Talk:Tourism in Indonesia
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Tourism in Indonesia was a good article candidate, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. Once the objections listed below are addressed, the article can be renominated. You may also seek a review of the decision if you feel there was a mistake.
Date of review: 17 September 2006 |
 |
Tourism in Indonesia has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article. |
 |
Tourism in Indonesia is part of WikiProject Indonesia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Indonesia and Indonesia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page. Please do not substitute this template.
|
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. |
| High | This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. |
 |
This article was the Indonesia Collaboration (August 21, 2006). For details on the improvements made to the article, see the Indonesia Collaboration/History. |
 |
A request has been made for this article to be peer reviewed by the Indonesia WikiProject. |
|
|
|
|
|
Tourism in Indonesia was the Indonesian collaboration of the week for the week starting on August 21, 2006.
For details on improvements made to the article, see history of past collaborations. |
|
|
|
 |
This article is a current selected article nominee on Indonesia portal. A selected article should exemplify Wikipedia's very best work related to Indonesia, and is therefore expected to meet selected article criteria. Please feel free to leave comments. |
|
|
|
 |
To-do list for Tourism in Indonesia: | edit · history · watch · refresh |
|---|---|---|
|
||
Tourism is a key part of the Indonesian economy, and something of great interest to foreigners. Unfortunely this contains no content :-( . For inspiration see articles for other countries like Tourism in Singapore. The category Category:Tourism_in_Indonesia contains some additional information and articles available for reference. --MichaelJLowe 11:14, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Headings
I'm not sure if the article is good if it has too many levels. Would it be better if the type of tourisms (nature, cultural, metropolitan(?)) to be placed at the first level? Some texts in under the "Main Attraction" heading can be placed on top, as the introduction. — Indon 13:25, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
- I've changed the heading. Please revert if you don't like it. And also I removed a paragraph about housing in Bali, as I think it's a bit out of scope of the tourism. Sorry... ;-) — Indon 13:38, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Notes, References and External Links
I'm confused about the difference between notes, references and external links, though I've read WP:CITE. This article is full of outside links. I'm afraid if it is overcrowded with external links, it will confuse readers. I think we need to regularize these links. — Indon 09:59, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
- Well, basically, based on my understanding, notes are just for inline citations, like the small numbers thing. While references are for the "big" sources, where we use almost all of the information there. External links don't have to be the sources for information. About the "too many", the "judge" at WP:FA will ask for more I reckon, hehehehe. Yeah, I think its not that much. Cheers -- Imoeng 10:04, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Statistics - Visitors by Island?
Do we have any statistics on the percentage of foreign visitors to each Island? I think that would be a useful addition to the Statistics section. I've not been able to find anything yet. --Bwmodular 09:18, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Historical Context
Could you please insert citation sources in the historical context section? History of tourism in Indonesia can enrich the article, but having all negative views without reliable sources does not endorse the WP:NPOV and WP:V principles. — Indon 11:33, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
- I think citations could solve this issue. That is all about it. Cheers -- Imoeng 10:42, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
(from Indon's talk page - inserted without SatuSuro's consent but left here as an example of what should have been resolved on the personal talk pages rather than placing in an article talk page)
-
- It seems there are so many misunderstandings, I cant count the number of them since I started trying to communicate with you two.
If you thought I was offline - I did not say that. I simply said I was not prepared to work on the tourism art in the next week or so, I have a large number of refs/citations on this issues that I simply cannot access at the moment - I did post grad research on the subject. :) I really think to pull a section of an article simply because I dont come up with them overnight is a bit too excitable for my style. I have to work on articles that people do not cleanup or fixup in 3 months, and you guys want one night or pull it? Come on be a bit more patient guys!
Maybe best if you want to do Indonesian articles you do them - and maybe If I contribute, you could communicate -directly- with me, so we can clear up any misunderstandings, as it has gone beyond the joke :) Be very careful wikipedia is for everyone - you must be aware that no one article is any ones possession ! Anyone can come in and edit and place any number of demands on what you think is good. Be careful, try not to take your edits and work too personally, or you will be dissapointed with wikipedia. Slow down, hati hati, and take it easy guys :) SatuSuro 10:35, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- That is alright, I understand that citing is somewhat difficult. To be honest, to be very honest, I don't like the way you say the things I've italiced. I know Wikipedia is for everyone, where anyone can edit. In this case, you can edit, and I can edit, Indon can edit, and so everyone. This is really beautiful, as we can work together. One of the example of working together is, to take and think about other's suggestions and recommendations rather than answering it and showing off the time someone has elapsed on Wikipedia.
- About you don't have enough time to put references, I reckon it is what sandbox is for, where you can edit the entry and put all reliable sources, like exactly Indon did for Bandung, which also you've related with this article.
- Above all, I, or we just asked you to put sources, thats it. Nothing more. If you can't do it soon, just tell us, and you don't have to put exclamation [parenthis or itlaics is what you mean]marks everywhere. Cheers -- Imoeng 11:02, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
-
It is exclamation (!), and you've edited my entry without my consent. I thought you didn't like your message to be put here. So what do you want now? Show everyone my mistake? Imoeng 11:46, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
- Okay guys, be calm. Relax. This is a collaboration work, that should be done together.
- First, putting somebody else's talk into article's talk is not probihited. The user's talk is in public place, and what Imoeng wanted to do is to clarify for other contributors of this article to understand what is going on between Imoeng, me and SatuSuro.
- Second, the issue is actually simple. When you want to add editing, reliable source is important, especially when the article is being peer-reviewed. This article is being peer-reviewed. I understand that SatuSuro has difficulty to add citation source. Actually if you have offline source, you still can include it. Please take a look at this example: how to make a citation. So, what Imoeng wants is just to add reliable source. Note that I changed the tag to say that if somebody knows sources of the historical context section, then please add it.
- Last, please do not edit somebody else's talk. It will be biased. I have to look at the history of this talk page to understand who edited who. Otherwise that can mislead somebody who read this talk.
- Again, please calm down. It's better to work together, rather than against each other. So, please add citation/source if you know, because the historical context still looks like an opinion without sources. — Indon 12:12, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Unnecesarry repetition?
See this article http://wikitravel.org/en/Indonesia - is that what you are trying to do here? if it is you dont need a history of tourism section in the first place - you're simply mimicing what is on another wiki :) SatuSuro 13:05, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
- Look, the reason of selecting this article as a collaboration of the week, is that somebody has had asked this article to be expanded. He also pointing to an example of Tourism in Singapore as a good one. The different between Wikitravel with this article, is that wikitravel — supposely — focuses more on practical issues for travellers. Wikipedia is more encyclopedia. Now, there is nobody who is suggesting that historical section is not needed. We need it, of course. Now, the issue here is only to give also sources, because in the historical context section, there are things unclear, whether it is only an opinion or not. For me, I believe that, but I can't say it for anybody else.
- Now, let us expand the historical section and also add reliable sources. Not deleting it, all right? — Indon 13:14, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Refs for Hist section
As I have tried to explain I have none of my tourism books to hand, they are locked up in a storage unit, so from help from database and library catalogues - could someone else insert these please as I am trawling the net and catalogues for more :) thank you!
[edit] Assertion that NEI had visitors in 30's
-
- http://www.charliechaplin.com/article.php3?id_article=46 for charlie chaplins visit in 1932 SatuSuro 10:12, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
- http://www.baliforyou.com/bali/bali_guide/bali_conquest.htm for Barbara Hutton and another ref for charlie chaplins visit SatuSuro 10:14, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Assertion that NEI had government control
Author: Indonesia. Vereeniging Toeristenverkeer. Come to Java : 1926-27 / Official Tourist Bureau. 3rd ed. Weltevreden : Official Tourist Bureau, [1926?] Description: 329 p. : ill., maps. ; 16 cm.
[edit] Statistics
Domestic and International travel needs to have separate sub-headings - clogged together there is insufficient separation.
Domestic Tourism (?) or travel during Labuhan is possibly the largest number of people travelling at the same time anywhere on planet earth (once again my ref for that was from Kompas or Kedaulatan Rakyat from 1995 and is still in storage).
Domestic Travel or tourism is different from International in a number of significant ways. International tourists pay money to enter, therefore the revenue to government can be significant compared to orang ziarah or local people returning to home and family at significant times of the year. Yes? SatuSuro 10:34, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Great collaboration
What a really great collaboration, this is a very good start, guys! Cheers -- Imoeng 04:16, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
- Agree. — Indon (reply) — 05:08, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
- Amazing what can be done in a week! --Bwmodular 08:16, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Citation
Again, about citation. Per WP:CITE, there are 3 different citation styles: embedded citation, Harvard referencing, and cite.php footnote. There is no requirement to which style an article should use, but if one citation style has been used, it must be used consistently. Mixing citation style is not allowed.
Now, looking to this article, it seems that footnote citation style is used, but it does not follow the guideline properly. I'm going to fix citation style to be consistent with the WP:FN, WP:CITE and generally WP:MOS. Also I'm going to see some unreliable sources per WP:RS and I'm going to use WP:CITET templates for consistent reference format. — Indon (reply) — 09:21, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Failed "good article" nomination
This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of September 17, 2006, compares against the six good article criteria:
- 1. Well written?: This is the major issue for the failure. The article needs a through copy-edit for proper English grammar, usage, and style. Organization of the sections for logical sequence of ideas would also help.
- 2. Factually accurate?: As far as I can tell the facts are accurate, but the presence of several generic statements is worrisome.
- 3. Broad in coverage?: All the major bases appear to be covered; though the historical section could be expanded, and the "Metropolitan tourism" section could certainly be elaborated upon.
- 4. Neutral point of view?: In the lead, one finds this: "...Indonesia offers both natural beauty and cultural diversity for both domestic and international tourists." I find this statement both vague and POV, which is to say, promotional. A rather promotional tone pervades most of the article.
- 5. Article stability? There are recent edits, but they seem to be purely constructive work on references.
- 6. Images?: They are well-chosen, eye-catching, and really enhance the article. The only license/tag issue I see concerns Prambanam.JPG, which has a note on its tag saying another more precise tag should be used instead.
When these issues are addressed, the article can be resubmitted for consideration. Thanks for your work so far. --Fsotrain09 19:47, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
