---

This review is transcluded from Talk:States and federal territories of Malaysia/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Chipmunkdavis (talk · contribs) 17:31, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 01:55, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will pick this up. But it will certainly take some time given the length of this article.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 01:55, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, no worries about the time. CMD (talk) 05:12, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Malaysia was formed through the union of various territories ruled by the United Kingdom I think it would be more appropriate to wikilink to British Malaya

• Done

• The three federal territories were created later Name the three federal territories (i.e. The three federal territories – Kuala Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya –...)

• Done

• The national government wields unusually extensive powers for a federation. The national constitution grants it wide powers, including over economic development and internal security – Might shorten a little to: Under the national constitution, the national government wields unusually extensive powers for a federation, which includes over economic development and internal security

• Done

• The third paragraph I would clarify it mainly applies to the states in West Malaysia.

• As written it does also apply to East Malaysia, the civil service for example is a live political topic today. However, I tweaked the fourth paragraph to more clearly note the distinction.

• collectively called Peninsular Malaysia or West Malaysia. I'm unsure of the use of italics.

• I think this is MOS:TECHNICAL

• This section is well-cited. No issues. But maybe I shall ping Icepinner if there are accessibility issues

• While the population of Malaysia is ethnically and religiously diverse would wikilink "population of Malaysia" to Demographics of Malaysia

• Done

• however, there is a significant distinction between the peninsular states and Sabah and Sarawak, which have large indigenous populations a bit of clarification, the natives aren't the bumiputera right?

• Most natives are considered bumiputera, if that is what you are asking, although using bumiputera here would slightly mislead as that also includes Malays that move there etc.

• Instead, the establishment of a federal system preserved the identity of the pre-existing Malay sultanates, and maintained the Sultans. I find this sentence a bit confusing and repetitive. Might say ...preserved the identity of the pre-existing Malay sultanates and their Sultans.

• Done

• providing significant powers to the centre, You mean "central"? Or I would say the Federal Government. Also wikilink to Government of Malaysia

• Done, just used Government of Malaysia directly.

• during the decades of BN rule need to explain what BN is here in first instance of mention in body.

• Done

• One former state chief minister who?

• Added

• (In states without Sultans, the King fills the usual role of a Sultan for Islam.) Brackets are unnecessary here

• Done

• Prime Minister wikilink to Prime Minister of Malaysia

• Done

• federal parliament wikilink to Parliament of Malaysia

• Done

• The legislature of each state selects two individuals to represent the state in the national Senate. Why the mention of the national Senate here? And I suppose this refers to the Dewan Negara. I would shift it later in the paragraph discussing the national parliament

• Moved and wikilinked

• Kelantan has passed strong hudud laws mandating punishments under Islamic law, but as Syariah Split this sentence such that ...mandating punishments under Islamic law. However, as Syariah...

• Done

• although even rich states remain limited might raise a few examples here

• I've reworded a bit to shift this closer to the Penang university example.

• As the national government has control over economic development, this in combination with being able to deny borrowing means it is able to control the large infrastructure projects simplify to: Since the national government oversees economic development and has the authority to deny borrowing, it effectively retains control over major infrastructure projects.

• Done

• While some were turned into federal territory – "federal territories"

• Done

• (Forestry outside of Sabah and Sarawak has also become uniform, as the National Land Council created the National Forestry Council in 1971, leading to the National Forestry Act 1984.) Again no need the brackets

• Done

• The greater autonomy of Sabah and Sarawak compared to other states means that Malaysian federalism is asymmetric – The greater autonomy granted to Sabah and Sarawak compared to other states renders Malaysian federalism asymmetric.

• Done

• I was about to ask if there are articles related to any secessionist movements in Sarawak and Sabah but there doesn't seem to be any.

• There are many many missing articles in this topic area.

• Something interesting I want to note is that also historically actually Sabah and Sarawak have often backed whoever the government is in charge, but also to draw concessions and advantages [1], [2]. Like, a "bring your enemy closer" sort of thing. Maybe there might be something in other reports but if there isn't, it's fine. Also, it's noted that independence sentiments are perhaps stronger in Sarawak. Other potential resources [3], [4]

• Putting a pin in actioning this one as this is currently covered in the History section. There is quite a bit in the Dominant party rule subsection about shifting relations with Sabah and Sarawak, Revival of federalism has the example of Sarawak creating its own mini-Petronas, and End of Barisan Nasional dominance has the more recent political pressures. Some of that could be consolidated and added to the Federal-State relations section if needed, perhaps appended to the "While this discontent has sometimes been used by leaders in both states to extract concessions from the federal government" sentence.

Review to continue.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 09:16, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• they are generally based population You mean "based on population".

• Done

• While the main court system is national would prefer "is at the national level"

• Done

• Brackets aren't necessary for the portion (In the Malay states chief ministers are known as menteri besar...

• Done

• Think mukim should be italicised

• Done

• Kuala Lumpur was separated from Selangor to have an independent national capital Think this is a bit oddly phrased. Would rewrite Kuala Lumpur was separated from Selangor to serve as Malaysia's national capital.

• Reworded

• Malaysia's federal system arose due the preservation of sultanates... Think should be in the past tense

• Is arose not past tense?

• Might wikilink Siam to Rattanakosin Kingdom (1782–1932)

• Done

• between Siam and the United Kingdom saw Thailand relinquish its claims over Pahang, Perak, and all territory to their south, although the United Kingdom did not claim this territory. I find the use of "Thailand" and the UK a bit repetitive. Would suggest between Siam and the United Kingdom saw the former relinquishing its claims over Pahang, Perak, and all territory to their south, although the United Kingdom/the latter did not claim this territory

• Done

• However, continued disputes in the region, and concerns about whether heirs of Abu Bakar would be able to exercise the same role, led to a slow process of increasing British influence beginning in 1881. Might simplify a little to: However, ongoing disputes, and concerns whether his heirs could maintain this influence, led the British to gradually expand their control from 1881 onward.

• Done

• British Officers sent to these states played similar roles to Residents, but informally. – British Officers sent to these states played similar but informal roles as Residents

• Done

• In 1898 a Resident was appointing – A Resident was appointed in 1898

• Done

• A resident was installed in Pahang in 1888 Keep it consistent whether to capitalise Resident or not

• Capitalised to avoid confusion

• The civil services of each of the Federated Malay States were merged with those of Penang and Malacca. Can explain what this means

• Tweaked with new source and one red link and one redirect added

• Movement towards bringing these disparately ruled territories together was resisted until the Second World War led to a Japanese invasion in 1942 – Efforts to unite these separately governed territories faced resistance until the Japanese invasion during the Second World War in 1942.

• Done

• In 1946, shortly following the end of Japanese occupation, the nine sultanates under British protection were joined together with Malacca and Penang to form the Malayan Union. – Shortly after the end of Japanese occupation, the nine sultanates under British protection, along with Malacca and Penang, established/merged into the Malayan Union in 1946.

• Done

• This had a strong central government, removing most power from the sultans. This, alongside other issues, made the union greatly unpopular. – The Union was highly unpopular [among whom?] as the Union's strong central government removed most power from the sultans, along with other factors.

• Done

• The hopes in the UK that Malay loyalties would shift from the sultans to the newly proposed nation were not met, instead the removal of power from the sultans was seen as a threat to Malay sovereignty, and became entangled with the Union's offer of citizenship to non-Malays. – British hopes that Malay loyalties would shift from the sultans to the newly proposed nation were not realised. Instead, the reduction of the sultans’ powers was viewed as a threat to Malay sovereignty and became intertwined with the Union’s proposal to grant citizenship to non-Malays.

• Done

• Other note: either be consistent with the use of UK or United Kingdom. If you say UK, abbreviate the first instance.

• Stuck with United Kingdom given your c/es above removed some of that repetition

Will continue.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 11:58, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Continued:

• On the island of Borneo, Brunei, North Borneo, and Sarawak became British protectorates in 1888. – Might be a little confusing. Suggest rewrite: In 1888, Brunei, North Borneo, and Sarawak –each located on the island of Borneo – became British protectorates.

• Done

• Might add a note that North Borneo is present day Sabah. Either "North Borneo (present-day Sabah)" or "Sabah (then North Borneo)". The former is preferable

• Done

• Following occupation during the Second World War, North Borneo and Sarawak came under direct British control as crown colonies in 1946. – After the Japanese occupation during the Second World War, North Borneo and Sarawak came under direct British control as crown colonies in 1946.

• Done

• For this chunk: These territories had little shared history with Malaya, and were demographically and economically dissimilar.[16]: 491  They were different from each other as well: Sarawak had developed a political identity since the mid-19th century, while Sabah was very loosely governed.[47]: 3–4  British officials did not feel either would be able to survive as independent states, being relatively undeveloped and vulnerable to neighbouring states, and so hoped to create a larger union to facilitate decolonisation. However, they also did not feel able to force the issue, and thus the British worked to ensure they had some buy-in from urban North Bornean and Sarawakian elites I felt it's a little chunky. Might rewrite to:
  • These territories shared little historical, demographic, or economic connection with Malaya,[16]: 491  and also differed significantly from one another. Sarawak had developed a distinct political identity since the mid-19th century, while Sabah remained only loosely administered.[47]: 3–4  British officials doubted that either could survive independently, given their limited development and vulnerability to neighbouring powers, and thus sought to establish a larger union to ease the process of decolonisation. However, unwilling to impose this unilaterally, the British instead worked to secure support from the urban elites of North Borneo and Sarawak.

• Done

• British authorities were also unwilling for Singapore to become independent on its own, while not wanting to alienate Singaporean leadership. Thus, while unable to force the issue, Britain sought to facilitate negotiations between all parties towards some sort of union. – British authorities were reluctant to grant Singapore independence on its own but also wished to maintain good relations with its leadership. Consequently, rather than imposing a decision, Britain aimed to facilitate negotiations among all parties to establish some form of union.

• Done

• Although the Malayan Emergency had been brought to an end, the presence of the Cold War and continuing insurgencies in the region meant fears of communist takeovers remained – Although the Malayan Emergency had ended, the ongoing Cold War and continued regional insurgencies sustained fears of potential communist takeovers.

• Done

• Tunku Abdul Rahman first publicly raised the idea of a greater union in May 1961, as his fear of a belligerent communist Singapore overcame his reluctance to incorporate it into Malaya. – Tunku Abdul Rahman first publicly proposed the idea of a larger union in May 1961, when his concern over a potentially hostile communist Singapore outweighed his earlier reluctance to integrate it into Malaya.

• Done

• Would cite this news article of when he first announced it

• Done

• Article on Brunei Revolt

• Not sure if that fits here but put it on the Brunei Revolt article

• In Singapore, security countermeasures included the detaining of political opposition. Wikilink to Operation Coldstore

• Done

• to secure their buy-in. – to secure their support. I find the use of "buy-in" quite unencyclopedic

• Done

• In September 1963, Malaya was joined with three new states: Sabah, Sarawak, and Singapore, becoming Malaysia. – In September 1963, Malaya joined with three new states: Sabah, Sarawak, and Singapore to establish Malaysia.

• Done

• Singapore became independent in 1965, leaving the current 13 states. – Singapore left the Federation and became independent in 1965 Also might elaborate more the reasons (political and racial tensions)

• Expanded with one of the already-used sources

• The departure of Singapore caused tension with Sabah and Sarawak. – caused "tensions". And also, can elaborate why?

• States rights, tweaked to make this more clear.

More to come.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 00:57, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• What is now the Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition, led by the UMNO party, controlled the national government from independence until 2018 First would clarify and cite about the Alliance transitioning into the BN. So like: The Alliance (later the Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition) controlled the national government from independence until 2018, with UMNO as the leading party of BN.

• Done

• The continuous rule of BN facilitated the shift of power towards the central government. – The continuous rule of BN shifted power towards the central government.

• Done

• In 1964, the Senate was expanded to include 32 appointees of the central government, increasing from 22 and meaning central government appointees outnumbered senators appointed by states (two from each state) Split such that In 1964, the Senate was expanded to include 32 appointees of the central government, increasing from 22. This meant that central government appointees outnumbered senators appointed by states (two from each state)

• Done

• However, it was unable to win Kelantan in the 1964 or 1969 elections I suppose "it" refers to UMNO and/or the BN component parties.

• Yes, tweaked

• Btw, I might prefer "emerged" over "arose"

• Done

• hung parliaments emerge in Perak and Selangor should be past tense

• Done

• 1976 also saw the national constitution amended to symbolically list Sabah and Sarawak as equivalent to the other states. Avoid having a number at the start of the sentence. Maybe use "That year"

• Done

• In 1993, the constitution was amended to strip royalty of full legal immunity, following the central government stripping all support from the monarchies it legally could and engaging in a public relations campaign in order to obtain royal consent for the amendment. – In 1993, the constitution was amended to remove full legal immunity from the royalty, after the central government withdrew all support it was legally able to, and undertook a public relations campaign to secure royal consent for the change.

• Done

• I might note that was done under Mahathir Mohamed.

• Reluctant to do that as specific prime ministers are not named for other actions, except for the direct connection between Mahathir and the funding of his home state.

Would review further. Did some other changes on my end. Feel free to rectify if needed.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 13:33, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• which met until the end their government. Would wikilink to 2020–2022 Malaysian political crisis.

• Done

• The Sheraton Move in February 2020, in which the PH government was unseated by a change in parliamentary coalitions and replaced by the Perikatan Nasional (PN) coalition, was followed by similar coalition shifts changing governments in four states – The Sheraton Move of February 2020 saw the PH government replaced by the Perikatan Nasional (PN) coalition through a shift in parliamentary alliances. This was followed by similar coalition realignments that changed governments in four states.

• Done

• Resulting instability add "The"

• Done

• The political instability saw the importance of the King and other rulers increase, as they took active roles in resolving political disputes – The political instability saw the increased importance of the King and other rulers, as they undertook active roles in resolving political disputes

• Done

• which asserts Petronas maintains national authority – which asserts Petronas as the national authority

• Done

• After the 2022 Malaysian general election led to the formation of a national coalition between PH and BN, many state governments led by PH or BN adopted this national alliance and brought the other into government at the state level. – After the 2022 election, the PH and BN parties formed a national coalition, and many PH- or BN-led state governments followed suit by bringing the other party into their state administrations.

• Done

• In Terengganu, PN won all seats, leading to there being no opposition – In Terengganu, PN won every seat, leaving the state without an opposition.

• Done

• including the first East Malaysian deputy prime minister Just name him instead of straight up wikilinking

• Done

• I think what is missing, and also rather significant, is that for Sarawak there was a change in title from "Chief Minister" to "Premier" as a sign of increased autonomy

• Good point, found a source and added

• Sarawak has even had limited success in pursuing autonomy over education, Sentence is a little confusing

• Reworded

• another potential source on Sabah and Sarawak

• Added to the paragraph on the 2022 Malaysian general election

• His political party was popular, and he had a complicated relationship with the Sultan. – While his political party was popular, he had a complicated relationship with the Sultan.

• Done

• the Sultan turned to Malaya in 1958, building political and economic ties Would shorten to the Sultan began building political and economic ties with Malaya in 1958
• A palace for the Sultan of Brunei was constructed in Kuala Lumpur in preparation for the Federation Does this palace still exist?

• I don't think so, it is remarkably difficult to find sources on. It was somehow given to Sabah and renamed the "Sabah house" or "Sabah State house", but Sabah sold it back to the central government in the 1970s.

• Despite a public inquiry, participated in by Azahari, coming out against the Federation in January 1962, the Sultan signed a preliminary memorandum at a committee meeting in February. A little confusing. I guess you meant that a public inquiry, which Azahari participated in, opposed the Federation. Despite that, the Sultan still went ahead. Might rewrite: Despite a January 1962 public inquiry opposing the Federation, the Sultan went on to sign a preliminary memorandum at a committee meeting in February.

• Done

• It is unknown to what extent the revolt or its leaders may have had the passive acquiescence of the Sultan of Brunei, especially in its early stages. felt this is a bit of a WP:WEASEL, so I might attribute Leigh's remarks or whoever he quoted.

• I've removed it per the below comment, if you feel it needs attribution then it belongs in the main article not here.

• I felt the mention of Singapore at the end quite short lmao. I think the content regarding the racial and political disputes should be put here.
• Was it also known how many seats Singapore had in the Federal Parliament?

• Added

Overall thoughts: I think in terms of content it's in good shape for a GA, although I felt some bits could be better organised or summarised in the respective state or other pages (especially the negotiations over the 1963 Agreement could actually be on the page). But that said, this is broad enough.

I will do a source check after this, though this would def take more time.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 10:20, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ZKang123, if you have specific ideas for where certain information should go that might help future development of the area. There are many missing articles, but I might have missed some appropriate places within articles. State of Singapore (Malaysia) is one article that does exist, don't think there is one on the Brunei negotiations though. I'll have a look at shifting some of the Brunei summary to the History section and expanding on Singapore in the Brunei and Singapore section. CMD (talk) 07:25, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Per this revision
• Refs 1, 4, 15, 16 (p491, 492), 18 (pp 300-301, 303, 304, 305, 314, 331), 19 (p7, 8), 22 (p18), 29, 41, 48 (p3-4) check out
• Recommend updating the web archive link for Ref 4 to this

• Done

• Ref 15 add a publisher or website parameter (50 shades of federalism)

• Done

• Ref 37: Is statoids an authoritative website? [5]

• Replaced with a news source which is about the asymmetric autonomy

• Ref 42, p 232 doesn't really support A Resident was installed in Pahang in 1888, while the Anglo-Siamese Treaty of 1909 brought Kedah, Kelantan, Perlis, and Terengganu under British control. A protectorate over Johor was established in 1914, bringing all territory south of Siam under British control

• This is from "...forcing each of these to recognize the British Resident System...Britain continued making other Malay states into protectorates, eventually bringing British Malaya into being" plus the footnote "Pahang became the British protectorate in 1888, Kedah, Perlis, Kelantan, and Trengganu, which had all been under the suzerainty of Thailand, in 1909, and finally Johore in 1914"

• Ref 33, p107 doesn't exactly support this part The popularity of PAS was seen as a rejection by Malay voters of the racial compromises made by Alliance, but I suppose the reference to the 1957 compromise was this. (The 1959 election, fought on the basis of a more representative electorate, has been described as a national referendum on the 1957 constitutional bargain). Also would add: was seen by Lim Hong Hai

• The "seen" here is meant to be "seen by Alliance", the source described their reaction: "Finding itself squeezed from both sides, the Alliance moved rapidly to secure its position. To counter the appeal of PAS, government posture and policy became more pro-Malay, and a massive and highly publicized rural development programme was launched. This only worsened the problem of non-Malay support. The Alliance therefore resorted to constitutional amendments that would contain or reduce the electoral weight of the nonMalays, or that would allow it to do so." The next page notes "with the government’s pro-Malay shift in policy, was confirmed by the results of the 1961 local elections: the Alliance scored gratifying victories against PAS in Malay areas, including Kelantan and Trengganu".

• Update Ref 21 link to [6]

• Done

• Ref 23, p 13 doesn't support increasing from 80.5% after the formation of Malaysia to 90.7% in the late 2000s

• The figures are from [25]: 426: "The federal government’s share of total government revenue before inter-governmental transfers increased from 80.5% in 1963–65 to 90.7% in 2006–10"

• Thus far reviewed up till "Creation of Malaysia" and checking through "Dominant party rule". Will continue source review. I rather if you don't edit anything as of yet.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 07:55, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Continued per this revision

• Ref 16 (p494, 499, 500, 501, 502, 503), 22 (p26), 33 (p11), 53 (p451), 58, 78, check out
• PAS took control of Terengganu and also saw significant growth in Kedah and Pahang. – I think this could be reworded as "increased electoral influence in Kedah and Pahang"

• Done

• I rather if you keep the access parameter for cited journals consistent. Like ref 53 has, but not for refs 16 and 55, for instance

• I would like to look into this, however the current additions were made by OAbot and I'm not sure what criteria it uses.

• How is Ref 55 by ISIS Focus reliable? (I joke)

• 2008, a different time

• Ref 55 doesn't exactly support the tail end of this fact united primarily by opposition to BN rather than by ideology. Neither is Pakatan Rakyat directly mentioned. In fact, I can't really find it in Ref 15, p 502 either

• Pakatan Rakyat is from 15 p.502: "It is clear that PAS's gains on the hudud issue have contributed to the fragmentation of the opposition coalition (the Pakatan Rakyat coalition that contested the 2013 general election collapsed in 2015)". The tail end is a very brief summary from 55, especially of: "There was sceptism as to the extent of cooperation possible between PAS and DAP, with their distinctively different political ideologies, goals and views on religion, politics, culture, among others...Opposition had tried to forge cooperative linkages to defeat the Barisan Nasional and to bring about a change in the political leadership." I've added page numbers.

• Ref 66: I recommend changing it to this source on Free Malaysia Today and also add the publisher/agency that it's originally by Bernama.

• I found a version on the Bernama site and added that. Used the FMT source to add a bit to a later paragraph.

• Curiously I also managed to find a source by NST that said in 2021, Article 1(2) of the Federal Constitution "was amended to reinstate the status of Peninsular Malaysia, Sabah and Sarawak as equals".
• Oh wait, it's stated further down. That said listing the "Borneo States" of Sabah and Sarawak in a separate group to the 11 "states of Malaya", I would also add that it still restores Sabah and Sarawak as "equal partners"

• The "equal partners" thing is a particular political spin. It's also sometimes interpreted as making Sabah and Sarawak "regions" or "territories" instead of "states". However these spins are not reflected in all other sources, so sticking with the actual written change rather than interpretations avoids undue POV.

• Potential sources on further updates [7], [8]
• Ref 69, decapitalise BERNAMA

• Done

• Ref 80 World of Buzz doesn't seem to be a reliable source. Better source is preferred, maybe The Star (even tho it's paywalled). this source might also be a bit notable when the PM said it's up to the states' discretion.

• Replaced.

That's all I have for the entire review. Pretty comprehensive and what intrigued most is the proposed accession of Brunei. Putting on hold.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 14:26, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to pass.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 09:54, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]