Talk:Supersemar

Was he at the cabinet meeting or not?

From the Background section:

...during a cabinet meeting (which Suharto did not attend), troops without insignia surrounded the presidential palace where the meeting was being held. Sukarno was advised to leave the meeting...

How can he leave a meeting he didn't attend? This does not make sense. Herostratus (talk) 15:41, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Suharto did not attend the meeting. Sukarno left. Davidelit (talk) 01:32, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

"A trap for beginners" That the two most overwhelmingly dominant characters in modern Indonesian history have such similar names still amuses me to this day. --Merbabu (talk) 01:40, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Edit war?

I recently polished the March 13 section, but someone didn't like what I did and reverted to the previous version, grammar errors and all. He or she also eliminated the reference I inserted to a Tempo article in January 2008 about the authenticity of the document. So, that means there are already enough references to explain the complexity of this subtopic? I don't think so.

I also added a section on humor, noting the double entendre SuperSemar relating to Suharto's self-description as being like the wayang character Semar. This was erased entirely, thereby narrowing the user's understanding of the numerous cultural threads related to this "sacred" document. I seriously think this page should be flagged as biased. Any opinions about that? Martindo (talk) 09:18, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

I was that someone. There were a number of reasons for the revert, including:

• The section on the authenticity of the document is dealt with in the Controversy' section. Any newer revelations would be better added there.
• alleged "coup attempt" seems to be overkill as the use of quotes already implies the less-than-certain nature of the events
• The cabinet meeting was being held at the presidential palace, so why replace it with building
• An official biography of Suharto - how many could there be?
• It is puzzling that Hanafi... puzzling to who? Is this POV or OR?
• ''Siapa Dia?: Perwira Tinggi Tentara Nasional Indonesia Angkatan Darat (Who is He?: Senior Officers of the Indonesian Army) 'dia' means he or she in Indonesian - there are no gender specific pronouns.

I accept your point about the grammar error with 'pointed' and have fixed it. I hope this makes things clearer. Regards Davidelit (talk) 09:37, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. I should have looked at history, but I'm relatively new to WP editing.

• The controversy should be mentioned in the introduction, because it is common to summarize all relevant info in that part of a WP entry. The single word "ostensibly" could refer only to the date, not to the authenticity of the entire document.
• Agreed.
• The presidential palace is in two cities: surrounded in Jakarta, refuge in Bogor? The existence of multiple palaces is not obvious to WP readers unfamiliar with Indonesia. Clarification is needed.
• Yes, there could be several, given the length of his life and number of years in power.
• Then reword. Your original "Hanafi is ambiguous" is not supported by the sentence structure, which compares a *single* date attributed to Hanafi to the title of the "correction". If Hanafi is "ambiguous" then the reader should see *two* different dates attributed to Hanafi himself.
• S/he is a pedantic translation. If someone were writing a book about childbirth, would you translate "dia" in reference to the mother as gender neutral? Absurd! All senior officers before 1988 were men, so this particular book should use only "he" as the English pronoun.

Since you are clearly dedicated about polishing this page, would you kindly make specific changes to my edits rather than wholesale reverts? By taking the easy step of revert, you lost my insertion of the closing quotation mark in paragraph 2 under Controversy. Martindo (talk) 00:42, 13 April 2009 (UTC)