Infrastructure tools to support an effective radiation oncology learning health system

[Untitled]

head quter == kathmandu nepal

Hi, Merbabu!

I decided to take a look at this edit from 2009: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Central_Jakarta&diff=298531333&oldid=298405135

And I decided to revert it.

Your edit summary says "(ridiculously trivial. this is the centre of a city of 10million plus and the capital of a 250m people country. there must be 100s (1000s?) of similar HQs)."

But we don't know that for certain, and there are no references that I see that say that there are a whole lot of companies based in Central Jakarta. Instead the solution is to add, and add, and add, and only contemplate what to remove once it is clear too much is added. But we don't know what companies are HQed in Central Jakarta, aside from that one. If we did, there would be additional references saying so.

Now, if we have a high quality map of Central Jakarta, then we can begin to look at many companies and see which ones are located in central Jakarta. WhisperToMe (talk) 10:31, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you so keen to insert airline offices? And second tier and former airline offices to boot? Doesn't that strike you as somewhat trivial? The article is indeed underdeveloped, but it doesn't mean we need to fill up with whatever. --Merbabu (talk) 12:22, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1. Regarding your edit summary - 1. I'm dead serious and all of what you removed needs to be put back into the article.

2. "Why are you so keen to insert airline offices?" - Because they form the economy of Central Jakarta. When you write about a place, you write about the major corporations headquartered in the city. When X city has the headquarters of a large corporation, that information needs to go into the article, especially if it is a small city. "second tier and former airline offices to boot?" - We have no frame of reference to say they are "second tier" compared to others because there is no rest. And "former" - Garuda Indonesia is not exactly an obscure entity.

Airlines are notable corporations. Of course there are also banks, computer companies, etc. but my forte is airlines.

There is no frame of reference as to what the main companies that are headquartered in Central Jakarta are, so I can put in whatever notable company I want.

3."The article is indeed underdeveloped" - Then let it get developed. Decide what to chop later.

4."but it doesn't mean we need to fill up with whatever" - Yes, it does mean we need to fill it up with "whatever"

In order to determine what to put in a Wikipedia article, you need to do research. Find as much as one can find. Once you have a complete picture of a place, then you can decide what is trivial and what isn't.

If you want to prove your point and argue that what I am adding is trivial, you need to find more references and prove me wrong. You need to find a summary of the economic activity in Central Jakarta, the major corporations, etc. etc.

I would like for the information to be put back in the article as soon as possible.

WhisperToMe (talk) 13:24, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How about this? Read this discussion: User_talk:Everything_counts#Companies_and_locations and see how it was resolved. In regards to that the user said: "There's a balance here that I think we can and should try to strike. Rather than adding a narrowly focused statement or citing a couple of specific examples with no broader context -- and then challenging others to throw even more more examples on the heap -- I think that we should try to start with an encyclopedic summary and then add the appropriate level of detail."

In this case, how do I write an encyclopedic summary if I cannot find a document summarizing the economy of Central Jakarta? Without the document, all we can do is add narrowly focused statements, because it is all we have to use. WhisperToMe (talk) 13:28, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm serious too. You can whittle it down all you like, and quote as many policies and essays that you want, with lots of bullet points. As I'm using common sense and a bit of local knowledge, it's not going to convince me that a list of companies at the centre of a city the size of Jakarta improves the encyclopaedia. (Why list Garuda when it's not even there?) If airlines is your speciality, it doesn't mean airline info needs to be added because that's te best you can do.

Perhaps take a bigger picture view and get some resources on Central Jakarta. And work from the top down. Your approach at best provides us with a mish mash of unrelated and off balance pieces of trivia.

Please use the article talk page as is the custom. --Merbabu (talk) 14:14, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PS - that's a lot more sensible. That's exactly what "you need to" do. Now you're not just an airline specialist. --Merbabu (talk) 14:15, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"and quote as many policies and essays that you want," - Policies are unavoidable, as you will see in a moment. They cannot be ignored. Essays can be ignored if you disagree with them, but it would be good to explain why.

While Wikipedia:Common_sense#Use_common_sense instructs users to use commons sense, it also says: "When advancing a position or justifying an action, base your argument on existing agreements, community foundation issues and the interests of the encyclopedia, not your own common sense. Exhorting another editor to "just use common sense" is likely to be taken as insulting, for good reasons." - So that means one needs to explain what "common sense" he or she has.

" a bit of local knowledge" - Use your local knowledge to find verifiable information that can help you write the section. If you simply say "I have local knowledge" but have nothing written down to back it up, it does not go. WP:V clearly states that verifiability, not truth, is the criterion for inclusion.

With WP:V in mind, the only companies that we know of that are currently headquartered in Central Jakarta are Merpati Nusantara Airlines and Sriwijaya. So, we can't say they are insignificant unless we have more information that puts things in perspective. If you have the "local knowledge," use your local knowledge to find sources that will back up whatever you say.

Just because it is the CBD doesn't mean large companies will be headquartered there. In regards to Auckland CBD, page 20 of this document says that while many large companies had offices within Auckland CBD, of New Zealand's largest corporations, only one (Air New Zealand) had its head office within the Auckland CBD.

"it's not going to convince me that a list of companies at the centre of a city the size of Jakarta improves the encyclopaedia." - We are not talking about the city the size of Jakarta. We are talking about the city the size of Central Jakarta, which has about 800,000 people. That's about the size of Austin, Texas. Austin,_Texas#Economy mentions Whole Foods and Dell, major companies. The main article doesn't list too many and its Economy section needs work. Having said that I can always split it into Economy of Austin and work on things in more detail.

"(Why list Garuda when it's not even there?)" - Because it was there. Articles are supposed to talk about the past as well as the present.

WhisperToMe (talk) 14:33, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Your approach at best provides us with a mish mash of unrelated and off balance pieces of trivia." - Since Wikipedia is a constant work in progress, I don't see a problem in providing incomplete information and leaving a section unfinished. It doesn't make an article a "good article" status article, but it helps build it. One can always decide to, at a later point, reorganize the mishmash and balance what is originally off balance. I can choose to contribute as much or as little to a particular article as I want at a particular point. It would be different if it was an article at "Good article" status or higher, or something in the process of being designated as a "good article." WhisperToMe (talk) 14:40, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Central Jakarta. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:37, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

View of Jakarta from Monas.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:53, 3 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

COLLECTIE TROPENMUSEUM Istiqlal 20025716-20025717 merged.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:08, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]