Talk:Nias
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
Nias is part of WikiProject Indonesia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Indonesia and Indonesia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page. Please do not substitute this template.
|
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. |
|
|
|
"Nias Island lies on latitude 10 30' north and longitude 970 98' east" This can't be right. --Wetman 07:08, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Religion Neutrality and More Info
The description of the rise of Christianity is not at all neutral. Numbers of baptisms "improving" and "spiritual awakening" are pro-Christian evangelism.
The article also totally lacks info on the traditional religion, which of course is of greater interest to most readers today than which missionary society has gotten more converts than another.
How and why the island had not been previously been converted to Hinduism and then Islam should be discussed. I've read elsewhere the Dutch had a hard time colonizing the island as well and were not succesful until the late 19th Century -- develop this theme of local resistance.
What is the traditional political structure (one kingdom, different fiefdoms?), and is this preserved ceremonially today?
What is the traditional and contemporary status of women, vis-a-vis reputed original Malayan matriarchy, Christianization, relations with Muslim-majority Indonesia?
Detail the unique culture -- architecture, megalithism, etc.
-
- Yes, yes. I totally agree that the article could be much improved in the directions you have specified. Can you provide online references? I'll read them and integrate information into the Nias article as time allows. And yes, its lame for me to say that I can't visit the library because I have no time, but truth is even if I do I strongly doubt that any library in Jakarta would have sufficient socio-cultural material on Nias. And I'd ask my grand-uncles etc., but even approaching them wrong would be rude.
-
- Lame excuses, I know. But together we can cure some of that lameness by providing online reading material. I promise I will digest them as efficiently as possible. Unless someone else does so first. ---Lemi4 01:59, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] References Section and Other 'Pretifying'
So recently I was introduced to the <ref> tag and to be honest, I'm quite enamored (more details concerning the tag's syntax, and footnotes in general here). It could conveniently round up external links and auto-magically create a reference section. I know, I'm a lamer for having just discovered it.
Anywho0.. a result of my <ref>-ing fun is that I discovered a broken link to an article supposedly citing the damage to the museum at Gunung Sitoli. I hate to remove the sentence since I know first hand that the statement is true, but then it just means that a citation is needed. Perhaps I should have put a 'citation needed' tag there and moved the dead URI here. Anyone feeling like doing so is welcome to it (not me, though, at least not today; I've been up all night just goofing around Wikipedia. Perhaps tomorrow :p)
- I had added the original link to an article written by one of the Museum's employees, but the link (as you noted) is now defunct months later. The good news is that the Museum now has its own website so I added a link to it although I'm not sure I did it correctly (Plus the website is in Indonesian). But I'm going to dig around and see if I can find another similar article that details more of the museums damage.64.81.100.40 23:11, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
Aand.. I found this really cool pic of Nias Island from the Dutch version of this article. Now I don't speak Dutch but from the symbols at the pic's page I gather that the image is public domain, so it can be safely and legally used here. But like, how does one go about doing so? Sure I could re-upload the thing to Wikimedia but, like, would that be right? It just doesn't feel right to have redundant copies of the exact same image strewn all over Wikipedia...
That's it, hope to see this article grow s'more. cheers :) --Lemi4 15:29, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
- Absolutely. It's public domain, so it would probably be even better to upload it to Commons; the Germans could safely remove it then. Edricson 20:28, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
