Jump to content

Talk:William Evan Allan

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

Beramba

[edit]

Beramba was a troop ship. We (unusually?) have no article that I can find. Rich Farmbrough 14:30, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we have many if any articles on Troopships from Australia yet. They may well be written though.--User:AYArktos | Talk 20:00, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I have created a Beramba stub - the only information so far is from the Allen transcripts - a web search comes up with nothing more--User:AYArktos | Talk 21:18, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"then British colony" vs. "then-British colony"

[edit]

I removed the hyphen.

  • "then British colony": The "then" refers to "British colony", not just to "British". It means that NSW was a British colony at that time. When you read on, you discover it later became part of Australia. That's the meaning we're wanting to put across.
  • "then-British colony": Due to the hyphen, the "then" is now attached only to "British". It suggests this colony was British at that time, but later became a colony of a different country. Definitely not the meaning we're after.

Au contraire, my anonymous friend. The phrase without the hyphen not only makes perfect sense, it makes exactly the sense it should mean. The phrase with the hyphen introduces an ambiguity as to what it could possibly mean - so why on earth would you do that, unless you were intending to be unclear? You seem to be reading "then" as an adverb, whereas it is obviously being used adjectivally.

Think of it like this: If you are now married to your 4th wife, and you are relating something that happened when you were married to wife No.2, you could refer to her (the 2nd wife) as "my then wife", to distinguish her from "my current wife". You should certainly not hyphenate either of those expressions (much and all as journalists are prone to do these days).

This is the same. NSW was then (meaning, at the time we're talking about, Evan Allan's birth) a British colony, so in "the then British colony of NSW", then performs the functions of an adjective that qualifies "British colony". Assuming the reader has no knowledge of Australia (as we should), "then-British colony" allows the perfectly reasonable interpretation that NSW was a colony of Britain at that time , but Britain was not always its owner before Federation, and some other unnamed country could have colonised NSW in the intervening period. From our knowledge of history, we know that would be a false conclusion to come to. It's certainly still a valid sentence grammatically, but far from valid as a true statement about history. Bad grammar leads to bad history. The hyphen must go because it is misleading. JackofOz 02:28, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Please don't fall for the new-fangled mania for over-hyphenating things. It is worse than unnecessary, it can be quite misleading, as this example shows. Cheers JackofOz 15:59, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Last I checked, use of a hyphen goes back decades and centuries.131.96.15.42 21:46, 26 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I knew that, actually. I was talking about over-hyphenation, a relatively recent phenomenon. JackofOz 02:28, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Reads strangely

[edit]

The second sentence reads strangely "he was the last Australian to have seen action overseas" I know something else is meant to be there it already says he is the oldest. perhaps someone who has a little more knowledge could correct this typo, otherwise a great read.--Matt 09:59, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on William Evan Allan. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:56, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on William Evan Allan. 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) 23:22, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:William_Evan_Allan&oldid=1204722289"