction between protests before and after the passing of the bill. Enjoyer of World^💬 13:08, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Enjoyer of World, I think the island-divided outline is already good. The exact chronology of the protests are also unknown yet. All we know is that it started in Feb 2020. GeraldWL 13:38, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are pro-government influencers & artists notable enough to be included? As they clash with activists on the internet. This news article convinces me that they are notable enough to be included and even i think the article still lacks information about them.Nyanardsan (talk) 13:05, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have added infos on that link to the section. GeraldWL 04:04, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Indonesia omnibus bill protests → Indonesia omnibus law protests – After the bill officially becomes law on 5 October, the English language name of the law become "Omnibus law on Job Creation" no longer as "Omnibus bill". Therefore, the name of this article shall be renamed as "Indonesia omnibus law protests" in order to reflect the bill that passed into law by parliament. In fact, many reliable source, whether English or non-english language source notably Indonesian language sources now refer to protests as "Omnibus law protest" (Unjuk rasa UU sapu jagat in Indonesian), not longer as "Omnibus bill protest" (Unjuk rasa RUU Sapu jagat in Indonesian). Indonesian language wikipedia now changes the title in order to reflect that the bill already passed by parliament as a law. 36.68.193.87 (talk) 20:58, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. But note that undang-undang sapu jagat is not used colloquially. So don't use that as an example. Enjoyer of World^💬 21:56, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Nyanardsan (talk) 00:38, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. What about something with "protests and riots against omnibus law"? Enjoyer of World^💬 03:18, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. It also means the whole article should be changed extensively, as nearly all of the article called it a bill. GeraldWL 03:34, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done copyediting. GeraldWL 04:04, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per WP:COMMONNAME. Ivan Humphrey (talk) 14:30, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support for short: this isn't a bill anymore. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael ^(marhata) 15:39, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support per above. An unimportant person (talk) 05:29, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Support Blue Sonic (talk) 10:10, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]