Archive1
Archive2

Just when the fun starts :) SatuSuro 05:51, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ngurah Rai - there are actually more incidents than there are destinations if one includes the number of times planes either get abandoned or simply sit on that tarmac for preiods of time with inadequate explanation as to why :) SatuSuro 08:47, 17 January 2010 (UTC) Actually (hahah very comomnly used by non native speakers yes? ) the Indonesian airport articles have mostly turned into a heap of shit - a classic case of messes that clearly no one has taken the little anak by the hand walked them out into the open and given a big cleanup to clear the dust from the lungs :) SatuSuro 09:40, 17 January 2010 (UTC) BTW you need to archive mate - messages from blocked users etc need dark hole to go to :) SatuSuro 09:42, 17 January 2010 (UTC) WOW - whoosh! happy new year too! SatuSuro 09:51, 17 January 2010 (UTC) I have just gouged SCTV for the umpteenth time - this time all to the talk page - unredeemed unalphabetic rubbish SatuSuro 09:57, 17 January 2010 (UTC) Yeah its the gotta make an unalpha list syndrome :( SatuSuro 12:26, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Davidelit. I am just letting you know that I contested the speedy deletion of Pelangi Kasih School Jakarta, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: A7 does not apply to schools. Thank you. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 17:35, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wow - almost as brilliant as WP:PROF - I cannot wait for a bunch of surabayan primary school kids putting up their schools as notable and important, and all the school policy strict eds come out and save them from deletion and we get clogged with non notable schools because of their insistence that they are notable - talk about shooting in the foot with a bazooka - whaddya think of open sauce javanism - doesnt it feel like (I know you love the stuff) dukuns and thoyuls and mystical bajajs in the ocean of bliss and so on.... SatuSuro 15:37, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Actually we do have a kid from surabaya who did put himself up as the 10th president of indonesia on mainspace a few days ago [1] - at this rate we should have a kid from jakarta putting up himself as ruler of the universe within the month :( SatuSuro 07:20, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You might want to check this out: Record-Keeper of the exiled and forgotten (including an e-mail link) and related audio slide show from The Jakarta Post. Arsonal (talk) 07:13, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns which you can see at Talk:Indonesian National Revolution/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:39, 19 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am a Medan citizen and I want to ask you where did you take this photo (File:MedanSkyline.jpg) ? I never seen this place before in Medan... Thx.  Kenrick  Talk 09:28, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh... terima kasih (Tambahan : Hotel itu kalau tidak salah bernama "City International" "A member of City Inn Group")  Kenrick  Talk 04:35, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tidak... Saya tinggal didekat Thamrin Plaza (tepatnya di kelurahan ini) dan waktu saya mau ke toko pangkas rambut, selalu lewat hotel itu...  Kenrick  Talk 04:54, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am not supporting either view at List of Indonesians - it is a sad reflection of how little we have left at the Indonesian project if we cannot keep a list on watch - my comment from 2 years ago is my reason for sitting on the fence - if it was on watch and only linked to notable persons articles I have not a problem with it existing. Sorry If i disappoint your on this! SatuSuro 02:13, 29 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have gone and over tagged it - machine indeed - indonesian terms throughout the article - hmmm - what do they really think wp en is for? dumping junk? SatuSuro 04:38, 30 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is an article from the original tangerang earlier. if you want to change. image only —Preceding comment added by Alfian Ainun (talk • contribs) 12:36, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there Davidelit, thank you for your contributions. I am a bot, alerting you that non-free files are not allowed in user or talk space. I removed some files I found on User:Davidelit. In the future, please refrain from adding fair-use files to your user-space drafts or your talk page.

• See a log of files removed today here.

• Shut off the bot here.

• Report errors here.

Thank you, -- DASHBot (talk) 05:09, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In view of the current state of your edits, is it now time to implement my suggestion of earlier this year?--Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 22:05, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there; I have had my username changed slightly, to remove the appearance of an e-mail (which it started out as). As you know, it would redirect, but if you want to change your address book my slightly changed name is --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 17:19, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

His attempted kidnapping story is interesting, but I think it might now be too long for that article. I'm looking at creating a separate article and summarising the coverage in the subject's main page. What do you think? cheers --Merbabu (talk) 14:15, 22 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand. I mean, I can understand a possible dispute over whether Abdurrahman Wahid was a Zionist, but what did you mean by possible POV category? A Zionist is just someone who supports and believes in Israel's right to exist with a Jewish presence. Wahid's article and the article Muslim Zionism indicated that Wahid was this. Is this a misunderstanding? There were already existing categories for Category:Christian Zionists, Category:Arab Zionists, etc. If there are a significant number of well-known Muslim Zionists, it seems like a reasonable tidy category. - Gilgamesh (talk) 20:18, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You know, if it's all the same to you, I'm going to add a brief definition to the category, and re-add Wahid to it. He was Muslim who was supportive of Israel, and that's a very notable interest in an encyclopedia. - Gilgamesh (talk) 20:25, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Two reverts is the magic number. I've decided that if there is consensus that he cannot be verified to be so, then I consider the matter closed. - Gilgamesh (talk) 07:29, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He's clueless how to build on encyclopedia. That's why he thinks Koor, Indonesia is non notable and is too lazy to expand it himself.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:10, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ha ha, that's hilarious - is Blofeld short for "people skills"? --Merbabu (talk)

I usually have excellent people skills actually. I'm a Taurus, a bull in astrology who if you stay clear of I won't harm and will be calm and reserved, but as soon as you cross my path then the bull's insinct is to flare up. If you behave foolishly in trying to delete an article I started then I'll treat you as a fool. Kindly ask me to expand an article in good faith and I'll treat you amicably and the same. I would hope that both David and you Merbabu are capable individuals who are keen to improve quality on Indonesian topics. We just got off on the wrong foot with AFD threats tha's all. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:53, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

memilih is in the brain a day later - ta for the project page comment - aging brain and all that SatuSuro 22:54, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

hangon - the regency absurdity needs very careful thinking - the megabrains of some over 100,000 edit persons created them - and the subsequent fallout could be problematic - I have to get off in a few moments - will try a very long gmail about this issue in the next day or so SatuSuro 05:07, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another editor has questioned some of you tagging, and I think they are correct. Wikipedia:Notability (geography) , though an essay, expresses the current consensus. Rivers are unquestionably notable. Populated islands or islands of more than very trivial size, certainly (a single house has been considered sufficient to show that it is populated). Villages, certainly. Formal administrative regions, at the province or subprovince level, certainly.; they would be analogous to states and counties in the US. Subdistricts, too, I think they correspond to the US townships, and I think they have all been held notable. They may also correspond to the Philippine Barangay; I recall there were earlier discussions about some of them, but I think they are currently all held notable also. The only relevant thing that is often not unnotable is unofficial non-adminsitrative divisions, "neighborhoods". I don't think any of these are among the ones you have been tagging. In practice, this is as firm a practice as any actual formal guideline, If you wish to test this, you certainly have the right to send a few to AfD, but I think you will find they are speedy keeps. DGG ( talk ) 18:46, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As above; I've reverted some of these and would ask that you self-revert on at least most of what I'm seeing in your recent contribs. Jack Merridew 07:38, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK so we didnt get to have that off wiki conversation before the burung burung dari luar turun - hope to catch up for a longer talk later SatuSuro 07:44, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is just to let you know that I have granted you the "autopatrolled" permission. This won't affect your editing, it just automatically marks any page you create as patrolled, benefiting new page patrollers. Please remember:

• This permission does not give you any special status or authority
• Submission of inappropriate material may lead to its removal
• You may wish to display the {{Autopatrolled}} top icon and/or the {{User wikipedia/autopatrolled}} userbox on your user page
• If, for any reason, you decide you do not want the permission, let me know and I can remove it

If you have any questions about the permission, don't hesitate to ask. Otherwise, happy editing! Acalamari 21:38, 24 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:PPPLogo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 03:40, 29 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be significant political spin / propaganda in the opening of the Renville Agreement with the phase "the Netherlands who were seeking to re-establish their colony in South East Asia". As far as I understood it, the 1946-49 conflict between Sukarno and the Netherland's was over the type of republic; despite the Dutch Church which wanted to protect it's pre-war business interests, van Mook promoted the idea of free elections and voluntary membership in a federation which was in conflict with Japan's idea in 1944 and Sukarno since at least that time to head a militant Republic administrated from Jakarta. The centralised Republic was supported by the Ford Foundation and other corporations wanting to obtain new mining licenses for the remote islands (justified by the 'Marshall Plan') which Sukarno would then administrate. Of course once they discovered in the 1950s that Sukarno was their equal, the Ford Foundation around '57 come up with the idea of replacing him with one of his Generals but that's another story. Does the Renville Agreement article need to include any quip alleging what the Dutch overall motivation was?Daeron (talk) 05:04, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:PDIPLogo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 08:35, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:PartaiDemokratLogo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Courcelles 08:35, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol – Survey Invitation Hello Davidelit! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you. If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only. If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it. Please click HERE to take part. Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback. You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey

etc etc - yup m.r. does like his version of transcribing jowo words with the 'a's rather than the 'o's - thems the breaks! SatuSuro 10:53, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Hamengkubuwana_III - have a look see here SatuSuro 12:36, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

semangat, nafas, call it what you like - there is a special quality there SatuSuro 13:16, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The article 'Freedom Party (Indonesia)' has a dead link that could not be repaired automatically. Can you help fix it?

Dead: http://www.infopartai.com/mod.php?mod=publisher&op=viewarticle&cid=53&artid=91

• You added this in August 2008.
• The bot tested this link on 13 April, 15 April, 17 April and today, but it never worked.
• The bot checked The Wayback Machine and WebCite but couldn't find a suitable replacement.

This link is marked with {{Dead link}} in the article. Please take a look at that article and fix what you can. Thank you!

PS- you can opt-out of these notifications by adding {{Bots |deny=BlevintronBot}} to your user page or user talk page. BlevintronBot (talk) 21:58, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

good to see you still dip in! trust all is well SatuSuro 14:26, 26 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to see you're still doing good work with Indonesia-related stuff. I expanded First Hatta Cabinet, which you started; hope you like it (btw, if you haven't seen it yet check out the article on Sudirman) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:31, 30 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Davidelit,

I am sincerely grateful for your help with the Garuda Indonesia Article. I too am trying to keep the article up-to-date and correct as I've great respect for the Airline and the Aviation world.

I'm writing this to request for your help in conducting a rollback of the said article as some of the recent edits have been weird and seemed out of place. If you have the time to spare, please review the recent edits made towards the said article and if possible, revert them to the last revision you deem appropriate.

Thank You.

Regards, Vandreadstriker (talk) 15:24, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted your reversion of an IP user's edit to Lion Air, which you said was unsourced. I reverted your reversion because the edit you reverted was made in good faith. It was a correction of a spelling error ("retired" not "retied"). Perhaps you reverted the wrong edit? —Compdude¹²³ 19:21, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted your reversion of an editor's edit to New York Agreement, which you did not say was a POV edit but did say was made by a person who has "history of bias in editing". I reverted your reversion because the edit you reverted was made in good faith, and the description of your revert was inflammatory, a personal attack, and likely to incite a edit war. — Daeron (talk) 01:33, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, why did you reverted the removal of Dutch East Indies in the Krakatoa article? We don't say Java is an island in the Dutch East Indies (modern Indonesia right?. I see no difference with Krakatoa. Garion96 (talk) 19:25, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]