Talk:Joko Widodo

Honorifics in the infobox

Skabe24 and Tensa Februari are having a minor edit "skrimish" about the honorific-prefix parameter in the infobox. "His Excellency" has been removed and re-added every now and then, these past few weeks. I don't see any sources supporting this honorific, neither here nor at id:Joko Widodo, although the id-wiki version of "President of Indonesia" mentions "Yang terhormat" as the presidential addressing style. I thought that "Yang terhormat" meant "The honourable", while "His excellency" was more like "Yang mulia"? Can anyone support the honorific "His Excellency" with reliable sources? - HyperGaruda (talk) 12:08, 3 January 2016 (UTC)

@HyperGaruda: Just read this discussion and this edit is still keep added every now and then. In Indonesian language, actually there is official letter mentioning how to address the president which is "Yang terhormat, Presiden Republik Indonesia, Bapak Jokowi", but no official English translation. However, there is Gov't regulation on state protocol (PP No 39 tahun 2018, penjelasan pasal 28) that mentioned how address president (not just president of Indonesia) which are "Your Excellency, Your Excellency The Honourable, The Honourable, Honourable, Dear Mr. President." So... I guess all of five them is OK. Ckfasdf (talk) 00:09, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Irresponsible undo

I objected with an reckless undo removing a large edit contribution without any clear reason.

In Indonesian article, there is a section about Controversy (Joko_Widodo#Kontroversi) supported with Criticism of Joko Widodo why not here?

I don’t understand why User:Gunkarta reverted my edit with ‘’BLP issue’’ without specify which Issue that [roblematic because my significant edit supported wih more than 50 reliable references. Please check which part of this edit contains BLP Issue:

His approval rating as president was declining by a lot of unpopular decisions especially related to economic policies impacted public life directly. Policies on cutting subsidy on fuel, electricity power, gas and health security are also affecting foods, toll road, airplane tickets and other commodity prices that multiplying life burden of non-high income group instead of increasing public welfare. This issue was hightlighted by opposition vice-presidential candidate Sandiaga Uno during his campaign that he received many complaints from local housewifes about the price raising.

Because of tens unfulfilled campaign promises that are noted by public, such as ending bagi-bagi kursi (political nepotism) policy, Swasembada pangan (Food self-sufficiency), and improving economic growth the president was scorned by the opposition as hypocrite. Before his inauguration in October 2019, he said young figures with age 20-25 years old would be chosen to fill ministrial post and it would be a lot of 30-40 years old figures in his Cabinet, but the statement is unfulfilled, as his plan to reduce bureaucracy when there are 12 deputy ministers appointed to his cabinet.

Several anti-Jokowi movements went viral amid the public especially in social media such as term "Presiden Jokowi Makin Mendunia" in April 2015 when a newspaper cover showed title "Joko:I don't read what I sign". also the hashtags #ShameOnYouJokowi, #2019GantiPresiden, #UninstallJokowi which have become a top worlwide Twitter trending topic. The term Cebong-Kampret also became popular in social media.

As a governor, Widodo had been reported to Komnas HAM (Indonesian Human Rights Board) for human rights abuse for the violent eviction. There are also other incidents which are criticized as human right violations during his regime.

Based on various controversial policies, such as foreign citizen on minister appointment, Constitution violation charge and other law breaches during the presidential administration, a number politicians and senior analysts expressed that he could have been impeached by law.

In his administrations as Mayor and Governor, he had unsound achievements for financial management from the annual BPK (Indonesian Audit Body) reports and had been reported several times to Local Courts, KPK and Supreme Court related to various corruption charges, such as BPMKS scandal involving data manipulation in educational budget and Transjakarta scandal with problematic bus procurement, but none of the charges is proceeded into trial while there are witnesses to support the criminal charges against him.

A controversial policy on food imports while in 2014 campaign election he had declared to stop food import decision to support the Indonesian farmers who should be honored. however millions tons food supply were imported, even in harvesting seasons which disappointing the local farmers, and reported by BPK audit that there are mismanagement on these import policies. After the corruption scandal of garlic import was uncovered including politician figures, this controversial imports policy raised accusations about the existence of "food import mafia" and in September 2019, following the import scandal, he made an immediate approval of KPK bill that is responded negatively by the public because this decision broke his own promise in Nawacita programs to root out the corruption.

Based on several studies were conducted by the scholars to examine the progress of democracy in Widodo era, they concluded on their results that the Indonesian democracy in recent years is declining, even reached the worst level in Reform era.

Anti-Islam accusations

Anti-Islam charges are often addressed to the president from various cases, including the controversial sudden Islamic group ban and unresolved cases of persecutions against Islamic preachers.

Term "radicalism", that has been blown up on the media, is linked with religion by several tendentious reports during his presidential administration, that a lot of mosques to Islamic preachers were affected with radical thoughts, while no other religion in Indonesia linked with the radicalism, except Islam. In October 2019, the suspicious about effort to connect radicalism with religious issues has been raising in public when he appointed new Religious Affair minister with main task to tackle radicalism and intolerance. Later, he suggested that term "radicalism" is replaced by term "manipulator agama" (manipulator of religion). Former House of Representative Deputy Speaker Fahri Hamzah accused that the president is surrounded by Anti-Islam circle, and blamed his position as sins when letting Anti-Islam sentiment and Islamophobia through "Ideology conflicts." The narration of radicalism itself is viewed as an issue diversion from serious economic problem,. while MUI official Din Syamsudin and other Islamic scholar claimed that massive deradicalization propaganda in Indonesia is a part of the Intelligence operation project related to "Islamophobia propaganda" that is funded by the West to undermine Islamism from within.

Please provide strong reason before dismiss the significant contribution, that everyone might have controversy stories you cannot deny including Joko Widodo Qzxv5 (talk) 09:09, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

As well as the problems with WP:UNDUE, the addition of this huge section is also a clear breach of WP:SYNTH. Where are the sources explicitly supporting the editor's conclusion that Jokowi is controversial? He is certainly not universally popular, but no politicians are. That isn't a controversy: it's politics. There are, of course, clear references supporting the contention that Jokowi is a politician. Davidelit (Talk) 09:50, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

When there are a lot of Information supported with dozens of reliable sources, then is accused of WP:SYNTH Don't be kidding. If you asking Where are the sources explicitly supporting the editor's conclusion that Jokowi is controversial? In Indonesian article, there is a section about Controversy (Joko_Widodo#Kontroversi) Qzxv5 (talk) 10:34, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

Leaving aside the problems of Indonesian Wikipedia, the section on controversies there does not support the religious agenda being pushed. I repeat, where are the sources explicitly supporting the editor's conclusion that Jokowi is controversial?. Regards Davidelit (Talk) 03:24, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

If you ask me "where are the sources explicitly supporting the editor's conclusion that Jokowi is controversial?" You should check dozens of references of Controversy section in (Joko_Widodo#Kontroversi) or Browsing them on Internet yourself and you might found several articles about the controversies (whether including religion topic or not). That aside, Which part of "my long edit and various sources" above contains BLP Issue that should be removed? If no one could give reasonable argument for this, therefore the section should have not been reverted on the article. Qzxv5 (talk) 09:17, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

response from uninvolved editor

All the signs are that adding material like this to an existing article is WP:UNDUE - it would rest much more appropriately in a separate article that addresses the 'controversy' relative to a person. Understanding WP:BLP and WP:ABOUT and WP:NOT clearly also helps.

Existing articles being added to with material like this makes the article a problem for any editor putting it up as it is specifically in the area of WP:SOAPBOX material, where the creation of such an article that is offering in the content is a view that is WP:POV and unencyclopediac. A better handle on how other politicians are covered in the Indonesian section would also help. Also more english language sources would also help. But I would not support its addition to the existing article. JarrahTree 09:40, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Whether you support the addition or not, Wikipedia do not depend on subjective supporter but any addition must be depending on fact, reliable sources and cooperation among the users. Qzxv5 (talk) 10:34, 18 December 2019 (UTC)

References

No merge for Criticism of Joko Widodo

The criticism article was huge content (more than 100 kb) while no single point of the criticism preserved on the Joko Widodo article Qzxv5 (talk) 10:29, 25 April 2020 (UTC) — Qzxv5 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Everybody in the AfD agreed that the original article was a 100k-piece of low-quality soapboxing by a SPA-user. The closing result was merge, with an explicit task given by the closer RoySmith: "I strongly urge whoever does the merge to only take the best material, and rigorously enforce policies such as WP:RS, WP:BLP, and WP:POV." I had begun to clean up the page even before the AfD had a result, because of the obvious blatant policy violations by Qzxv5, and I became simply tired because nobody cared to join. After the closer, MorningThoughts eventually took up the task, which I highly appreciate, and merged the remaining 40k into this article. Now it's my turn to strongly urge all editors to remember that the result was merge (the best content) and not delete. Keeping not even a single grain of the material without previous explicit vetting is against consensus. Sorry, Juxlos, as much as I agree with you, we must do the dirt job first, scrutinize every paragraph, and say why it's not worthy to be kept, otherwise it does indeed looks like censorship. It's all about quality, nothing else. –Austronesier (talk) 11:17, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

I get the idea and I understand the censorship issue, but dumping 40kb worth of "Criticism" content which is basically Google Translated rants onto a 90kb article is a gigantic BLP violation. Many points are also already in the "Presidency" parts (e.g. meh economic growth, human rights issues that doesn't involve the FPI). We should try to incorporate valid points into the "Presidency" section if anything. Juxlos (talk) 16:41, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

@Juxlos: I took care of removing 17k unencyclopedic material, MorningThoughts more than 40k, so sifting through the remaining 40k will be tedious, but manageable. I don't know, does it comply with WP policies to draftify the page (last version before merge) for the cleanup? –Austronesier (talk) 17:12, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Just realized that critics section took half of the page. I will to try to trim some of the criticism and them removing some WP:overcite. Since criticism sub-section is located in presidency of Indonesia section, I propose to only include criticism during his presidency (not include times as governor or mayor). and the criticism include there are only critics that directly related to him. Ckfasdf (talk) 01:45, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

@Ckfasdf: Trimming is done - I kept gubernatorial criticism where relevant, but roughly 3/4 of the wikitext (including 20+ citations for "Jokowi violated freedom of expression", several big WP:SYNTHESIS items, Fahri Hamzah and Fadli Zon's ramblings, and borderline hoax misreadings of sources) were removed and merged into other sections. Juxlos (talk) 06:30, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Why British English?

Can anyone explain why this article uses British English and not American English? The Indonesian government generally uses US English (except in correspondence with some Europe-based agencies). Was the imposition of British English in this article just the whim of an editor? Granted, most of Indonesia's neighbors use British English (Australia, PNG, Singapore and Malaysia), but Indonesia doesn't. I'd like to change this article to US English, if there are no valid objections. SiberianCat (talk) 12:26, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

@SiberianCat: there is a relevant policy at MOS:RETAIN. In a nutshell, it seems that unless Indonesia has its own variety of English, then you should not change the variety used in this article. Regards, Citobun (talk) 12:39, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, @Citobun:, for your prompt response. The MOS:RETAIN policy states that when an English variety's "consistent usage has been established in an article, maintain it in the absence of consensus to the contrary". The Joko Widodo article has not evolved with consistent use of British English. There is no discussion toward any consensus to use British English. The most commonly used English-language references in this article are from Indonesian media that use US English. Those sources being The Jakarta Post, Antara, Jakarta Globe and Tempo. It therefore seems contrary to common sense to insist on using British English in this article when there is no consistent use over time (just arbitrary edits), no consensus and Indonesia itself does not generally use British English. SiberianCat (talk) 13:09, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

@SiberianCat: I was the one who started it (my first edit was 9 Aug 2018), since I thought that Indonesia uses British English, then all Indonesia-related articles should use British English. Turned out I'm wrong when I found out that Surabaya doesn't. Since it has been only two and a half years since the change, guess it should be fine now to revert the article to US English? AdaCiccone (talk) 20:06, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Covid 19 response

I think we need to mention Joko Widodo's covid-19 response. It is for every world leader a major part of discussion for their legacy. SwoerMell (talk) 12:07, 22 August 2021 (UTC)

More fitting for Luhut Binsar Pandjaitan. Geanard (talk) 07:45, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Bit of both I’d say. At least mention his public statements and his appointment of Luhut. Juxlos (talk) 10:15, 18 December 2021 (UTC)