Talk:Indonesian National Revolution

message: Now that  mentioned it, the "Supported by" section in the infobox appears to be somewhat bloated. As WP:MILHIST does not currently have a proper MOS for these things, examining it one by one:
* Australia: the source mentions significant diplomatic pressures against the Netherlands by lobbying the US/UK and participating in regional movements. Openly sided with Indonesia during diplomatic negotiations.
* New Zealand: the source is... not verifiable. Removed
* USA: Well-recorded as threatening to withdraw the Marshall Plan from the Netherlands, and was likely one of the deciding factors in the Netherlands giving up.
* India: Imposed restrictions on Dutch traffic to the region, hosted several leaders after Operation Product, general active diplomatic support. 
* Pakistan: The WowShack source makes a rather serious claim that Pakistan sent 100 men to Indonesia to fight, but I cannot verify this with academic sources. Otherwise,  Explaining Pakistans Foreign Policy, p142 mentions Pakistan's boycott of KLM, but also adds that India had stronger relations at that time. Removed to be safe, unless someone can verify the WowShack claim.
* Japan: not fully sovereign in 1945-1949, so removed. Holdouts already mentioned as combatants, which is valid.
* Philippines: Source cited mention what happens after 27 December 1949, and popular support prior to that, but otherwise, nothing I would consider significant. Removed.
* Soviet Union: Source cited is 1949-1953: after the revolution. In The Soviet View of the Indonesian Revolution, it is discussed how the Soviets were lukewarm early on, then more supportive by 1947-1948 mostly through the UN... but then the Madiun Affair happened. Soviet recognition of Indonesia's sovereignty was given a month afterwards, described as "with some hesitation". I would argue that the Soviet support wasn't as significant, and so I removed it.
Juxlos (talk) 00:29, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: IMO, at very least, we should define that "Supported by" means.... either only diplomatic recognition suffice (egypt and other arab countries falls under this category), or by pressuring certain parties (such United States), or support by providing materials (supplies, armaments... pretty much what India did). Ckfasdf (talk) 02:06, 14 May 2023 (UTC)
replies: text:  Up to today, the prevailing consensus regarding countries "Supported by" indicates either exerting pressure on specific parties (like the United States) or providing materials (such as India). Apart from these two criteria, countries, especially those that solely offer diplomatic recognition, should not be included. Ckfasdf (talk) 08:12, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Supported by: 

message: Shouldn't the Darul Islam and People's Democratic Front have separate column from the Dutch forces? Currently it's being lumped together with the Dutch forces and only separated by a line. In my opinion, they being in the same column could cause confusion as some readers might interpreted it as they're co-belligerent, while the fact is that they're in conflict with both the republicans and colonial forces. Jauhsekali (talk) 05:45, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Separating "Internal conflict" in infobox 

message: Please add page protection for this, persistent sockpuppetry and IP vandalism. 182.2.50.179 (talk) 05:57, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page Protection