Talk:Bali Nine
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 | Bali Nine has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | An incomplete index of news articles from external websites that could be used as references in the article has been compiled. If in need of a particular news article to use as a reliable reference in the article, you may find the /Collected references subpage useful. |
|
 | This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:
|
| This  level-3 vital article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=logo}
 | It is requested that an image or photograph of Bali Nine be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible. Wikipedians in the following regions may be able to help:
|
External links
In accordance with Longhairs comments that links on the Schapelle Corby wiki were unecyclopedic I have removed the external links from this wiki too.Bluetongue 23:35, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
- Where would the world be without you!?!??! Bluetongue 21:55, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
- I don't know. You're slipping on the assumption of good faith once again. Perhaps a read over What Wikipedia is not and External links will help settle your obvious frustrations with my edits. The community as a whole creates the policies in force here; I only enforce them. -- Longhair\talk 22:41, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
GA note
I won't review the GA nomination now, but the article appears to be incomplete in that it does not clearly state what happened to the Bali Nine at the end of the appeals process. Are they serving their sentences? Where? When can they expect parole, if any? Sandstein 06:53, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
Successful good article nomination
I am glad to report that this article nomination for good article status has been promoted. This is how the article, as of October 21, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:
- 1. Well written?: Most of the article is well written in clear language. However, for readability sake and per WP:LEAD, please merge shorter paragraphs together, lead should be no more than 4. Also, please try to merge shorter paragraphs (less than three sentences) together in the other sections of the article. The Criminal History section is out of chronological order, and should be moved up further in the article.
- 2. Factually accurate?: Article is referenced to (50) good sources, looks like most used WP:CIT. Sections Pre-arrest history and Pre-trial investigation, however, are missing some cites at end of paragraphs for verification, so please add these before your next step in quality review, which should not be WP:FAC, but another WP:PR, in my opinion.
- 3. Broad in coverage?: Article is thorough, covering many aspects of the proceedings. However, per Sandstein (talk · contribs)'s comment, please expand the Appeals section with more detail, as well as more sources, in order to improve the quality of the article.
- 4. Neutral point of view?: Article does seem to be phrased in neutral language, simply stating the events as they occurred.
- 5. Article stability? Minor anon edit concerns, but looking back several months these are usually addressed quickly. I also saw some nice civility in talk page discussion. No issues here.
- 6. Images?: 4 images used in the article. All have fair use rationales. Please add subsection headings to the image pages: "Licensing" above the license tags, and "Fair use rationale" for the rationales.
If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to Good article reassessment. Thank you to all of the editors who worked hard to bring it to this status, and congratulations. — Curt Wilhelm VonSavage 10:20, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
This brilliant page wouldn't be possible without the AFP tipping off Indonesian authorities and basically ending 9 young Australian lives.. bravo! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.28.124.246 (talk) 16:20, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
- Look on the bright side...at least you and other taxpayers wont be footing the bill for their luxury accomodation in Aussie jails! WikiphyteMk1 (talk) 11:21, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
I cleaned up the article to make it look more neat and tidy. Also added some stuff from the book "One Way Ticket - The Untold Story of the Bali 9" by Cindy Wockner and Madonna King. Portillo (talk) 01:27, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
Related arrests
Image copyright problem with Image:MichaelCzugajinterview 9.jpg
The image Image:MichaelCzugajinterview 9.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
- That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
- That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --06:36, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
Scott Rush
This is of relevance to both here and the Scott Rush page but I might as well ask here since it's likely to receive more intention. Has there ever been any clear evidence whether Scott Rush was informed he was under surveilance? The information in the article is somewhat unclear. I would be surprised if he was informed but "Mate, we could not stop him, they have let him go through and he's on his way to Bali" seems to suggest to me he may have been Nil Einne (talk) 01:33, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
GA status
An unreferenced section tag for a section that should really be referenced and the prose is not quite up to GA standard (all the "on 13 February 2006", "on 6 September 2006" paragraphs in the lead and extensive quotes under reactions). Someone should probably look into giving the article a good copyedit or it could be delisted. AIRcorn (talk) 18:22, 29 October 2012 (UTC)
"Awaiting commutation of their sentences"
Execution Date
Zero dark 39.
Immediate failure of the GA criteria: it has an {{Unreferenced section}} banner since 4 years ago! sentausa (talk) 07:24, 29 April 2015 (UTC)
Done and agreed. As soon as I saw this, I jumped to the talk page to see if there was any valid explanation for why a four-year tagged unreferenced section is acceptable in a good article, yet alone one linked from the main page. Here's the text, in case anybody can source references:
=== Pre-trial investigation === Indonesian law does not require that arrested people be immediately charged with an offence, and by 22 April 2005 no charges had yet been laid. Police indicated that the five arrested at the airport would be charged with drug trafficking, which carries the death penalty, while those arrested in the hotel would be charged with the lesser offence of drug possession, which carries a maximum penalty of ten years' imprisonment. By 26 April 2005, media speculation suggested that Andrew Chan recruited the other eight to act as [[drug mules]] – couriers who would not arouse suspicion while carrying heroin to Australia – and offered them A$10,000 to A$15,000 each to carry out this task, although some reports claim that they were only going to get A$5000. On 27 April 2005, Colonel Bambang Sugiarto, head of the Bali police drug squad, said police would seek to have all nine charged with offenses which carry the death penalty. He revealed that several of the nine had previously visited Bali using false passports, suggesting that they had acted as drug couriers before. Indonesian police released video evidence showing heroin being removed from the bodies of the four arrested at the airport. Indonesian police initially maintained that Chan was the "mastermind" of the importation plan. "They were following Chan's instructions and if they didn't follow these instructions their families would be killed," Sugiarto said. Australian police said that they believed that an Australian drug syndicate was behind the plan. Mike Phelan, International Operations Chief of the AFP, said, "This is obviously some sort of sophisticated syndicate. In excess of 10 kg of heroin is a large amount and by definition it requires a distribution network here in Australia." Lawyers in Indonesia engaged by the families of those arrested appeared in media interviews, to concede that the four arrested at the airport were acting as drug couriers. Anggia Browne was quoted as saying, "They are only couriers – they did it just for money." She said they were from low-income families, and did not know that drug trafficking in Indonesia carries the death penalty. Investigations closed in August 2005 and briefs handed prosecutors in Denpasar ready for trial.
GA Reassessment
- This discussion is transcluded from Talk:Bali Nine/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.
I just added a reference, the section now has 5 references, including at least one in each paragraph. EdChem (talk) 06:19, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
Reassessment status query
sentausa, voidxor, it appears that EdChem has addressed the issues you raised in this reassessment. Are there any additional issues you have with the article's adherence to the Good Article criteria, or can this reassessment be closed? Thank you for your response. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:39, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
- I'd worry about the four sentences that had been tagged {{Citation needed}} since May 2015, but I just removed them. Unless somebody restores them without references, I have no qualms with you closing the reassessment. Thanks for asking. – voidxor 23:54, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
- Right now I don't have time to check for additional issues with the article's adherence to the Good Article criteria, but for the issue that I raised, I see that it's OK now. sentausa (talk) 08:11, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks to you both. I'll close the reassessment as "kept", then. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:28, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
- No country is in a rush to rescue (let alone go to war for) self-proclaimed heroin dealers. Australia doesn't have the backing of any other major power to do this either. The United States is allies with both countries and wouldn't support violating sovereignty in order to save felons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.156.157.19 (talk) 18:11, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
