Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian history

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As a new WP, we need to start by evaluating what articles have been written already, and discovering what glaring holes are in place. I am going to start a structural tree of events, and linking too the articles that cover those events. Once we understand where the Australian history is lacking we can maybe start a concerted effort to fill them.SauliH 06:16, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I started to outline Australia history at Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian history/Timeline, as a basis for breaking down into seperate categories ie Law, Politics, Religion, etc. If anyone would like to pitch in please do so. SauliH 09:41, 17 November 2006 (UTC)


Contents

[edit] Sister Project

I am about to put Wikipedia:WikiProject Australian maritime history on Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals - as I feel that the odd range of histories of (a) ships, (b) ports, (c) shipping companies, (d) coastal shipping (e) maritime museums (f) maritime history as an academic discipline in australia (g) miscellaneous shipping issues - could well be covered under the umbrella of such a project - and not be a problem within this project. I do hope anyone reading this might feel inspired to either offer suggestions or support - here - at the proposal or at my talk page. Thanks 11:30, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I think it might be just as well handled under the banner of this project, perhaps through a taskforce or subpage.--cj | talk 07:36, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
Sister/Child ? The important issue is that the disparate and poorly linked/co-ordinated subjects (if you see the proposed list of articles to be covered) are pulled together into the umbrella of australian maritime history. I personally would be very hesitant about complete subordination to the australian history project per se until some of the policies/principles are clearly sorted out for the project! SatuSuro 15:43, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Due to the broad nature of history and the subjects covered, I am not sure that subordinating the maritime history subject to the Australian History WP will limit the scope, or anything else. As a subject area, Maritime History will have it's own quirks, and it should develop it's own set of unique policies where required.SauliH 21:34, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

  • With seven proposals in support, I think it is probably a goer - see Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals#Australian maritime history and User:Moondyne/Australian maritime history. For me it is not so much a matter of policies but scope and filling in the gaps. I would like to see river transport within the scope too if we could be so generous - coastal trade and river trade are by no means identical but have significant overlaps.--Golden Wattle talk 22:38, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Australian Military history taskforce

The Australian Military history task force of Military Histoy Project should be a sister project of the new project. Hossen27 10:32, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia Day Awards

Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention. Badbilltucker 22:41, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Request for comment

I would like to place the following - edited only very slightly to reflect suburb names - in the suburbs of the City of Blacktown:

Prior to settlement and colonisation of Australia, Riverstone and the surrounding area was inhabited by the Darug tribe. Most of these people died due to introduced diseases following the arrival of the First Fleet, and the remainder were largely relocated to government farms and a series of settlements. This resettlement eventually led to a settlement at the intersection of Richmond Road and Rooty Hill Road which came to be known as Black's Town.[1]

Would anyone like to comment / suggest / improve before I put it on the 20-odd current stub articles? Note: I will be confirming as much as I am able that each of the suburbs is in the region which was used by the Darug people. If there is any doubt for a given suburb I won't put that paragraph in. Garrie 04:13, 4 January 2007 (UTC) PS. Brief history of the name of the City of Blacktown:

  • aboriginal settlement created
  • this was known as "Black's Town"
  • the road to it became "Black's Town Road"
  • a railway station was built near "Black's Town Road" - this became, Blacktown Railway Station
  • The town that grew up next to the railway station, became "Blacktown"

Source for all this is indicated on the City of Blacktown council website.Garrie 04:18, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

I find boilerplate copied text annoying - better to put just the first sentence, or something specific to the suburb, and put the general stuff in the Darug people article. Somebody did something similar to a lot of towns near Adelaide (about the Kaurna people). It becomes monotonous to read, and adds little to each page. Sorry to sound negative - maybe someone else will have a positive remark for balance. --Scott Davis Talk 07:27, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
I don't have a problem with feedback directed at the content!
It has been strongly suggested that suburb articles should reflect pre-european history though... and the Durag people pretty much covered all of these suburb areas, which cover very similar terrain in a definate geographic area (small compared say to the area covered by the Wiradjuri).
Obvious areas for improvement include trying to identify if there was any patern of use of different parts of the territory (which I am sure there would have been just identifying what it was would be the challenge).
I guess the later part of the text is much more appropriate for specific suburbs: Plumpton where the Black's Town was located (not that there's anything there to mark it's previous history). Dharruk, which directly takes it's name from the Darug people. The suburb Blacktown.
As stated above - I want to get it down right before I drop it all over the place and annoy people with copied boilerplate text!Garrie 00:24, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
As we are discussing suburb articles, you may want to bring the suggestion up at WP:AUSTPLACE. From a historical perspective, my opinion is that this content belongs in with the history of that indigenous group, and that the Darug people article should contain the meat. In the instance of the Blacktown article, the etymology of the name would be an important addition to the article, and what you have written relates quite well the name's origin. Whether you need to add that particular piece to all the suburb articles in the vicinity is a whole different matter, and it would be my opinion to leave it out (that's speaking with my AUSTPLACE hat on). The history you draw attention to belongs at a higher level, as it is really regional history. SauliH 01:09, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Yeah but if I go there ppl would say "you're talking about history not the place" ;)
I think etymology of the name is already discussed somewhere between the suburb, the city, and the local government article - they are all called Blacktown so I get a bit lost...
To be honest I didn't really know about that page. I have seen significant criticism of suburb history sections commencing with European settlement though and would like to avoid such criticism. The article I am seeking to approach, for western Blacktown suburbs, is Summer Hill, and I think that parts of it's history section spill over into the history of the surrounding area (but I don't know those areas well enough to be 100% on that one). Garrie 03:05, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Regarding Scott Davis' comment: While I have sources to show that the suburbs were part of the range of the Darug people - I don't particularly have anything to show how extensive the range of the Darug people was. I know enough to say they used to live in these places - but not enough to say weather they lived anywhere else. Many indigenous groups covered large areas. I don't want to put anything on the Darug people article which is a systematic error by ommission. (if I do it by mistake that's different!)Garrie 04:05, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
History of the Dharug people belongs on their article. History of the suburb actually does only start with white settlement, unlike some foreign cities that can trace the history of the actual town back through several different civilisations (Inca/Mexican/California or Celtic/Roman/Anglo-saxon/Norman). The goal I would aim for is to put specific information in the most specific article, and summarise and link from others that are appropriate. The Summer Hill article has no relevant links in it - the closest is to Indigenous peoples (redirected from Aboriginal people). Some of the info there is specific to land within that suburb's present boundaries, and the rest is vague and uncited, verging on WP:WEASEL and WP:OR. --Scott Davis Talk 07:47, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
The history section on the Summer Hill article really belongs on the Dharug page in my opinion. If actual physical localities need to be mentioned the article can reference another location like - the Dharug people had xyz in the area now known as [[Summer Hill, yada yada. The article itself does not need to then go into detail regarding the prehistory of the suburb which only existed during white settlement. Now if the two histories overlap - say the Dharug settlement at Blacktown which may have been there for many years of the early european days, then I think it is fair to include that in a history section on that page. SauliH 07:57, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
OK. To sum up what has been offered, on each suburb I should put something in the lines of:

Prior to settlement and colonisation of Australia, (suburb) and the surrounding area was inhabited by the Darug tribe.

That will direct the reader to that article for further information which can be provided by a contributor with access to suitable sources (ie - I don't really have them). And I haven't totally disregarded the indiginous history of an area which remains well known for it's continued aboriginal population. User:GarrieIrons|Ga]]rrie 12:07, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
That's the idea, yes. Plus you have a bit more for Blacktown itself, and you have some info in your first proposal that you might want to add to Darug people even though you think you don't have much info - it's more than what was there to start with. --Scott Davis Talk 14:07, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
Perfect. SauliH 05:15, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Palm Island ACOTF

Hi Wikipedians, as you may already know Palm Island has just become the Australian Collaboration of the Fortnight, I invite you to get involved in one of the most relevant articles to Australia's history and the development of race relations over the past 100 years.

I am hoping that members of wikiproject Australian history will help out as you have access to (or practice with) Australian historical documents and websites and will therefore be able to contribute a lot to this project which also involves Law, Geography, Politics and current Indigenous affairs in Australia, this is an article which can really combine the talents of people in all the different Australian wikiprojects.

To get things started I have started a to do list, please feel free to edit or add to it. The article is currently of a fairly low standard so it will be interesting to watch it develop over the next two weeks. I look forward to seeing you on Palm! WikiTownsvillian09:18, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject History Merger

I was wondering if this project should be turned into a task force under WikiProject History. This would attract a lot more members and give acces to a lot of infrastructure.--Phoenix 15 (Talk) 17:36, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] collaboration of the history projects

Hi, I'm newly appointed coordinator of the Wikipedia: WikiProject History. I was coordinator of the Wikipedia: WikiProject Military History before. My scope is to improve the cooperation among the different history projects andf use the synergy of a common infrastructure to improve article quality. One idea would be to merge small project into a larger wikiproject history with a common infrastructure and the small projects continuing independently as task forces of this project. What are your suggestions? Greetings Wandalstouring 15:10, 28 October 2007 (UTC)