Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sumitro Djojohadikusumo/archive2

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 14 January 2023 [1].

Sumitro Djojohadikusumo edit

Nominator(s): Juxlos (talk) 13:34, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about an Indonesian economist/politician/rebel/oligarch/aristocrat/statesman, depending on when and who you ask (well except "economist", everyone agrees on that), who formed Indonesia's economic policies from 1950 to 1957 and 1968 to the 1980s and arguably to this day. Previous FAC failed due to general lack of interest (helps that Indonesian history isn't exactly common knowledge). Juxlos (talk) 13:34, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Image review edit

  • Don't use fixed px size
  • Suggest adding a legend to the map caption, since the inbuilt one is unreadable at that size
  • File:Suharto,_Irian_Barat_dari_Masa_ke_Masa,_Preface_(cropped).jpg needs a US tag. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:32, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Addressed. Is the "legend" sufficient? Juxlos (talk) 16:09, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not quite: what represents the operations? The dashed lines, the arrows, both, something else? Nikkimaria (talk) 02:53, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The black arrows. Added. Juxlos (talk) 13:08, 27 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Arsonal edit

  • This article could benefit from a thorough edit to comply with MOS:COMMA and MOS:DASHES.
  • Lead section mentions that Sumitro is Javanese, yet this fact and his family background are not mentioned or referenced anywhere in the article.
  • Added (and source)
  • "During his studies, he joined an Indonesian students' organization there which aimed to promote Indonesian arts and culture." The use of "there" is ambiguous, since the Netherlands, France, and Spain have been mentioned by this point in the paragraph, and may not be necessary.
  • Removed
  • "During the political wrangling and coup attempt that followed, the group was first relocated to Yogyakarta, and was brought to Sukarno while their kidnappers presented demands to Sukarno to remove Sjahrir and appoint a new cabinet. Due to a botched attempt to kidnap another minister, Amir Sjarifuddin, however, Sudarsono's soldiers failed to show up to Sukarno's palace. Sukarno refused the demands, Sudarsono was arrested, and Sjahrir along with his group were released." The first sentence reads awkwardly and may benefit from a rewrite to only mention Sukarno once. The information in the first sentence also conflicts with the second because it says that the hostages were brought to Sukarno, then they actually were not.
  • Better now?
  • "Sumitro was charged with bypassing it and on one occasion American cargo ship SS Martin Behrman carrying cargo from the Indonesian-controlled city of Cirebon was seized by Dutch marines. This is a run-on sentence.
  • Separated
  • "[...] Sumitro gave a press conference which was prominently featured in American media - The New York Times, for example, published in its entirety a memorandum [...]" Is there a reason these two sentences are not separated by a full stop?
  • The reason being my tendency to overuse commas and dashes. Changed
  • Please verify whether the debt figures specified by Kahin is using Netherlands Indies gulden rather than Dutch guilder. At first glance, I don't think Kahin clarifies this, though in my experience the Indies version of the currency is the one usually used in the context of colonial period.
  • I cannot find any statements for either case in either Kahin or Thee Kian Wie's statement. Though, since NEI's guilder is fixed at par to the Dutch guilder, and the NEI's government didn't exactly exist by late 1949, I imagine they meant the Dutch guilder.
  • "Sumitro also opposed deferring the Western New Guinea issue, but was again overridden by Hatta." This sentence may benefit from explaining what the "issue" actually is.
  • Done
  • A significant portion of the section titled "Minister of Industry" is dedicated to Sumitro's activities after he left the Natsir cabinet and his minister post. Perhaps the section should be titled differently.
  • Added the "UI" - any suggestions? It does still feel a little off.
  • The article never parenthetically associates UI with University of Indonesia, so maybe ===Minister of Industry and academic appointment=== is more clear. Speaking of which, are See also: Natsir Cabinet and See also: Wilopo Cabinet necessary if they are already linked in the prose? If they are removed, See also: Liberal democracy period in Indonesia can also be brought up immediately under the ==Cabinet Minister== header. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 05:11, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and academia"?. Also, changed up the see alsos.
  • Huh, in my defense, that article was created like last month.
  • "He was president commissioner of Astra in 1992, when the group faced a takeover, and Sumitro resigned in December that year." Who was attempting takeover?
  • Expanded the sentence
  • "[...] Sumitro still held considerable influence in policymaking circles due to many of his former pupils holding government positions during the 1980s, and his continued teaching at Universitas Indonesia." University of Indonesia is used throughout, but this sentence uses Universitas Indonesia.
  • Fixed
  • "Despite his previous Keynesian policies of extensive state involvement [...]" The characterization of his economic policies as Keynesian comes very late in the article, well after the sections about his ministerial career. Can this idea be introduced earlier?
  • Added in the first sentence of his ministry under Suharto
  • "[...] he continued to play a role in Golkar party politics [...]" Using "continued" implies he was already involved in Golkar. When did he start his involvement? (I presume since the start of the New Order's three-party system, but this needs further information about the extent of his party involvement.)
  • A little tricky since Sumitro didn't play much party functionary - and well, basically if not literally everyone in government was in Golkar back then. I think it's easier to simply cut off the Golkar part.
  • The Legacy section seems underdeveloped, especially since there is often curiosity and interest among Indonesians as to why he joined PRRI. Social Science and Power in Indonesia (Irwan in Hadiz & Dhakidae 2005), for example states that Sumitro "did so in the name of capitalism". The book also expands upon idea that, despite training neo-liberal economists at UI, his policies were far from liberal. Recognition of Belligerency and the Law of Armed Conflict (McLaughlin 2020) dives into a 1959 treatise by Sumitro explaining his views on the doctrine on recognition of belligerency in the context of international law and how this relates to PRRI. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 17:11, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just to note, due to errands I may take a few more days for the last few points. Juxlos (talk) 14:58, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the infobox, Sumitro's ministerial positions are listed in reverse chronological order, but within each ministerial section, his terms of office are listed in forward chronological order. I believe common practice is to display these in reverse chronological order as well. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 05:18, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • That better?
  • Hi Arsonal, I was wondering if you felt in a position to either support or oppose this nomination? Obviously, neither is obligatory. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:56, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm leaning toward support, but I would still like to see the ==Legacy== section further developed before committing. —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 03:25, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I have incorporated Hadiz & Dhakidae, but I'm not sure about McLaughlin - doesn't feel like it is something particularly relevant to Sumitro, more to PRRI itself (Sumitro believed PRRI could not get a belligerent status because it went to guerilla warfare too quickly). Added a little vignette on the usual things named after him ( a road in UI).
    Otherwise, not sure how much else I can include in that section. Juxlos (talk) 16:10, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging Arsonal for information. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:13, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Arsonal (talk + contribs)— 04:16, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator note edit

This has been open for three weeks and has yet to pick up a general support. Unless it attracts considerable movement towards a consensus to promote over the next three or four days I am afraid that it is liable to be archived. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:54, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Mike Christie edit

Since this is short of reviews but had reviewers last time around, I'm pinging those reviewers in case they can take another look: Kaiser matias, Dudley Miles. Coords, I don't think I've done that before (pinged prior reviewers to someone else's FAC); let me know if you'd rather I didn't.

Reading through now; review to follow. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:28, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've copyedited; please revert anything you disagree with.

  • "According to British reports, Sumitro had been included in the delegation to provide a good impression for the Dutch government": does this mean the Dutch included him in order to make them look better at the UN because they included an Indonesian? If so I think it should be clearer, and perhaps also the reason why this mattered should be stated -- presumably because the independence war was well under way by this time. As the paragraph is currently laid out a reader can't see the two are connected (if I'm right in assuming they are).
  • The source was a British report, which simply stated "in order to impress the outside world". It was fairly obvious in context that the impression is a "hey look, we have an Indonesian in our delegation, they're Dutch", but it was not explicitly stated. Any advice?
  • "During the political wrangling and coup attempt that followed, the group was first relocated to Yogyakarta": why "first"? No other move is mentioned. Or is this intended to refer to "show up to Sukarno's palace"?
    • By 1946, Sukarno was based in Yogyakarta, so yeah the first is not necessary. Removed.
  • You mention the kidnappers' plans twice: " intended to remove Sjahrir from office" and "planning to force Sukarno to remove Sjahrir": can we eliminate the repetition?
    • Consolidated
  • "Sumitro was assigned to the Indonesian delegation to the United Nations": surely the UN had not recognized Indonesian independence by this time? So shouldn't we qualify "Indonesian delegation" -- presumably the Dutch also still claimed to represent Indonesia at the UN?
    • At that time, I believe, they were observers - not members, but definitely in the room. There are definitely pictures of them at the UN as the delegation. "Observer delegation", maybe?
  • Is the Indonesian-American corporation worth a red link?
    • Not really, no. I think it did not last very long.
  • Can we make the sequence of events in 1957 a bit more linear at the end of the first paragraph of "Joining the rebellion" and start of the second paragraph? "Throughout 1957" refers entirely to events after "Arriving on 13 May".
  • "He participated in another dissident meeting in the town of Sungai Dareh in January 1958, and a deadlock occurred": a deadlock implies an inability to reach a decision or take action, but we haven't said the group was trying to make any particular decision. You give Barlian's position, but what progress was prevented by it?
    • Sumitro et al. wanted to recruit Barlian for their cause, but Barlian didn't want to join. Better written now?
  • "to be based in Manado under the Permesta group": I assume the Permesta group was a part of the PRRI, just an organizational group within it? If so do we need to mention them here? If we do I think we should identify them in some way so the reader doesn't have to follow links to know what we're talking about.
    • It was affiliated but basically separate. Clarification sufficient?
      Yes, but we now have "Sumitro's posting was to be based in Manado" -- does this mean he was actually posted there? If so I'd make this "Sumitro's was based in" or "was posted to". Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:27, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    With another reading of the source, it seems that he wasn't posted there - I cannot find anything stating that, and his last known position was abroad. He was also abroad by the time the movement had been defeated. On the other hand, I can't find something that explicitly states he was abroad, so I reworded it. Juxlos (talk) 16:42, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Additionally, due to Sumitro's involvement in the rebellion, many of his students who had pursued further education in foreign universities were excluded from government posts." Seems a non sequitur, I think because we mention it before saying the PRRI was defeated -- perhaps it would feel more relevant later in the paragraph.
    • Moved it to become the last sentence in the section - better spot?
  • "Despite its utilization in planning, the study was ceased when": suggest "use" rather than the unnecessarily formal "utilization", but I'm not sure what is meant -- what planning is being referred to here?
    • Economic planning - clarification there sufficient?

That's it for a first pass. Overall looks very sound. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:50, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Second pass. One pont unstruck above as well.

  • In the lead we have "Following his death, his children and grandchildren remain influential in Indonesian politics" but this is not supported in the body.
    Struck; I missed this but it's there. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 00:56, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I got curious about Matthew Fox and found this, which I can send you a PDF of if you don't have access. It seems to contradict "sole agent", and has a couple of minor details you might be able to use.
    Having looked at a couple more articles it appears it was the purchasing and buying agent for the Indonesian government for some commodities, but not for private business.
    Hmm, I guess Thee Kian Wie needs to check again. But maybe it was that the NYT was not informed of the exclusive arrangement then. Regardless, I think reducing the "sole agent" to "an agent" is a safe thing to do here.

Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 00:34, 5 January 2023 (UTC) More later. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:12, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • You have both Soekiman and Sukiman, and only one needs to link to Sukiman Cabinet.
  • Fixed
  • "Sumitro also engaged in a public debate with Sjafruddin Prawiranegara, on their differing views on Indonesian economic development while both also criticizing the incumbent Sukiman Cabinet": tense mismatch. Suggest "Sumitro also engaged in a public debate with Sjafruddin Prawiranegara, on their differing views on Indonesian economic development. Both also criticized the incumbent Sukiman Cabinet." though there are other ways to solve it.
  • Fixed
  • "The nationalization of De Javasche Bank and its conversion into Bank Indonesia was completed during his tenure": should be "were completed", unless the nationalization and the conversion are two ways of saying the same thing.
  • Fixed
  • Is it "PRRI" or "the PRRI"? The article has both.
  • No "the". Standardized.
  • "Soedjatmoko" looks like the old spelling system -- shouldn't that be "Sudjatmoko"? Same question for "William Soeryadjaya".
  • I hate EVO. Anyways, put everything into EYD, hopefully.

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 00:56, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Mike Christie: Addressed issues. Re the first first point, the paragraph has been expanded somewhat, and I think it gives a better idea of the situation now.

Support. Issues all addressed. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 17:21, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Prose check from Airship edit

As always, these are suggestions, not demands. Feel free to decline.

  • Make sure you've standardised which variation of English you're using: favor/humor/behavior vs favour/humour/behaviour, defence vs defense, travelled vs traveled.
  • Decided to go with British English and did a couple passes - did I miss anything?
  • Is the occupation parameter necessary in the infobox?
  • No, not really, and honestly I don't even remember putting that in. Removed.
  • Done
  • "... which Sumitro was not part of took part in ..." grammatically sound, but perhaps not as clear as could be.
  • Maybe with parentheses?
  • "He also supported the transmigration program" could specify the subject for clarity.
  • Done
  • "This cabinet was the first to include the Berkeley Mafia, a group of Western-educated economists with Sumitro being a key member and some others such as Finance Minister Ali Wardhana being former students of Sumitro." the subordinate clauses are just slightly out of hand
  • Splitting into 2 sentences work well?
  • "The takeover was completed by January 1993, Sumitro having resigned in December 1992." you could just say "Sumitro resigned in December 1992 and the takeover was completed the following month."
  • Fair enough, fixed
  • "policies were due to his view that such policies were simply a continuation" waffly. "policies because he believed they continued" better.
  • Used a "simply" there, but fixed
  • "military general-politician" is unclear.
  • "And" better there? Also did some stuff with parenthesis
  • "his involvement in the 1997–98 activists kidnappings in Indonesia" you may want to pipe the link for increased clarity.
  • Piped
  • Combining the final two paragraphs of the family section would probably work better.
  • Fair enough

Leaning support currently. Look forward to your response. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:35, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AirshipJungleman29, I think Juxlos is ready for you now. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:28, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi AirshipJungleman29, I was wondering if you felt in a position to either support or oppose this nomination? Obviously, neither is obligatory. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:56, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Dudley edit

  • I commented on the previous nomination, but it was timed out before I completed my comments, so I will start again.
  • "Sumitro served as finance minister in the cabinets of Prime Ministers Wilopo and Burhanuddin Harahap". As you mention below that he became an opponent of Sukarno, it would be more relevant that he served as finance minister under Sukarno than the names of the PMs.
  • Sukarno had limited day-to-day involvement during this period, and it would be somewhat inaccurate to describe him as the person over Sumitro at this point. I added "during the Sukarno era" at the end of the sentence - that alright?
  • "With the establishment of the New Order". You should mention that Sukarno was overthrown in a military coup and replaced by Suharto.
  • Done
  • "a high ranking civil servant in the Dutch colonial government". Presumably of the Dutch East Indies, but you should spell this out.
  • Done
  • "his children and grandchildren remained influential in Indonesian politics". Remained or remain? (as of date if the latter).
  • Latter
  • Is his mother not recorded?
  • Something something WP:SYSTEMIC. Added, although just her name is really recorded.
  • "from ports under Republican control". Was part of the territory under republican control and part Dutch? You should clarify?
  • I'm not entirely sure how to clarify that in text. I feel like this is clear to the reader? Since "Republican-controlled" implies that they don't control everything.
  • Looking again at this, I think you need more context at the beginning of the 'Early revolution' section. You start by saying that he joined a Dutch delegation and then returned to join the government of the Republic of Indonesia. (The link is not helpful as the Government of Indonesia article starts in 1950.) A sentence at the start of the section saying Sukarno declared independence in 1945 and what territory they gained control of would set the scene. Then what was the purpose of the Dutch delegation? Did Djojohadikusumo initially support the Dutch. These points need clarifying. Dudley Miles (talk) 11:44, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
On ports - I am not sure that information on which territories exactly were controlled by Indonesians would be relevant to the reader. Not to mention, being in war and all that, territories change hands (mostly one way at that time). I feel like "Cirebon was under republican control at the time" would be sufficient for Sumitro's context in the incident.
On the Dutch delegation, a little digging found me an online magazine article that seemed to have dug deep into Indonesia's position in this first UNSC meeting. Added to the article, hopefully clears up the context a bit. What Sumitro had in his head at that time is probably not something known to us, but there are second-hand (possibly propaganda-mixed) reports I put in there from the magazine. Juxlos (talk) 15:44, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • How about expanding the start of the 'Early revolution' section to set the context with something like "After the end of World War II, Sukarno proclaimed Indonesian independence on 17 August 1945, and a four year military and diplomatic struggle followed in which the Dutch mostly controlled the major towns and the Indonesians the countryside." Obviously, this would need correcting in the light of your better knowledge. Dudley Miles (talk) 17:19, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm still not sure how to present that without breaking WP:DUE with regards to Sumitro's article, and simultaneously being accurate at the same time. I believe that at the time of the Martin Behrman affair Indonesians still had sizeable control of some major settlements. Indonesians started out in control of basically the entire place (by virtue of the Dutch not being there), and gradually lost control of cities and some countryside over 4 years of fighting.
    Maybe a sentence like "the Dutch returned sometime in 1946, and retook some major cities while Indonesians maintained control of others", or thereabouts. Juxlos (talk) 04:21, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Added it:
    "By this time Dutch forces under the Netherlands Indies Civil Administration had returned to Indonesia to retake control, but they had only managed to hold several coastal cities at first." Juxlos (talk) 04:29, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, once I have had a reply to my comment of 31 December above. Dudley Miles (talk) 23:35, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
New years’ activities and whatnot, will try to complete the responses by this week. Juxlos (talk) 02:31, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Juxlos ? Gog the Mild (talk) 14:14, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Forgot to ping, but I think I've addressed the issues still around. Juxlos (talk) 14:36, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Sumitro (seated, far left), in the Dutch–Indonesian Round Table Conference." I would add the date.
  • Added
  • "it was decided to abolish the Benteng program in order to increase domestic production". But you say that the program restricted imports in order to increase domestic production. The apparent contradiction needs explanation.
  • Not exactly - the program restricted imports to increase domestic indigenous production (read: screwing with Dutch/Chinese-Indonesian companies). Clarified with an extra sentence in that paragraph.
  • "The ministry was previously headed by Suhadi Reksowardojo during the Sukarno period, although it had been inactive since until Sumitro's appointment to the office." I had to read this sentence several times to understand it. Maybe delete as not needed.
  • It was more to allow the name to be mentioned in the Infobox, to be honest. Regardless, "since" removed, feels like that made the sentence make sense.
  • "students at the Bandung Institute of Technology were less accepting of his policies and Sumitro walked out from the meeting." What meeting? You have only referred to discussions in general.
  • "Discussion session", I suppose
  • "Prabowo was also married to Titiek Suharto, one of Suharto's daughters." Why also? for clarity I suggest "Prabowo was formerly married to Titiek Suharto, one of Suharto's daughters"
  • Changed, though I made the divorce explicit.
  • "Sukarno's anti-capitalist stance clashed with him". A stance does not clash with a person. Maybe "he opposed Sukarno's anti-capitalist stance". Dudley Miles (talk) 09:59, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source review by Nikkimaria edit

Source review - spotchecks not done

  • Some of the details in the infobox don't appear to be sourced anywhere - for example, the exact dates of his ministry appointments
  • Added a few citations here and there and added text for exact dates. Not sure if I should source the successor/predecessors - is this common practice?
  • Everything included should be cited somewhere in the article. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:45, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Should be done now. Juxlos (talk) 04:16, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • FN26 is missing author. Ditto FN75, check throughout
  • Added, also with fn 123 and 149
  • The Politics of Economic Development in Indonesia has editors who should be credited
  • Added
  • Be consistent in whether publication locations are included
  • Removed the one that existed
  • Ranges should use endashes, including in titles
  • Fixed, I think.
  • For some reason, the specific link to it seems to be buggy now, but it has been cited in several other academic sources ([2], [3]). It's also a PhD dissertation from a reputable university.

Nikkimaria (talk) 17:42, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nikkimaria, is that satisfactory? Gog the Mild (talk) 14:16, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nikkimaria ? Gog the Mild (talk) 12:46, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, should be good to go. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:32, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

SC edit

Putting down a marker: will review shortly. - SchroCat (talk) 17:02, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Early life
  • "going to the civil service" jars a bit with me: "into the civil service" feels more natural
  • Changed
  • "Completing his bachelor's in 1937": "bachelor's degree"?
  • Changed
Early Revolution
  • "but Sumitro became disillusioned": you can use "he" here
  • Fair enough
  • "On the other hand" is a bit too informal: "An Indonesian report differed and stated...", maybe
  • "in contrast", maybe?
  • "Ukraine, the Soviet Union and Egypt": you need to check for serial comma use and make sure it's consistent. I saw it used above and noted its absence here (if this is in strict Oxford style in line with Hart's Rules, it should be used, but I'll leave it to decide – as long as it's consistent).
  • added the Oxford comma
  • "this was shot down": informal. "this was vetoed" or rejected or similar
  • Changed to rejected
  • "Sjahrir's diplomatic approaches to the Dutch to be too lenient an approach.": you can lose the last two words to avoid the duplication.
  • Removed
  • "10 year license": "10-year licence". (it's licence in OxEng for the noun)
  • Huh, TIL. Changed.
Diplomatic talks
  • Added

"owe the Indonesian one": this is a bit clumsy: " owe the Indonesian state"?

  • "owe Indonesia"?

More to come. - SchroCat (talk) 19:22, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing

Minister of Industry and academia
  • "During this period": it's a vague when this is. Maybe something like "in the early-1950s" or whatever the timeframe is?
  • Sure
  • "he returned to being a government minister": "when he returned to government"?
  • Shortened
  • "mid 1951": hyphenate
  • Done
  • "Both also criticized": no need for "also"
  • Done
  • "The two economists did agree on": "The two agreed on"
  • Done
  • "He also supported": Need a name here – you've been talking about two individuals
  • Sumitro, added
Minister of Finance
  • "These policies did result in some reduction": These policies resulted?
  • Done
  • "He was dispatched": Again, need a name here as you've been talking about two people
  • Sumitro again, fixed
Joining the rebellion
  • "reestablished": "re-established", per the OED
  • Hyphenated
  • "intelligence agents mainly in Singapore": comma needed after agents
  • Added
Rebellion and exile
  • "On the other hand, the pro-government": too informal. "Conversely", maybe?
  • Sure, changed
  • "autonomous from PRRI": "autonomous from the PRRI"
  • Above it has been settled that PRRI doesn't go with a "the", so I will keep it
Minister of Trade
  • "Sumitro was convinced to return to Indonesia.": Don't need the last two words.
  • truncated
Minister of Research
  • '"sternly."': per LQ this should be '"sternly".'
  • fixed
  • "Sumitro did this": "He did this"
  • Changed
  • "Five-Year Plans" -> "five-year plans"
  • Changed
  • "removal in office" - > "removal from office"
  • fixed
Views
  • "While he disliked the enforcement of various quotas and restrictions on trade, he acknowledged that it was politically impossible for Indonesia during his time to engage in a complete free-market economic regime, and many of his policies were based on an intention to remove Dutch influence from the Indonesian economy;[152] his opposition to Sjafruddin Prawiranegara's policies because he believed they simply continued the Dutch approach": this is a bit of a mammoth sentence that is trying to do too much. I suggest breaking it down and simplifying a bit
  • Split to three sentences? Also, reordered the paragraph to hopefully make his views be presented in a logical order.
  • "labour unions" -> "trade unions"
  • Sure
Family and personal life
  • "in his biography of pinning the blame on Prabowo." This is a bit garbled: I suggest removing "in his biography" to make the meaning clearer
  • Fair enough, removed

That's my lot – I hope they help. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 10:07, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • @SchroCat: Issues addressed. Juxlos (talk) 01:17, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Nice piece of work. I have no subject knowledge here, so I do not pass comment on the completeness of sources used, etc, but simply the standard of prose and adherence to the MOS in relation to FA criteria. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 08:27, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Sumitro_Djojohadikusumo/archive2&oldid=1133562337"