Talk:Indo people

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Indo people article.
Article policies

Contents

[edit] Restructuring_2008

Due to the many valuable 2007 contributions made by our fellow wikipedians on several of the Indo communities around the world (merci!), I restructured the article to clearly differentiate between the historical and contemporary additions. btw. The only major Indo community still missing is the one in australia (&new zealand). Regards JG It's just HIS story... (talk) 21:25, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Fascinating reading material. thank you! Otto

[edit] Indo's in Sumatra

From my readings,it seems that most Indos or all Indos are Dutch+JAVANESE descent. Are there any Indos in Sumatra? Do anyone know anything about Indos there? If so,where exactly are most Indos situated in Sumatra during the Dutch East Indies period? Template:J87

[edit] Indo subculture

Instead of bashing the Japanese, the editor might want to provide more information on the subculture of "Indo's". we have our own flag now, we have our own customs and gave the netherlands the pasar malam and some culture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Christian Lebis (talk • contribs)

Can someone confirm that Erwin Koeman is indo? I never heard this before, and why isn't Ronald Koeman mentioned? (unsigned?)

[edit] Disambig

There are two 'other meanings at the top of the page - I think that deserves a disambig SatuSuro 09:35, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] removal bulk of article

Weird to see that someone deleted a major contribution and replaced it with this original stub?? As per comments by others this stub doesnt really add any informative data. While the article I read last had many topics of interest confirmed by many other WIKI articles. Doesnt seem constructive to me to remove it in total. How can people like myself study and enhance the article if its removed and repaced with the stub? Looks to me that disturbs the whole point of Wikipedia. Suggest the responsible editor or contributor returns the page to its previous state.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.94.191.131 (talk • contribs)

The large addition i removed was only made a few days before i removed it - viewing the history tab will confirm this. By User:JAGO. As per my edit summary, it's because it is a major addition without 1 single reference. Again, as per my edit summary, please see WP:RS. Surely if someone can write that much they can provide citations? Also, such large one-off additions are often copy'n'paste copyright violations. None of the text should be replaced before such citations are provided - this is fundamental to wikipedia. I will notify the User:Jago. Merbabu 12:41, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Agree with the unsigned comment. The 7 feb addition by user JAGO that was removed by user Merbabu was of significant higher value then the stub status this article is returned to. I dont see the point of this kind of 'editing'. Suggest someone returns the favour. Adrian 213.160.193.50 17:00, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

The 'point' of the removal is straightforward. It is based on at least two of wikipedia's 5 non-negotiable princples - not just some optional guideline. Please read WP:VERIFY, WP:NOR and WP:RS. The onus is on the WRITER to provide references. Wikipedia is to based on published reliable sources. If they can't provide it, the material shouldn't be there. Why can't the editor put such citations (preferably in-line) now rather than it being unsourced and others have to chase them later. It's about wikipedia's quality. Wikipedia is intended as a serious encyclopedia, not just any other web-site where people can write what they please. Try reading Wikipedia is failing. Note that the problem is poor (no?) referencing. Merbabu 20:32, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Just dropped in but would like to make the statement that wikipedia is not a encyclopedia that you purchase off the traditional bookshelf subject to conventional rules. I concur with the opinion that the whole point of wikipedia is the opportunity by the whole on line wiki community of thousands or millions even, including myself, to verify any content deliverd to the forum. We should be strict in removing non sense. But a stub is per definition non sense and we have enough of them. This is something we must take for granted. Wikipedia is living documentation under constant revision. This continued revision will eventually guarantee its data quality. This does require however that we should leave usefull material on and make it subject to revision. I have browsed the articles version mentioned in previous comments and I actually see nothing wrong with leaving it on for enhancements by others. The first person commenting on its removal appears to be interested in several topics of the article. So its likely that this is one of the people that will start potential revision of specific subjects in the article. And so Wikipedia lives on another day fullfilling its promise... Good luck with this article I hope it looks better soon. Gerry 80.120.189.158 21:19, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Given that it seems those in favour of re-inserting have not actually addressed the policy of verification, i will paste here the summary. Remember, this is one of only five compulsory 'policies', not an optional 'guideline'...
This page in a nutshell:
  • Articles should contain only material that has been published by reliable sources.
  • Editors adding new material should cite a reliable source, or it may be challenged or removed by any editor.
  • The obligation to provide a reliable source lies with the editors wishing to include the material, not with those seeking to remove it.
Merbabu 09:22, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks to the wikipedians that have left their comments and motivated me to continue contribution. Still convinced of the fact that I had not stated any unconventional claims that were likely to be challenged I do acknowledge the requirement of citing sources and have therefore looked up my main reading material which you can now find in the bibliography. I have also added peer reviewed academic journals and articles that should assist editors and readers alike to research or verify this wikipedia articles content in its current form and state. Pls revert to the external links. I hope the interested readers have not been deterred and will return to this topic to assist in its enhancement. Merci and Kind rgds, JAGO It's just HIS story... 01:12, 26 February 2007 (UTC) Ps. Pls feel free to contact me on my user page in case of specific questions.

[edit] Diaspora

Firstly excellent article contribution by responsible editor. It is overall well referenced and should perhaps even move away from its stub status. (Not sure yet how thats done though in Wikipedia.) To my knowledge and information I can confirm most everything covered. However believe Ive read that that are actually 6 distinctive waves identified w/rgds to the Indo Diaspora. Will try to look that up and present to editor in chief ; ) if still active in Wikipedia. Kind regards, JOHN NATHANN 18:32, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Well it was 5 waves afterall. Ill find something better to contribute... Krgds, JOHN NATHANN 15:59, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] english vs dutch wiki

Hi, just dropped in from another wiki world. Wanted to let the editors of this article know they did a very nice job. This article is even better then the Dutch language one. Keep it up guys. Marcel 194.151.13.225 19:17, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] too many family names

Originally, most VOC employees came to the Indies without wives. The same went for the many Dutch and German soldiers who served in the Netherland East Indies Army. Family names include: Du Perron, Fransz, van Haastert, de Grave, Knuppel, Varkevisser, Moll, La Fontaine, Berk, de Groot, Vogelsang, Hanson, Davies, Middleton, de Vries, Cohen-Stuart,etc

Including some family names to illustrate the fact that all Indo-European families in its first definition have European last names is fine. Should not try to make it a complete list that is impossible and unnecessary. Think there are too many names. The long list of famous Dutch Indos already supports that. Also the comment on the East Indies Army does not belong there. But in the next section: The KNIL is part of that. Final comment: Also believe the categories arent giving this book its cover. Etnic group in Indonesia? But only historically then, nothing about Indos in contemporary Indonesia?? If they have disappeared then why not Etn. group in Holland or America...? Sorry if I sound bitchy... I actually think this article is both comprehensive and clear in its high level overview of a long history. Warm rgds, Ms.Finesse 02:11, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. Added the long awaited appropriate part for Indo citizens in Indonesia. Probably the part that was always intended to feature by the orignal topic starters. JOHN NATHANN 19:39, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A CLASS!

This article is A class except maybe for the missing Indos in Indonesia section. Good job everybody and good luck with it. Pat —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.201.18.68 (talk) 20:23, 10 May 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Registration of Indos in the Netherlands.

Just checked and Indos in the Netherlands are officially registered by the Dutch CBS as citizens of foreign descent (Dutch: Allochtonen) when at least one parent is born outside the Netherlands. Interestingly enough their Eurasian status puts them in the Western category of foreign citizens. Krgds, JOHN NATHANN 18:31, 7 June 2007 (UTC) Indeed. Btw. many thanks for your contributions. Excellent work. Regards, It's just HIS story... 20:51, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Thought above comments actually award mentioning in the article itself. Dutch official CBS registration differentiates between citizens of the netherlands that are born in the (geographical) netherlands(called 'Autochtonen') and those born outside (called 'Allochtonen'). Although in the Netherlands the latter term is often misinterpreted as meaning 'Foreigners', both terms actually refer to Dutch citizens. More specifically the registration term 'Allochtonen' does not only refer to Dutch citizens born abroad, but also their children. Even if only 1 of the parents is born abroad their children are put in the 'Allochtonen' registration box. So for registration purposes: if one parent is Indo (not born in the Netherlands)the child is Indo. (Interestingly enough this makes the entire royal house of the Netherlands, including the queen and the crown prince, 'Allochtoon'.) Hope my contribution added value to this already great article! Wiki rules, Atilla

[edit] Renamed 'Indo people'

The article was renamed 'Indo people' to conform to a (sort of) standard ('XXX people' for ethnic groups, 'XXX language' for languages). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jorge Stolfi (talk • contribs) 12:50, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] East Timor

I have removed the folllowing statement Even in East Timor the mestizos [sic] play leading political roles (both elected presidents are mestizo). East Timor was not part of the Dutch East Indies, and of the country's two presidents, only José Ramos Horta is mestiço, Xanana Gusmão is not (although his first wife was.) Quiensabe 19:40, 3 November 2007 (UTC)


Quick inet ref check shows that the vast majority of online articles (english, french, portuguese, indonesian language) confirms Gusmaos metizo background, as well as the wiki link you refer to: Xanana Gusmão. There is only 1 unreferenced english online article (i.e. blog) that claims otherwise. For those familiar with the ethnic Timorese physical features his mestizo roots also seem obvious. Suggest to revert. JAGO It's just HIS story... 00:21, 6 November 2007 (UTC) (Ps. Nowhere its suggested that E.Timor was ever part of the Dutch East Indies.)

[edit] List deletion

Just noticed deletion of the 'Lists of Indos' page, that was linked to this article. (?)

Well what can I say? Overzealous admins run a rampage again... The Wikipedia Achilles heal revealed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.94.191.131 (talk) 22:18, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Barryprima.png

The image Image:Barryprima.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --07:36, 15 May 2008 (UTC)