Talk:Bali Nine/GA1

GA Reassessment[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Immediate failure of the GA criteria: it has an {{Unreferenced section}} banner since 4 years ago! sentausa (talk) 07:24, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done and agreed. As soon as I saw this, I jumped to the talk page to see if there was any valid explanation for why a four-year tagged unreferenced section is acceptable in a good article, yet alone one linked from the main page. Here's the text, in case anybody can source references:

=== Pre-trial investigation ===
Indonesian law does not require that arrested people be immediately charged with an offence, and by 22 April 2005 no charges had yet been laid. Police indicated that the five arrested at the airport would be charged with drug trafficking, which carries the death penalty, while those arrested in the hotel would be charged with the lesser offence of drug possession, which carries a maximum penalty of ten years' imprisonment. By 26 April 2005, media speculation suggested that Andrew Chan recruited the other eight to act as drug mules – couriers who would not arouse suspicion while carrying heroin to Australia – and offered them A$10,000 to A$15,000 each to carry out this task, although some reports claim that they were only going to get A$5000.

On 27 April 2005, Colonel Bambang Sugiarto, head of the Bali police drug squad, said police would seek to have all nine charged with offenses which carry the death penalty. He revealed that several of the nine had previously visited Bali using false passports, suggesting that they had acted as drug couriers before. Indonesian police released video evidence showing heroin being removed from the bodies of the four arrested at the airport. Indonesian police initially maintained that Chan was the "mastermind" of the importation plan. "They were following Chan's instructions and if they didn't follow these instructions their families would be killed," Sugiarto said.

Australian police said that they believed that an Australian drug syndicate was behind the plan. Mike Phelan, International Operations Chief of the AFP, said, "This is obviously some sort of sophisticated syndicate. In excess of 10 kg of heroin is a large amount and by definition it requires a distribution network here in Australia." Lawyers in Indonesia engaged by the families of those arrested appeared in media interviews, to concede that the four arrested at the airport were acting as drug couriers. Anggia Browne was quoted as saying, "They are only couriers – they did it just for money." She said they were from low-income families, and did not know that drug trafficking in Indonesia carries the death penalty. Investigations closed in August 2005 and briefs handed prosecutors in Denpasar ready for trial.

– voidxor ^{(talk | contrib)} 05:51, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I just added a reference, the section now has 5 references, including at least one in each paragraph. EdChem (talk) 06:19, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reassessment status query[edit]

sentausa, voidxor, it appears that EdChem has addressed the issues you raised in this reassessment. Are there any additional issues you have with the article's adherence to the Good Article criteria, or can this reassessment be closed? Thank you for your response. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:39, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'd worry about the four sentences that had been tagged {{Citation needed}} since May 2015, but I just removed them. Unless somebody restores them without references, I have no qualms with you closing the reassessment. Thanks for asking. – voidxor 23:54, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Right now I don't have time to check for additional issues with the article's adherence to the Good Article criteria, but for the issue that I raised, I see that it's OK now. sentausa (talk) 08:11, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to you both. I'll close the reassessment as "kept", then. BlueMoonset (talk) 15:28, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]