Jump to content

Talk:Cristóvão de Mendonça

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Necessary?

[edit]

Having contributed to this, I'm not completely convinced about it! We know almost next to nothing about de Mendonca, his fame resting almost entirely on conjectured voyages. Even if one accepts the theory the Portuguese discovered Australia in the 1520s, it's quite possible it was someone else and de Mendonca had nothing to do with it! --Nickm57 22:57, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Revision December 17 by anon

[edit]

The revision by 85.154.32.52 on Dec 17 may be well intentioned (or it might be a prank) but the article is now virtually unreadable.--Nickm57 (talk) 00:54, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nope - I think its a serious contribution. I want to revert this to the last version by XPTO, however I'll give 85.154.32.52 a day or two to correct/improve/explain on this page.--Nickm57 (talk) 02:17, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Revert of 18 December 2007.

Here are the reasons why I felt a revert was necessary;

  • WP principles not followed (inc Neutral POV or citing verifiable authoritative sources)
  • Irrelevant detail added (nature of Portuguese colonial forts, fate of Al Andalus library)
  • Poor spelling and expression (including author’s personal narrative in capitals and rhetorical questions in text throughout).
  • References to a non-English language website as primary evidence, which may also be peddling fringe theories (The Dighton Rock website – Portuguese discovered America and Australia etc)
  • Simplistic argument/errors of fact “in 2007, a copy of Mendonca's map of Australia reapeared, showing how a map of Queensland would look like, before humans discovered how to draw maps”--Nickm57 (talk) 22:18, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Who is Philip Du Rhone ?

[edit]

Potentially fascinating addition by anon user. However, I've reverted the page as the addition does not cite any sources for a contentious claim. Also, I can't find any reference to an Australian historian by the name of Philip Du Rhone anywhere. The tree referred to in this addition is actually Eucalyptus globulus, popularly known as the Blue Gum or Tasmanian Blue Gum. Being a rapidly growing tree, it has been planted throughout the world since the early 1800s. I would welcome a well sourced addition about this on the Theory of Portuguese discovery of Australia page, but as it was written here, it only had a highly speculative relationship to Cristóvão de Mendonça.--Nickm57 (talk) 09:07, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Apoplogies, I have found an Australian called Philip Du Rhone - a photographer connected with an Art Gallery in Sydney. On the website there is a photo of a blue gum attributed to Philip Du Rhone... a coincidence surely? Anon user I await a response!--Nickm57 (talk) 09:22, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I am Philip Du Rhone and the photo of a Blue Gum is no coincidence. Sorry to have caused any consternation. I have a History Honours degree from University of Sydney and have just returned from Portugal having collected E. globulus leaf specimens for DNA analysis by Jules Freeman at the University of Tasmania. I would like to contribute to and hear more from this site but am not too sure how to go about it. Would it be possible to repost my addition and I'd like to hear more about the site and people involved.

Regards. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.218.69.146 (talk) 04:05, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Hi Philip, the following are very good starting links for learning about using Wikipedia:

As you will notice when you read these - one can't cite oneself as an authority, which was the problem with your first contribution. Nickm57 (talk) 04:35, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this article sorted by source by rather than by details of Mendonca's life?

[edit]

The headings in this article refer to the sources in which details of his life appear. Surely we should completely rearrange the article to try and put it in rough chronological order of his life and spreading the source citations throughout the article, as with other biographies. Donama (talk) 02:09, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I'm inclined to agree. However, surely the problem is that almost almost nothing is known of Mendonca beyond Barros ? When I first edited this page several years ago (early 2007) it stated contained far too much unsubstantiated assumption and conjecture for Wikipedia. Anyway, why not have a go?Nickm57 (talk) 06:48, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cristóvão de Mendonça. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:11, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cristóvão_de_Mendonça&oldid=1258652861"