Talk:Victoria Hotel (Toodyay)

Cavanagh and Cavanagh and Allom

Was the firm name really "Cavanagh and Cavanagh and Allom"? Or should it be "Cavanagh, Cavanagh and Allom"? Perhaps it's actually "[the firm of] Cavanagh and Cavanagh and [someone not in that firm] Allom", in which case a reword might be needed for clarity. (Michael Cavanagh (architect) doesn't mention Allom at all.) Mitch Ames (talk) 13:01, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

I've only been working on the Michael Cavanagh article for just over 24 hours, so I haven't got around to including anything on the various architects that over the 50years Cavanagh and Cavanagh existed. I'm still trying to decipher the details about when the practice was established and when James Cavanagh became involved - give me time Mitch and hopefully I'll get it sorted.Dan arndt (talk) 13:40, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

H.O. Allom was a partner in the firm Cavanagh and Cavanagh from c.1937 until c.1939 - prior to then he appears to have been an architectural draftsperson for the firm. Haven't been able find too much more at this stage.Dan arndt (talk) 02:59, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Hotel/Motel?

According to Google Maps (follow the coords link from the infobox), including a StreetView image dated February 2008 showing the sign at the front, and the Toodyay Visitor Centre, it is Victoria Hotel/Motel. According to the White Pages entry it is Victoria Hotel Motel.

Should we rename/move the article accordingly? Mitch Ames (talk) 12:17, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

no - in most cases the toodyay articles are being started by toodyay based editors, and the local business names change over time - it is not to start playing with the range of former names - look at the akas in the name box on the right hand side - one name is enough - if anything a redirect with current name to name of title if there is a very discrepant or left of field name change... otherwise the akas in the info box should deal with the issue satusuro 12:23, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Eating, Boarding and Lodging House License

Resolved

This edit says Woods applied for Eating, Boarding and Lodging House License, citing [1]. However I checked that ref and I read it as:

Application for Wine and Beer License
...
I, James Thomas Wood, the holder of a Wine and Beer Licence ... give notice ... to apply ... to remove the license on the premises ... general store ...

Application for a Billiard and Bagatelle License
...
I, James Thomas Wood, the holder of a Wine and Beer Licence ... give notice ... to apply ... to be the holder of a Billiard and Bagatelle License ...

Application for an Eating, Boarding and Lodging House License
...
I, Charles Claydon, ... give notice ... to apply ... for an eating, boarding, and lodging house license ...

Ie Woods did not apply for an Eating, Boarding and Lodging House License, Claydon did.

Have I misread the ads? Mitch Ames (talk) 12:37, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

• • yeah you have miss read the source it goes on to say

I CHARLES CLAYDON, stonemason, , now residing in St. George's Terrace, in the city of Perth, do hereby give notice that it is my intention to apply at the next licensing meeting to be holder for this district for an eating, boarding, and lodging house license in the shop or rooms which I now occupy, situate in St. George's Terrace,...

Claydon was applying for one in perth, woods was cancelling the general store license and replacing it with Billiard and Bagatelle license(meeting place selling liquour, meals and having rooms) , not a eating, boarding, and lodging house license Gnangarra 13:41, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

When I made the reference from the trove un-corrected column at I saw was:

A PPLICATION FOR A WINE AND A BEER LICENSE. To the Worshipful the Justices of the Peace acting in and for the district of Toodyay, in Western Australia. I, JAMES THOMAS WOOD, the holder of a Wise and Beer License for the house and premises now occupied by me, formerly occupied by John Cooper, situate in the town of Newcastle, in the district of Toodyay, do hereby give uotice that it is my intention to apply to the Justices sitting at the petty sessions to be holden at Newcastle Court House the 5th day of June, 1882, to remove the license to the premises now occupied by me as a general store, situate in the town of Newcastle, in the district of Toodyay. Given under my hand this 20th day of May, 1882. JAMES THOMAS WOOD. Newcastle, May 20, 1882.

for some odd reason the same text is repeated...

It is interesting in that the application pre-dates the date given by another editor claiming 1888 as being the license being given from the rickson book (which i think i have a copy of but have mislaid). satusuro 14:37, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Now I'm even more confused. I asserted in my original post that the reference did not say that Woods applied for an Eating, Boarding and Lodging House License (which is what our article says); the ref says that Wood(s) applied to remove a licence and apply for a Billiard and Bagatelle License, and that Claydon (not Woods) applied for an Eating, Boarding and Lodging House License.

• Gnangarra, you said that I "miss read the source" and then quote the same text (albeit in full) that I did - that Claydon applied for an eating, boarding, and lodging house license - and then you say that Woods was cancelling a licence and applying for a Billiard and Bagatelle license, not an Eating, Boarding and Lodging House License. Ie appears that - after saying I misread the ads - you're saying exactly the same thing that I was saying!
• Then satusuro also quotes the newspaper article with text (possibly misinterpreted by him?) about Wood and a wine and beer license - no mention of the Eating, Boarding and Lodging House License that our article mentions, and which I was querying.

So did Wood(s) apply for a Eating, Boarding and Lodging House License or not? If so, please quote for me the text from the newspaper that says so. (The words I'm looking for, and can't find, are "I, JT Wood, ... apply for an Eating, Boarding and Lodging House License ...").

Possibly a Billiard and Bagatelle license and an eating, boarding, and lodging house license are the same thing. I don't know. If you are asserting that they are the same thing, please say so explicitly. (Of course if you do make that assertion, even with a reference, it's still likely to be WP:SYN, unless we find another reference that explicitly says Woods applied for an "Eating, Boarding and Lodging House License".)

Note that I am only looking at the page image, not the transcription. The first few paragraphs of the transcription are completely garbled, so I didn't bother with the rest. Mitch Ames (talk) 14:28, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

ok sorted changed to Billiard and Bagatelle License as per source, it appears Sats miss quoted, as to what defines this license thats a whole new subject area to research... the place went from bulk sales(by the carton) to sales by the glass. The EB&L looks like what we know as a "service apartment" type accommodation is nothing to with this article Gnangarra 15:26, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. Mitch Ames (talk) 04:02, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Wood(s)

I notice that in the Trove ref for #Eating, Boarding and Lodging House License above the ads were from James Thomas Wood - without an S. But our article refers to Woods. The other refs are not obviously online so I can't check them. Do other refs have the S on the end? Mitch Ames (talk) 12:44, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

between 69 and 70 gentlemen sat down for a meal

Unless there were fractions of gentlemen, I don't see how "between 69 and 70" people could do anything. Could someone check exactly what the reference says and reword this sentence please.

Also it might be slightly clearer if the sentence was worded something like:

between xx and yy gentlemen sat down for a meal and over a score 20 more were unable to find seats

or

between xx and yy gentlemen arrived for a meal and over a score 20 were unable to find seats

Ie use "20" instead of "score" and make it clear whether the initial numbers(s) include those who couldn't get a seat or not.

(The quote marks will probably need to be removed, because it will no longer be a direct quote.)

Mitch Ames (talk) 12:53, 31 January 2014 (UTC)