Talk:Joko Widodo

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)

And note that Luhut is a general without an MD. Martindo (talk) 01:13, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Joko Widodo's name

A note at the start of the article states that Joko Widodo has no family name or patronymic and should thus be referred to using his full name 'Joko Widodo', or 'Jokowi' for short. Yet the article consistently refers to him as 'Widodo'. I am not Indonesian, but it seems to me that this is as odd as having the article about Joe Biden consistently refer to him as 'Robinette' or something like that. The articles in Indonesian and Javanese about him call him Jokowi. Most reputable English language newspapers do so too. This article should be changed to follow that convention as well. caoimhinoc (talk) 23:04, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

I've replaced the most mentions of his name with "Jokowi" for now. That seems most appropriate. I hereby undid SteelerFan1933's 30 March edits which among things messed up the part on Jokowi's childhood name and several titles of external references. I've noticed that the articles on other Indonesian figures are messed up in a similar way. caoimhinoc (talk) 02:05, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Background

NY Times just published a lengthy article on the new capital (16 May 2023), which includes some background on Jokowi. Although it's a puff piece with muted criticisms of the project, it's worth citing as a reliable source in English. Indonesian-language sources (such as a Tribun article from 2012 to describe his accomplishments as mayor) are not as "accessible" to most WP editors, and some of the translations are poor, as I noted in edits a few minutes ago. Martindo (talk) 01:18, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Non-neutral lede

The current lede is very generous to the subject and violates NPOV. Phrases like "achieved national prominence", "reinvigorated local politics", "improved the city's bureaucracy, reducing corruption in the process", "focused on economic growth", "ambitious health and education agenda", "emphasised "protecting Indonesia's sovereignty"", as well as the unusually personal origins story "born and raised in a riverside slum", "married his wife", "worked as a carpenter and a furniture exporter". Not all of this is biased, but it is when taken all together.

As well as this, it makes no mention of either the 2019 Indonesian protests and riots or the Indonesia omnibus law protests, or of the laws which provoked them, despite being very significant laws and the largest protests in Indonesia since the emergence of democracy. Fedjmike (talk) 02:33, 25 February 2024 (UTC)