Talk:Environmental protest in Indonesia denounces Australia's plastic waste exports

 
Retraction — August 29, 2025
 
This article has been retracted because it failed to comply with our sourcing policy, and contained misleading information.
The last version of the article text can be found here.
 

Review of revision 4873939 [Passed]

Revision 4873939 of this article has been reviewed by Gryllida (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 12:41, 15 August 2025 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: I have a few issues. Firstly, for NPOV, it would be good to find comments from Australia, if the Australian government issued a comment by now; and to clarify the research method and peer reviewed status of the findings by ECOTON, as otherwise in absence of such a clarification their claim about plastic in unborn babies is about as good as a blog post. The name 'Ecological Study and Wetland Conservation Institute' should be included in the first paragraph. it would be good to say how many people attended the protest. I hope these issues can be addressed within less than 24 hours after the article is published. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

Revision 4873939 of this article has been reviewed by Gryllida (talk · contribs) and has passed its review at 12:41, 15 August 2025 (UTC). Copyright: Passed Newsworthiness: Passed Verifiability: Passed NPOV: Passed Style: Passed Comments by reviewer: I have a few issues. Firstly, for NPOV, it would be good to find comments from Australia, if the Australian government issued a comment by now; and to clarify the research method and peer reviewed status of the findings by ECOTON, as otherwise in absence of such a clarification their claim about plastic in unborn babies is about as good as a blog post. The name 'Ecological Study and Wetland Conservation Institute' should be included in the first paragraph. it would be good to say how many people attended the protest. I hope these issues can be addressed within less than 24 hours after the article is published. The reviewed revision should automatically have been edited by removing {{Review}} and adding {{Publish}} at the bottom, and the edit sighted; if this did not happen, it may be done manually by a reviewer.

RR: add name of org, add no. of protesters, and expand

Hi @Badak Ironman @VinderV Hi @George Ho @Wikiwide @BigKrow @Lofi Gurl @Back ache @Md Mobashir Hossain @Almondo2025, @Dsuke1998AEOS, @Ternera, @Monsieur2137 @Asked42, @Sheminghui.WU, @excelblue (if you want yourself removed or someone else added to this list, please inquire here) A revision has been requested. Here is a list of what to do. (If/when you intend to start working on it, please Subscribe to this section and to this talk page, and post reply messages here when you started and finished editing) See below:

1) Check the review comment above and implement the changes.

Thanks, Gryllida 12:43, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm currently reading the article and its sources, and I'll perform the requested changes soon. Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 13:39, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

I already revised the request for the news. And removed the picture that indicate Ai generate. Badak Ironman (talk) 05:12, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

AI use and AI generated image

I have some reservations about using an AI-generated image to depict the protest in Surabaya. While it’s not a photo of the actual event, it functions similarly to stock or illustrative images often used in journalism when no original image is available. The key is transparency. I’ve updated the caption to clearly state the image is AI-generated and credited the uploader. Like any other content, readers should be able to verify or explore further, and attributing the uploader helps support that transparency.

The article also shows signs of AI-assisted writing. While this isn’t prohibited, contributors are strongly encouraged to declare such use to maintain transparency.Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Reviewer) 23:11, 15 August 2025 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm also very concerned. None of the sources listed in the article support either the alleged response of the embassy staff member or the content about LindungiHutan. I'm also not completely against AI use for writing Wikinews articles (I think it can be especially useful for breaking news stories), but it should always be accompanied by strict human supervision after output to ensure verifiability, NPOV and compliance with the style guide. In the unlikely case that this is an OR piece, the author should have disclosed their notes on the talk page. This article definitely shouldn't have been accepted. Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 00:40, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Dsuke1998AEOS, thank you for your attention and for reviewing the article. I wrote this article based on information I gathered from Ecoton news and several other external sources. In the drafting process, I did use AI as a tool to help structure the text, but I personally verified the facts, checked the data, and edited the content to ensure it aligned with the information I had and with relevant sources.

If there are parts that you feel are not fully supported by the listed references, I’m more than happy to improve them or add more appropriate citations. Your feedback is very helpful to make the article more accurate and aligned with the guidelines.

Thank you 🙏 Badak Ironman (talk) 01:39, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

I'll take another look at the full article.

@Badak Ironman, what source did you use for the following paragraph: "Meanwhile, environmental activists in Indonesia were calling for a regional summit to address..."?

In addition to the statements identified above by Dsuke1998AEOS, I couldn't find a source that mentions a potential regional summit or the Basel Convention.

Thank you in advance.Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Reviewer) 14:36, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your input. Since I'm a new contributor here, there's quite a lot I might not know yet, but I'll keep learning. I've removed the parts of the photo that appear to be AI-generated. Badak Ironman (talk) 05:15, 16 August 2025 (UTC)

Sourcing issues with this article

@Gryllida and @Badak Ironman,

I believe the following statements are not supported by the provided sources. Can either of you indicate the source for the following:

• ECOTON has not yet disclosed whether these findings have undergone peer review...
• ...the group has previously published other research in scientific journals on microplastics in consumer products.
• Wearing hazmat suits...
• ...demanded stricter waste regulations and an end to what they described as "environmental injustice."
• A banner held at the protest read, "Stop poisoning our children"...
• "This is not just about waste. This is about public health... Australia needs to take responsibility..."
• ...containers of imported plastic waste often arrive labeled as recyclable...
• The Australian government has not yet issued a formal response...
• A consulate staff member who spoke on condition of anonymity...
• ...said the consulate "respects the right to peaceful protest"...
• In previous years, Australian officials have stated they expect recycling exports to comply...
• ...environmental activists in Indonesia were calling for a regional summit...
• ...to address transboundary waste and enhance enforcement of the Basel Convention...
• The protest came amid growing concern over Indonesia's role as one of the world’s largest plastic waste importers.
• ...Several environmental organizations, including LindungiHutan, have echoed ECOTON’s concerns...
• "Plastic waste does not just harm humans, it suffocates mangroves...," said Siktiyana...
• LindungiHutan... has launched several collaborations education campaigns this year...
• ...loopholes reportedly allow some types of waste to still be shipped abroad under the category of "recyclables."

Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Reviewer) 15:42, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

The image of protestors in hazmat suits is a file photo from a different protest in 2024 and does not represent the protest our article covers. This should have been noted in the image description. Our article incorrectly states the protestors wore hazmat suits. Tempo describe the protestors as wearing black.Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Reviewer) 15:52, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

The only news pieces I've found about the protest are those already listed in the article. There is one Kuwait Times article featuring a photograph of the protests, but the content itself mostly deals with the negotiations around the plastic pollution treaty. I don't think this story passes the relevance test, as much as I would have preferred that more outlets had covered it. Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 16:59, 18 August 2025 (UTC)

Proposed retraction

I agree with Dsuke1998AEOS that this article should not have been published as-written. I have proposed a retraction here. Please discuss and vote there.

To be clear, I don’t think this reflects poorly on the original author. This was only their third article started here, and they’re still learning our policies and guidelines (as many of us are). These problems should have been caught during review.

@Badak Ironman, it would still help to know where the above statements came from. If any were generated by AI/LLM, that would also be useful for us to understand and learn from.Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Reviewer) 13:20, 19 August 2025 (UTC)

Deletion/retraction discussion closed with consensus to retract[1]. Michael.C.Wright (^Talk/_Reviewer) 15:32, 15 September 2025 (UTC)