User talk:Eustatius Strijder

Hello, Eustatius Strijder, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay.

• Please
  talk pages
  , by using four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically produce your username and the date, and helps to identify who said what and when. Please do not sign any edit that is not on a talk page.
• Check out some of these pages:
  • Contributing to Wikipedia
  • Introduction to Wikipedia
  • How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard
    if you wish)
  • Cheatsheet of WikiCode

• If you have a question that is not one of the frequently asked questions below, check out the Teahouse, ask me on my talk page, or click the button below. Happy editing and again, welcome! Rasnaboy (talk) 04:06, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @Rasnaboy, I really appreciate it :) Eustatius Strijder (talk) 16:08, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

==References==
{{Reflist}}

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Template:Religions by country table Asia, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Davidelit (Talk) 07:55, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I will provide a more reliable source after this sir. Eustatius Strijder (talk) 07:59, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

done, removed disambiguation. I've linked to the correct articles. Eustatius Strijder (talk) 15:37, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eustatius Strijder, thanks for appreciating my recent edits. I noted that a user by the name of Lmharding reverted my edits without reason. I've reverted it back, and looking at their talk page, this is an habitual behavior of this user who has done this on various other articles, and has been warned multiple times by different users. It seems like a case of

Fake news I have talked to you multiple times on the talk page, you;re the one who keeps reverting instead of continuing to discuss your edits. You're WP:NOTTHERE nice attempt at a projection. Keep lying. User:Lmharding (talk) 00:29, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No need to fight in my talk page Guys, calm down. It’s better to restore the edits to the previous one bcs the law against homosexuality were not enforced at all even before the Supreme Court decision in 2022. Eustatius Strijder (talk) 11:07, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am talking about the LGBT rights in Singapore issue on this matters, the dispute claims weren’t clearly sourced. Eustatius Strijder (talk) 11:09, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but who reverts Jacob Kennedy's Revert time's Jllproductions, Russian vodka's Moneyspender's 4chankek's Ususer445's personal attacks. Like calls Pauline Muley 'keep lying" . He knows he is being against all Wikipedia rules, but thinks they do not apply to him. A disease dishonesty 103.12.202.139 (talk) 12:43, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

for your editing on Indonesian subjects - one small problem is that edit summaries are not a suitable location for arguing for an edit change - it is much more recoverable and understandable on the talk page - if there is likely to be any issue arise - talk pages are the place for explanation - and even more so are

• You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
• Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
• We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 13:57, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the

2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users

are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The

topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review

NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:55, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

It is standard practice to only include official support from a government. Until there is an official statement from a government agency explicitly stating their support for a cause, it is not the country, it is the individual/organization. Political parties do not in fact count, especially if they are in the opposition. Juxlos (talk) 05:42, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In the same way, support from former leaders does not count. And in any case your reference to the Ghana "support" is an article about amphibians. Davidelit (Talk) 09:25, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not here to support West Papuan independence. That was for another reason, also the reference said that Ghana had opposed the Act of Free Choice in the UNGA since 1969. It was not meant to be the statement of 2 Former Prime minister’s alone. Eustatius Strijder (talk) 09:31, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody here is supporting anything except the facts. You cannot claim a country supports anything based on the opinions of former leaders. Also your citation for the Ghana claim is an article about amphibians - the clue is in the title: Amphibians with Tails Davidelit (Talk) 10:03, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Citation about Ghana was the former one that is in Wikipedia’s sources, it was not by my edit reference. Ghana opposed The Act of Free choice by its statement in the United Nations General Assembly in 1969 in favor of West Papuan independence as for “Support” refs said. The support doesn’t only come from the former Prime Minister but Ghana in the United Nations as a whole leading the African backed countries. Eustatius Strijder (talk) 10:27, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ghana did not even vote against it at the UNGA. If you classify that as "support", or any of the pacific nation signing a declaration and that’s it, then every -other- country would qualify as supporting Indonesia. Based on your previous edits, you have clearly demonstrated a lack of understanding of

WP:V

, in addition to lacking basic reading comprehension of sources (like, really, reading a couple Green MPs showing up to an event as “New Zealand supports West Papuan independence?).

You are putting an absurdly low threshold for “Support” there, as none of the Pacific Islands have given any actual support to West Papuan independence - certainly none comparable to Libya (funding/training) or Netherlands (training/organization/funding). Unless you can provide sources that state, say, Vanuatu has been funding the OPM, do not include them. Juxlos (talk) 16:20, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection

.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. JarrahTree 11:26, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Papua conflict, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page National Democratic Congress.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

Juxlos (talk) 03:43, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Eustatius, The dispute resolution process is likely to be closed soon if there is no response from you at that page. A possible next step may be to seek action from administrators should edit warring continue. —Merbabu (talk) 22:46, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

January 2023

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Indonesia, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Davidelit (Talk) 10:55, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. --Merbabu (talk) 01:57, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

January 2023

You have been blocked from editing from certain pages (Papua conflict) for a period of 1 week for edit warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Primefac (talk) 13:56, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Biak Massacre moved to draftspace

Thanks for creating Biak Massacre. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it has no sources. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. echidnaLives - talk - edits 06:19, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, now I had re-created the article of Biak Massacre (West Papua) again this time, I will published reliable sources and references. Eustatius Strijder (talk) 08:42, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:COPYPASTE --Merbabu (talk) 09:12, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Sure, I will re-correct the grammar so it doesn’t purely look like the HRW’s data reference. But please keep a neutral stance on it regarding

WP:NPOV. Eustatius Strijder (talk) 12:02, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Copyright problem on

Biak Massacre

Your edit to

Biak Massacre has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. — Diannaa (talk) 15:24, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, Eustatius Strijder. Thank you for your work on

page curation process

, had the following comments:

Thanks for creating the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 10:36, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

January 2023

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain pages (Papua conflict and Timeline of the Papua conflict) for persistent edit warring.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Drmies (talk) 15:26, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Eustatius Strijder, sorry, but if you do not understand why this is incredibly disruptive and out of line, you may be looking at a different block. Drmies (talk) 15:39, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am very sorry, but what was the reason that I was blocked anyway? I have been waiting 1 week until the block timing has been expired. Also, my edit to the page Timeline of the Papua conflict have not been edit warring but rather cooperative with the other users as I have provided a reliable sources for the list of incidents. How can I get rid of this page block? Eustatius Strijder (talk) 15:47, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You were blocked is because a significant number of people commented in the ANI thread on aspects of your editing and thought it would be better for the project if you did not edit that page. I'll add that you went right back to editing Papua conflict after your block expired, doing the exact same thing: loading up that infobox. Even without the community calling for a partial black to prevent you from that kind of disruption any admin would have blocked you.

As for the other article: as I said, blocks are preventative, and I really have no faith that you will abide by our normal editing procedures and play collaboratively. What you can do? Post an unblock request. But let me add that the disagreement with your editing isn't limited to the content of the Papua conflict article; it's your behavior across the board, and I could have decided on a more wide-raging set of restrictions. Further disruption will likely result in either a

topic ban or a full block. Drmies (talk) 16:20, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Sure I will post an unblock request to you and I apologize for my mistakes. Although the reality is that I already got to the talk page before editting back then. I am not interested in editting the article again, but I wanted to get more user access levels in this Wikipedia account of mine, so it is better that your block in the later 2 pages could be unblocked immediately. Eustatius Strijder (talk) 06:22, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See my post below. You are headed in the opposite direction. Drmies (talk) 15:47, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:Filep Karma.jpeg

Thanks for editing West Papua-related articles. I just wanted to give you the heads-up that the English Wikipedia generally avoids most non-free media, especially if you have freely-licensed media of the same person. Have you read our media guidelines? ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:30, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of reliably sourced info

Please do not remove reliably sourced data by falsely saying it's unreliable. The Jakarta Post is more than reliable. Further, in this instance, your edit summary makes no sense. Ie, deaths should only be included if they were killed or murdered? Happy to discuss, but if you edit war as you normally do, a ANI report will be lodged (and before you hit 3RR) --Merbabu (talk) 01:52, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have since added more info about those events and an additional source. --Merbabu (talk) 02:11, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy dleete notification

{{subst:copyvionote|1=File:Student protests in Indonesia criminal code revision 2019.jpg|source=https://m.tribunnews.com/nasional/2019/09/25/terkini-jumlah-korban-demo-mahasiswa-tolak-rkuhp-dan-ruu-kpk-hingga-pasal-pasal-kontroversial?page=all}} Davidelit (Talk) 03:38, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your use of "

WP:VANDAL

"

Can you please stop using the term "vandal" to describe edits you don't like. Example here The "

WP:VANDAL

" page (that you so quickly link to) is very on the difference between a good faith (ie, well-intentioned) and a vandal edit. Just because you don't like an edit, and even if that edit is not a good one, it does not mean it's vandalism necessarily vandalism.

I suggest you take time out and carefully read

WP:AGF. --Merbabu (talk) 09:35, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

As you have tended to date to usually revert advice/warnings, you must be aware that constantly reverting items on your talk page is your perogative, however it will probably mean that you will not gain access levels of wikipedia that you aspire to on the evidence of your editing behaviour. A certain level of understanding

WP:OWN

also is reflected in your messages and editing.

So as you delete this, remember other members of the editing community watch [1] and will wonder, how come this is all happening? JarrahTree 10:30, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• I saw those claims too and am investigating. In the meantime I have blocked you also from editing 1999 East Timorese crisis because of your edit warring, and your refusal to civilly discuss matters on the talk page. I find that Ckfasdf, in this edit, is correct: you are not discussing anything, you are simply laying down a mandate which is clearly not supported by other editors. Drmies (talk) 15:42, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• So, no more improper accusations of vandalism please, lest you simply be blocked indefinitely. It is the job of editors to help support a positive atmosphere; improper accusations harm such an atmosphere, and on top of the other problematic behavior may well lead to an indefinite block. Drmies (talk) 15:44, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am deeply sorry for what I have done, however in the 1999 East Timorese crisis, I and Ckfasdf has made a compromise that we would not be putting TNI again in the infobox which actually solved the conflict editing. I believe you should at least give me a warning first. I am sorry if I have lots of mistakes.. Eustatius Strijder (talk) 16:31, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

January 2023

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

---

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

---

Administrators:

IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Drmies (talk) 04:04, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

Nomination of Kartika Sari Dewi Sukarno for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Kartika Sari Dewi Sukarno is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kartika Sari Dewi Sukarno until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

 // Timothy :: talk  01:00, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]