Talk:Malaysia/Archive 2

message: I think the debate has, for the most part, been carried out with as cool a set of heads as can be expected on a contentious issue. There was no need for User:Sir Edgar's final remark and several of his(?) remarks include language that is unlikely to de-escalate. De-escalation (i.e. eventual consensus) should be the aim of every remark. Equally, User:Andylkl's suggestion of a "twisting" of facts is almost certain to irritate someone and does not further the debate. Simply say you disagree, and say calmly why. It is apparent from User:Sir Edgar's comment on WQA that he feels put-upon — evidently a more conciliatory approach could have been taken by User:Andylkl and User:Earth. I have no business assigning blame here (and I do not think there is any to assign). I think both sides should take a deep breath, re-read my comments and take another deep breath. Then, come back here with a genuine desire to make the best article you can, with respect for each other's feelings. I will watchlist this article and talk page. -Splash 02:34, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikiquette

message: Hmm, why aren't those templates included in the page? __earth 10:52, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: We still haven't worked out whether categories have made templates redundant or not; some argue they have, but others say they haven't. So I guess it depends on the editors' whims. Johnleemk | Talk 11:54, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Commonwealth and ASEAN 

message: I am just passing through (so I'm not going to edit anything), but I couldn't help notice that there is significant overlap in the Demographics and Culture parts of this article.  There are also at least one contradiction: the former says that 7% of the population is Indian; the latter specifies 7% _and_ 10% in different sentences... - Dilberito 12:07, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've seen hairstyles a thousand times more outlandish than that here. :P You're definitely welcomed to visit. --Andylkl [ talk! | c ] 16:37, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Demographics and Culture overlap 

message: I distinctly recall that there used to be television licences in Malaysia but they were ended recently. Could someone clarify this and/or add this info the to the television licence page please? Nil Einne 21:17, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: TV licenses

message: Can anyone provide authoritative information on Malaysian Civilian losses in WW2 due to the Japanese occupation ?--Berndd11222 23:41, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You might find Battle of Malaya and Battle of Singapore of some help. __earth 04:10, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Malaysian losses in WW2  

message: I don't see why there is a need to put the Chinese (up to both Simplified and Traditional!) and Tamil name of Malaysia on the article, those are languages widely spoken in Malaysia, yes, but they are not official languages. We're not Singapore. Malaysia has only 2 official languages, and the names need to reflect them. Will be changing them shortly.
:I agree. A country's name should be displayed in English and the official language only. -- Saikiri~ 21:08, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Only Relevant Languages Please! 

message: Hi! Please take a look at Template talk:Infobox Country - we're currently trying to standardize infobox usage, that's why I reverted; if you insist, though, I won't revert a second time. You're welcome to join the discussion!  ナイトスタリオン ✉ 12:50, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox 

message: Malay (National), English, Chinese, Tamil? Isn't it just Malay? __earth 09:22, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed everything but Malay. See http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Malaysia#Article_152 __earth 09:29, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

text: The English language was an alternative language of instruction in schools of all level until it was was gradually phased out from 1970 onwards and English medium schools and institutes of higher education had their language of instruction changed to Malay. This was achieved in totality by 1982 when public universities completed the transition. Alternative language of instruction in government and government aided schools, apart from the Malay language, was only available in the Mandarin and Tamil languages for primary levels only. Nonetheless English was retained as a compulsory second language in all primary and secondary schools. This only recently changed with the re-introduction of the English language as the language of instruction in Mathematics and Science subjects in all levels. However, this does not imply that English has the status of an official language in Malaysia, at least legally. English was only retained as an official language with the caveat that this status be abolished ten years after Independence (which meant it ceased to be so in West Malaysia by 1967 and the East Malaysian states by 1973). English, however, remains an important language of communications among Malaysians and it is not uncommon to see Malaysians use English for multiple purposes, even for day to day conversation at home. - Bob K 09:15, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

text: that's just lame politics going on. Constitutionally, its Malay (ie Bahasa Melayu). __earth (Talk) 08:26, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official languages? 

message: Hello all. What is the origin of the name of this country and what was the reason for its name change from Malaya to Malaysia? Does it have anything to do with the relations with Singapore or East Malaysia? Or was the name coined in analogy with the neighbouring -neasia to mean "Malayonesia"? (far fetched) //Big Adamsky 02:38, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I saw on Discovery Channel some time ago, that it's Malaya + the 3 s's from Singapore, Sarawak and Sabah. So, Malay + Sia. __earth 02:44, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: hmmm..somehow that some people try to create a sense of difficulty to us, where we keen to give right infomation to public. They try to revert all the edition just for their "correct" perception. --Johnson 02:57, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have your own theories? Would love to hear it. __earth 04:38, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just in my opinion, I suggest that we should put a vote on whether should include other languages for the name "Malaysia" and the result of the poll should be the final. This is only the way to solve the conflict. If something wrong with my idea, comments are welcomed to correct my idea. By the way, I am also Malaysian too, Chinese from Alor Star.--Johnson 09:51, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, I thought your were talking about etymology. The discussion about inclusion of other languages is in another section. And I don't think nationality/enthicity relevant though. I know several American professors that know more about Malaysia than most Malaysians do. The point is, all you need is knowledge on the subject. __earth 11:46, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to clarify, I was curious as to the origin of the name, nothing else. //Big Adamsky 18:15, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Haha..sorry for the wrong post at wrong section. Pardon me  for the mistake. However, I reckon that only the english name of malaysia should be included only since this is the english version of Wikipedia and the actual name according to constitution of malaysia is FEDERATION OF MALAYSIA and the government tends to use MALAYSIA only for catching international intentions. That's just my opinion.--Johnson 13:20, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I beg to differ. Article 1.1 of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia states that "The Federation shall be known, in Malay and in English, by the name Malaysia." I have always been a little curious why the name "Federation of Malaysia" was used and I changed it once before but the change was reverted. -- Bob K 14:42, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Etymology

message: If the reversions continue, I suggest we approach an admin and ask for a lock. __earth 09:18, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, semi-protection seems like a good idea now. --Andylkl [ talk! | c ] 09:25, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's not completely clear to me that what is happening here is really vandalism and not an editorial dispute.  It may be better to request mediation. --BenjaminTsai Talk 09:43, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page lock 

message: On my screen I see a large space in the history part. Can that be removed? --Snakes 01:52, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why is page in half? 

message: Related issue: Percentage of Indians in the population of Malaysia. There's an inconsistency in the article. Under "Demographics," it is stated that "Malaysians of Indian descent comprise about 10% of the population," while under "Culture": "Malaysia is a multi-ethnic society, consisting of 65% Malays and other indigenous tribes, 25% Chinese, 7% Indians." Clearly, Indians cannot comprise both 10% and 7% of the population of Malaysia. The only way the two figures might make sense is if the additional 3% have some Indian ancestry but are classified as Bumiputras, Eurasians, Chinese, etc. I don't have a copy of the census figures, but would someone who does please determine the most accurate percentage and edit the two passages for consistency?
Michael 09:27, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Presumably the remaining three percent are "lain-lain" (others). They could be Eurasian, etc. Johnleemk | Talk 11:50, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Percentage of Indians in Malaysia 

message: —Preceding unsigned comment added by  (talk • contribs) 
try http://www.malaysia.alloexpat.com/ __earth (Talk) 12:44, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  information to sattle in malaysia 

message: The terminology of the official language of Malaysia, actually, already changed from Malay to Bahasa Malaysia (Malaysian Language). Hope the wikipedians take note about it.141.213.240.242 04:15, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Official language 

message: I see someone has quoted Malaysia's Federal Constitution as follows;
Article 1(1) of the Federal Constitution states that "The federation shall be known, in Malay and English, as Malaysia". The name "Federation of Malaysia" therefore has no official sanction.
Does this mean someone out there actually disputes refering to Malaysia as the Federation of Malaysia? If so, let me just put in my 2 sen in response. First of all, I really don't see what the fuss is all about, given the triviality of the matter. I would say (and I am sure the reasonable avarage Malaysian would agree with me) that the name "Federation of Malaysia" is simply a formal variant of "Malaysia". Article 1(1) of the Federal Constitution begins with "The federation shall...be known as Malaysia". So, the Constitution acknowleages that Malaysia is a Federation and is known as Malaysia, so it's not wrong to refer it as the Federation of Malaysia. The question of official sanction here does not arise since the words be known imply common parlance, not official sanction. As for where "official sanction" is concerned, I am sure there enough evidence in practice, as indicated in government websites and etc. to attest to there being official sanction, both as "Federation of Malaysia" in the English language and "Persekutuan Malaysia" in Bahasa Melayu. - Anonymous User
:There is only one correct name, which is set out in the Constitution. The fuss is made by people who keep replacing Malaysia with Federation of Malaysia and Persekutuan Malaysia and the jawi equivalent in the opening sentence of the article and in the country box. No-one in Malaysia ever uses the name "Federation of Malaysia" or "Persekutuan Malaysia", whether formally or informally, and it is ridiculous to invent a formal variant when none exists. Malaysia is a federation, it is also a country, a constitutional monarchy, a parliamentary democracy, etc. Are you suggesting "Country of Malaysia" is another "formal variant"?
:It is therefore wrong for there to be a Malay name and an English name in the country box. The reason we have Article 1(1) of the Constitution is that it was decided in 1963 that the name of the country would be the same in Malay and English, unlike before when we had "Federation of Malaya" and "Persekutuan Tanah Melayu". Just look at the postage stamps from 1957-63 to see how much space it took just to print the country's name. It is introducing "fuss" and complexity for the sake of it. Andrew Yong 14:57, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just what is meant by "Federation of Malaysia" having no official sanction anyway? 

message: Not on Malaysia but related, History of Southeast Asia is currently a nominee for Wikipedia:Article Improvement Drive. Please support the nominee by voting for it! __earth (Talk) 03:12, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia:Article Improvement Drive 

message: "Bersekutu Bertambah Mutu" would literally mean "Unity adds quality", and not unity is strength, unless that is an "official" translation which i am not aware of.  explanation? Khing 14:20, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The official translation is Unity is strength. . Literal translation doesn't work. __earth (Talk) 14:33, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  awesome.  thanks. Khing 14:57, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Motto 

message: Like what __Earth and Andylkl said above, I think that this page should be semi-protected as soon as possible. Many IP address users are vandalising the page by adding nonsense into it. I fully agree to the semi-protection of that page. Could someone (administrator) please make the page semi-protected as soon as possible? The Malaysia page is being vandalised very badly. Thank you and I really appreciate it if an administrator does an action about the Malaysian page. Acs4b 08:36, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have to agree -- Bob K 14:21, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't. If this page were placed in WP:RFPP I would decline protection, and so would most other administrators. There isn't a high volume of anon vandalism at all (there are a lot of good faith noob edits, but these aren't what semiprotection is designed to prevent) Borisblue 04:48, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Page "Malaysia" should be semi-protected 

message: Malaysia is not a chinese speaking territories. Having some people speaking chinese doesnt justify  the need to categorise it into that. THe territories here actually were referring to some part of their region having loose governmental control and most of them speak chinese (perfect example is Taiwan). If you want to say Penang is a chinese speaking 'state', it is still not right, because having chinese becoming a majority, still doesnt mean everything there have been changed into chinese language. THank you, please understand 70.52.72.159. Zack2007 04:04, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  chinese speaking territories? 

message: I noticed that the GDP (PPP) figure in the infobox was changed for a number of times, usually to a higher figure and ranking. According to the List of countries by GDP (PPP) per capita article, Malaysia has a GDP (PPP) per capita of USD $11,201 and ranks 61st in the list. Does anyone know what's going on? Joshua Chiew 08:59, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  GDP (PPP) 

message: Alright. There are officially too many templates running around at the very bottom of the article. I propose we remove a majority of them. __earth (Talk) 04:08, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: My goodness! You're very right about that. I think the regional templates aside from  are possible candidates for removal. --Polaron | Talk 04:15, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I agree with you. Too many templates are just making the page longer and some are not really very useful. I personally think that aside from , , , and  the others should be removed. The other templates (ex:G15, D8, and OIC) can be seen in their article. However, the categories should not be removed as it is not taking up too much of space in the article. Thank you. Acs4b 06:04, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template frenzy 

message: Singapore most definitely was unilaterally kicked out of Malaysia, at the request of the Tunku and with the support of Parliament against the wishes of LKY/the PAP, and "expelled" is a perfectly NPOV way of putting it.  See History of Singapore#Separation. Jpatokal 05:13, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think expelled is the proper term, but most Singaporeans would probably prefer to hear "seperated". That said, I believe that the term "expelled" should be kept. –-  kungming·2 (Talk) 06:05, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

text: I think the problem is that it was a de jure separation (a secession, actually, that was permitted by Malaysia) but a de facto expulsion. The Tunku did not literally force Singapore out; he just forced LKY and the PAP to take it out. The issue is quite nuanced, so the article probably should mention that although it was a separation in name, it was an expulsion in reality. Johnleemk | Talk 16:54, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expulsion of Singapore 

message: :Image:Msia-crest.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 23:20, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Msia-crest.jpg