Talk:Ashmore and Cartier Islands

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Flag
Portal
 Ashmore and Cartier Islands is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Assessment comments

Contents

[edit] ww2?

Does anyone know if the Japanese captured them in World war 2, like they did with Christmas Island --Astrokey44 13:24, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Migration

I removed the reference to mandatory detention as a discouragement for people smuggling because it made it sound as if that was a solution to the practice of taking people to Ashmore. In fact mandatory detention of refugees had been brought in in 1994 by the Keating government. Mat Hardy (Affentitten) 05:43, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Disputed islands?

This page is in the category 'Disputed islands', yet no reference is made to this in the article. Are they disputed? If so, by whom? Iain 23:00, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

To clarify for anyone else looking, it is the Category:Ashmore and Cartier Islands that is in Category:Disputed islands. The article Cartier Island says "...whose authority over the islands is disputed by Indonesia." without a specific reference. The CIA World Factbook page linked from both articles includes
Indonesian groups challenge Australia's claim to Ashmore Reef; Australia has closed the surrounding waters to Indonesian traditional fishing and created a national park in the region while continuing to prospect for hydrocarbons in the vicinity
Note that the world factbook says "Indonesian groups", not "Indonesia". --Scott Davis Talk 23:43, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
I have put the article into Category:Disputed islands, aswell as the cat, to enable a full list of disputed-island main articles to appear in that category. Bards 22:40, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
I removed it before seeing this, but I still don't think it's necessary:
  1. The article does not have any mention of a dispute, especially not one cited to reliable sources
  2. The category should be enough. I'm prepared to reconsider this if the first issue is satisfied.
The quote from the World Factbook above appears to be contradicted by Indonesian fishermen are allowed access to the lagoon and fresh water at Ashmore Reef's West Island earlier on the same page.--Scott Davis Talk 03:23, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
From personal experience - cia world factbook is never and should never be used as a final answer point for issues such as these - surely the work of viv forbes the map librarian at uwa (who has worked on issues re the state boundaries in a number of places would be more circumspect of the issue) I will try find a cite/and or quote from his work...SatuSuro 03:32, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Does the Indonesian government lay any claim to Cartier Island? Qaka 21:38, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
ETAN makes mention of a dispute (link added), though it was an isolated posting from 2003. Not sure how intently people are making the claim. Mention made here too: [1] --Dylanfly 19:28, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Popular support

Could one of you Aussies change this sentence, please? "This policy was popularly supported by the public." The news we got in North America was that the politics around the asylum seekers were pretty darn intense, with a lot of strong feelings on both sides. When I think of "popularly supported," I think of things widely agreed upon. Maybe the sentence could be adjusted? --Dylanfly 02:39, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

This sentence is incorrect, the issue was extremely divisive. The government won a subsequent election by winning the most seats, but actually lost the majority vote mathew (talk) 00:04, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Distance?

Are these islands closer in distance to Australia or to Indonesia? Inkan1969 00:37, 26 October 2007 (UTC)