Talk:Tommy Suharto

message: This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 20:55, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject class rating

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Tommy Suharto. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080902000844/http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5iVeIurfDTySdMXyl8qWxIaG2YSgg to http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5iVeIurfDTySdMXyl8qWxIaG2YSgg
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071007054533/http://www.kabar-irian.info/pipermail/kabar-indonesia/2006-November/012559.html to http://www.kabar-irian.info/pipermail/kabar-indonesia/2006-November/012559.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:15, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: A section of disputed content is:
Criticism of Jokowi	
:In February 2018, Tommy criticized the government of President Joko "Jokowi" Widodo for allowing state debt to rise to $340 billion. He said that by comparison, when Suharto was president, state debt was $54 billion. He criticized Jokowi's infrastructure development policy, saying it had caused foreign debt to rise. He said infrastructure development should be coupled with a reduction in commodity transport costs, rather than just focusing on projects.(with reference)
This was deleted on the grounds that it is "completely irrelevant". Perhaps it could be reworded along the lines of: "Tommy has been critical of President Joko Widodo's infrastructure development policy, saying it caused Indonesia's foreign debt to rise to $340 billion, compared to $54 billion when Suharto was president. He said infrastructure development should be coupled with a reduction in commodity transport costs, rather than just focusing on projects."
Is such content completely irrelevant? Should Wikipedia pages about politicians not include their views on political rivals and their efforts to appeal to nostalgia? I feel the content is important because it shows the subject's political views toward the Indonesian government. I also feel it is relevant because the subject is a politician with presidential aspirations and is critical of the incumbent. Also, the subject is the son of a former president and is making the argument that things were better when his father was in power, which is part of his party's campaign strategy; that is, an appeal to nostalgia that things used to be better.
I apologize if I am not following correct etiquette on a Talk Page. SiberianCat (talk) 07:39, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: There are many people who have criticised Jokowi, but Tommy Suharto is a minor politician who happens to be the son of a president who resigned 24 years ago, and I don't see how a comment he made four years ago merits a paragraph, as per WP:UNDUE.  Davidelit (Talk)  11:08, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  I beg to differ. I'm not sure why "made four years ago" and "resigned 24 years ago" are pertinent points. Everything happened in the past. This is an encyclopedia, not a news service that must avoid old quotes. Yes indeed, many politicians have criticized the president. But not all of those critics are the politically ambitious, powerful progeny of the country's longest-serving president. This is precisely why I feel it is relevant. How would you feel if the content of the disputed paragraph were to be cut into a single sentence - and incorporated into an existing section - merely mentioning the attempt to appeal to nostalgia by criticizing the president, claiming the country was in better economic shape (less foreign debt) when his father was in power? I do appreciate your prompt response above. SiberianCat (talk) 11:37, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hi, I take your point about everything happening in the past, but the reason why "four years ago" is pertinent is that 2018 was the year before President Jokowi's reelection, following an election campaign in which Tommy played no part whatsoever. And the most powerful thing that Tommy has done in the last decade or so is to have the team producing the Garuda Indonesia inflight magazine fired after he was referred to as a convicted murderer in its pages.  Davidelit (Talk)  12:13, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  Hi. Again, with due respect, I don't quite follow your argument. Tommy did play a part in the campaigns ahead of the 2019 elections. Or do you mean he "played no part whatsoever" in Jokowi's campaign? (well obviously you don't mean that, as he was not on team Jokowi). Or do you mean that his campaigning (especially his criticism of Jokowi) had no impact on the final election results because his party failed to meet the threshold for the DPR (and therefore couldn’t nominate him for the presidency)? As for suing Indo Multi Media (and Garuda) for screwing up the 2009 advertorial in the Garuda mag, I think the perception of 'most powerful' is relative and subjective. Since then, he has dealt with numerous legal and business cases involving substantial sums. Also, he did not get all of the production team fired. IMM did eventually fold due to financial problems following the lawsuit, but not all staff working on the mag were directly fired at his behest. I really hope you won't think I'm being antagonistically obstreperous here, as I'm all for collaboration through constructive criticism, accuracy and whatever is required to achieve consensus that can improve articles. I could point to numerous Indonesia-related pages that have multiple problems (well beyond a subjective assertion of a "completely irrelevant" couple of sentences), but I don't want to go off topic here (too late?). My sole issue here is that I feel the subject's criticism of the president's performance, as part of a strategy to appeal to nostalgia (whether it succeeded or not), is not "completely irrelevant" and I therefore propose revising the contentious section into a simpler, single sentence, placed in the extant content. SiberianCat (talk) 13:48, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

text: Further to David's comments, the article is not made better by providing snippets of commentary from its subject. Further, there is no context. And to provide our own interpretation of context - as Siberaian Cat seems to be proposing ("appeal to nostalgia") - smells a bit of original research and commentary. --Merbabu (talk) 19:47, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  The appeal to nostalgia is not original research. It has been well documented in various credible media articles. Regarding my proposal to reword the content, I would include a reference to at least one such article. Such as this one. You claim there is no context. How is the following not context? Father was longest-serving president, son has political ambitions, is unable to become Golkar chairman, forms new party, runs for office, criticizes incumbent president in effort to appeal to nostalgia. For example, he criticizes infrastructure policy for raising state debt to a much higher level than when his father was in power. I feel that using the term "snippets of commentary from its subject" does not prove your original assertion that the content is "completely irrelevant". Many Wikipedia articles contain "snippets of commentary" from their subjects. SiberianCat (talk) 00:11, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have since revised and restored the deleted content, as I do not feel the assertion that it is "completely irrelevant" has been proved by any of the arguments put forward here. I also refute the accusations that "there is no context" and that it "smells a bit of original research". SiberianCat (talk) 14:01, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism of president deleted 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
* 
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:22, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion