Jump to content

User talk:Austhistory99

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

Teahouse

[edit]
Teahouse logo

Hi Austhistory99! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Cullen328 (talk).

Visit the Teahouse
We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

08:30, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Welcome

[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

Need help?

How you can help:

Additional tips...

Good luck, and have fun. – Laterthanyouthink (talk) 07:30, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

September 2019

[edit]

Information icon Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. This is just a note to let you know that I've moved the draft that you were working on to Draft:Warrowen massacre, from its old location at User:Austhistory99/sandbox. This has been done because the Draft namespace is the preferred location for Articles for Creation submissions. Please feel free to continue to work on it there. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to ask me on my talk page. Thank you. -Liancetalk/contribs 16:21, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Joseph Birdsell with Kongkandji tribe member, Mona Mona Mission, near Kuranda, North Queensland, in 1938.jpg

[edit]

Thank you for uploading File:Joseph Birdsell with Kongkandji tribe member, Mona Mona Mission, near Kuranda, North Queensland, in 1938.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator seven days after the file was tagged in accordance with section F7 of the criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This bot DID NOT nominate any file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 01:00, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Austhistory99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am not sure why my account AustHistory99 has been blocked? - please advise what I need to do or comply with to have it unblockedAusthistory99 (talk) 11:24, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

This account is not directly blocked. If you are unable to edit, please follow the instructions which appear when you attempt to do so. Yamla (talk) 11:41, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Warrowen massacre has been accepted

[edit]
Warrowen massacre, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Missvain (talk) 16:35, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of Interest

[edit]

Information icon Hello, Austhistory99. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Dark Emu and Bruce Pascoe, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

  • avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
  • propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
  • disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
  • avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
  • do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Bacondrum (talk) 00:54, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of Draft:Indigenous Australian Inter-tribal Wars and Violence

[edit]

Draft:Indigenous Australian Inter-tribal Wars and Violence, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Indigenous Australian Inter-tribal Wars and Violence and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Draft:Indigenous Australian Inter-tribal Wars and Violence during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Rob (talk) 01:22, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

blanked section

[edit]

Hello, I have blanked a section on the linked talk page. Please be very careful about making defamatory unsourced claims. Even when sourced, you have to be careful of your tone, talking about a living person, and may not attack a subject of an article (or anybody). You are welcome to contribute to Wikipedia. But, if the main reason you're here is to attack certain people or press a hateful POV, you are likely to be blocked. --Rob (talk) 01:47, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Copyright problem icon One of your recent additions has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Bacondrum (talk) 01:22, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ANI Notice

[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. --Bacondrum (talk) 02:09, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deletion - Warrowen massacre

[edit]

Proposed deletion of Warrowen massacre

[edit]
Notice

The article Warrowen massacre has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Nominate for deletion. Relies almost entirely on primary sources. These are sensational, colonial accounts, the language used in these primary sources demonstrates a strong bias and profound racism, secondary sources are needed. The office of the Protector of Aborigines is certainly not a reliable source in this context. Boro Boro Willum, for example may not have existed at all, I can find no other source that mentions this tribe or one with a similar name, it's likely a colonial fiction.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Bacondrum (talk) 01:19, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Warrowen massacre for deletion

[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Warrowen massacre is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Warrowen massacre until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. The Drover's Wife (talk) 02:11, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

October 2020

[edit]

Information icon Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. This is just a note to let you know that I've moved the draft that you were working on to Draft:Massacre of Running Waters, from its old location at User:Austhistory99/sandbox. This has been done because the Draft namespace is the preferred location for Articles for Creation submissions. Please feel free to continue to work on it there. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to ask me on my talk page. Thank you. Nathan2055talk - contribs 05:37, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Charles Sievwright, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Victoria. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:10, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Massacre of Running Waters (October 29)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Snowycats was:
Very large direct quotes are used. We don't need those.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Snowycats (talk) 04:55, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Massacre of Running Waters has been accepted

[edit]
Massacre of Running Waters, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

DGG ( talk ) 07:51, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

COI and defamation

[edit]

Information icon There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Bacondrum 11:44, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Indefinite block

[edit]
Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for disruptive editing (including blatant advocacy and conflict of interest violations).
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

El_C 14:58, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Austhistory99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I apologise if I unintentionally appeared to have done a disruptive edit - In the case in point I (along with some other editors) feel that the Dark Emu article would be improved if a recently published, very reputable academic paper from a third party, who has his own Wikipedia article Ian Keen, and to which I have no affiliation, was referenced in some way. We feel that there is strong push-back by some editors to the inclusion of a reference to Dr Keen's work as he is critical of the Dark Emu thesis. I am interested in the topic of Dark Emu and do run a private, amateur non-commercial website, but I do now understand that I need to be careful not to allow any COI to occur and will be mindful of this going forward. I have only been editing the Talk page of Dark Emu not the main article and am happy for another editor to add the final agreed additions to the main page. I have successfully created two other Wikipedia pages, one of which Warrowen massacre was listed for AfD by it appears this same editor who has applied for my blocking for serious COI. His AfD was ultimately declined as it was found to have no basis and my article was strongly supported by many other editors. I value, and financially contribute to, Wikipedia and feel Wikipedia would be losing out on some valuable future additions I have planned if I was permanently blocked. Austhistory99 (talk) 21:05, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I will not unblock you to continue editing/discussing Bruce Pascoe and Dark Emu, due to your clear conflict of interest. Wikipedia articles should be developed by disinterested editors who have no conflict of interest. If you make an unblock request in which you commit not to touch the subjects of Bruce Pascoe and Dark Emu, and instead to work only on unrelated subjects, another administrator might consider that more favourably. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:42, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Courtesy link to ANI discussion that lead to block
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Austhistory99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Your reason here : OK, I agree to not touch the subjects of Bruce Pascoe and Dark Emu and will only work on unrelated subjects Austhistory99 (talk) 3:39 am, 17 February 2021, Wednesday (21 days ago) (UTC−6)

Decline reason:

This does not address the WP:NOTHERE issues raised at ANI. signed, Rosguill talk 06:09, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Looking carefully at this:

and in particular comments they have posted under the username MungoMann, where they make it clear they were colluding with User:PetroAntonio to push a particular POV: "We on the Centre-right appear to be losing the day-to-day ‘cultural-war’ because we have real, fruitful lives and don’t spend mind-numbing hours on the keyboard ‘re-writing history and ‘the narrative’, like our Progressive-Left opponents do. Nevertheless, if we have some spare time it is worthwhile lobbing into Wikipedia ( the Oracle of the Progressive Left!) some real history from time to time. In the long run it will help our cause in the cultural wars. Today Wikipedia approved my entry on the Aboriginal inter-tribal Massacre of Running Waters." They've never fully owned up to much of their disruptive behavior: https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2020/09/something-wiki-this-way-comes/ they should remain indef blocked, their behavior here and offwiki has been blatantly agenda driven. If they are to be merely topic banned then that should be broadly construed to include all topics relating to Australian politics IMO, or at the very least Aboriginal Australians and the Australian culture wars, at the very least. Though I think their behavior here has been so far beyond the pale that they should remain indef blocked. Bacondrum 10:16, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MfD nomination of User:Austhistory99/Indigenous Australian Inter-tribal Wars and Violence

[edit]

User:Austhistory99/Indigenous Australian Inter-tribal Wars and Violence, a page which you created or substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; you may participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Austhistory99/Indigenous Australian Inter-tribal Wars and Violence and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Austhistory99/Indigenous Australian Inter-tribal Wars and Violence during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Bacondrum 20:49, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This page I have in draft User:Austhistory99/Indigenous Australian Inter-tribal Wars and Violence should NOT be deleted. Scholarship on this topic is a valid area of research. For example a book [1]has recently been published by Christophe Darmangeat a lecturer at the University of Paris which has received high praise from academics around the world such as :
Editorial Reviews (See :

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B08P3ZWWNS/ref=dbs_a_def_rwt_bibl_vppi_i0 )

This is the first comprehensive study of the literature on the roles of collective violence in classical Aboriginal Australia. . . . Justice and Warfare in Aboriginal Australia makes a most useful addition to the anthropological literature on Australian society as it was before conquest by the British Empire. The nature of that society has recently come under considerable social media debate and public discussion in Australia. This book is thus a very timely contribution to our understanding of the past. -- Peter Sutton, South Australian Museum

For over a century anthropologists have sought to counter ethnocentric and unilineal evolutionary views of Australian hunter-gatherer societies by emphasizing their sophisticated environmental knowledge, efficacious socio-political organization, and complex cosmology. Embedded in this approach has been a tacit acceptance by the vast majority of anthropologists that pre-European Australia was a continent of peace where conflict was solved solely through cooperation and avoidance. This view has had a profound impact on the study of the origins of violence and warfare in human history. A handful of scholars have reevaluated this assumption through consideration of evidence from archaeology, oral tradition, history, ethnography, and material culture. This book, however, is the first comprehensive analysis of this material. Darmangeat assembles detailed evidence for violence and warfare among Australian foragers through the critical lens of a Marxist perspective. Particularly valuable is his emphasis on placing conflict within the context of traditional justice systems. The result is a vital and long overdue contribution to the study of the origins of violence and warfare among hunter-gatherers.

-- Mark W. Allen, California State Polytechnic University at Pomona

Until the first English settlement in 1788, the Australian continent was solely inhabited by hunter-gatherers whose social life mirrored human history for 95% of our existence. Darmangeat’s Justice and Warfare in Aboriginal Australia is the richest and most comprehensive source of eye-witnessed violence ranging from simple assault to feud and warfare ever compiled for the continent. As such, the accounts therein are central for our understanding the origins of organized violence. Just as importantly, his theoretically informed classification of collective violence is a valuable guide for researchers.

-- Raymond Hames, University of Nebraska-Lincoln

Christophe Darmangeat has produced an exhaustive volume on traditional Aboriginal Australian justice and warfare. I opened the book with trepidation because the topic is fraught with problems of politics, definition, interpretation, bias, prejudice and missing data. But I was pleasantly surprised to find all the issues were tackled head on with a very readable forensic analysis. This methodical book is fascinating to read and an excellent record that questions many past assumptions about hunter-gatherer lifeways. -- Paul S. C. Taçon, Griffith University

The subject of Australian Aboriginal warfare – whether Aborigines went to war and if so how and why – has become a vital issue in scholarship on the origins of human warfare. In Justice and Warfare in Aboriginal Australia, Christophe Darmangeat has made an enormously valuable contribution by assembling a large database of widely scattered reports on Aboriginal violence, evaluating this evidence, and discussing its implications for current research on war and its origins.

-- Paul "Jim" Roscoe, University of Maine --This text refers to the hardcover edition. About the Author

It appears that the editor Bacondrum who raised this request for deletion may be not acting in good faith. It appears he has gone through all my Wikipedia additions and is attempting to delete them because he/she claims '...this draft was clearly created as an attack on Aboriginal Australians - It's essentially racist...'. I strenuously deny this charge. Some of my contributions have been saved by the intervention of other editors (see talk Warrowen massacre and Massacre of Running Waters who clearly see the value of these neutral contributions which are just recording aspects of Australian history as supported by the academics above. Except where other editors have come to the defence of my additions, I am unable to prevent deletion of all my other contributions to various pages over the past few years as Bacondrum has succeeded in having my account blocked, despite several applications to have my account unblocked.

It is very important for the reputation of Wikipedia's neutrality for another senior editor to review the blocking and deleting on my account and page contributions. If contributors like myself can't add documented, referenced and peer-reviewed third party information to Wikipedia there is not much point to Wikipedia then. Austhistory99 (talk) 22:12, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • The sources don't cease to exist just because this blatantly racist attack page does. If an editor who hasn't been blocked for pushing a racist agenda wants to use the sources to write a NPOV article nothing is stopping them. Bacondrum 23:04, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Title's like this "The Daily Threat of Violence in pre-Colonial and Colonial Australian Aboriginal Society" are so obviously loaded (and racist, in my opinion). "Violence in Modern Australian Aboriginal Society see Indigenous Australians and crime" it's so obviously contructed to malign Aboriginal people - bald faced racism. "a 30 to 40 year old Aboriginal male was excavated at Narrabeen in Northern Sydney in a dune near the coast having been killed by Death Spears" I'm sure a few people were speared to death in Europe over the years, the framing of this issue as it is presented here is simply loaded with racism. The entire draft article is cherry-picked and framed in the most negative way possible, blind-Freddy could see the racist agenda at play here. Bacondrum 23:18, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In answer to Bacondrum, you in my opinion are providing further evidence of Bad Faith. My article is only Draft phase and I cannot finish and edit because you have blocked me. The point that you raise that, "The Daily Threat of Violence in pre-Colonial and Colonial Australian Aboriginal Society" is 'racist' is wrong. This is much the same point made by other editors on other Wikipedia pages, for example see
Australian frontier wars in Wikipedia which basically states

Section = Traditional Aboriginal warfare , Aboriginal warrior "According to the historian John Connor, traditional Aboriginal warfare should be examined on its own terms and not by definitions of war derived from other societies. Aboriginal people did not have distinct ideas of war and peace, and traditional warfare was common, taking place between groups on an ongoing basis, with great rivalries being maintained over extended periods of time." It is not up to an editor like yourself to appoint yourself as a censor of our history, much of which is being added to Wikipedia by other editors who you have not cancelled (yet).Austhistory99 (talk) 23:53, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Austhistory99 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Given that the changes to the Dark Emu (book), Massacre of Running Waters, Warrowen massacre Wikipedia pages that I had been proposing for the past year and half, before I was blocked by some editors who disagreed, have now all finally been accepted, I think that my account should be unblocked. I am here in Wikipedia to build an encyclopaedic data base - There is a wealth of information regarding Australian colonial history which has yet to be referenced on Wikipedia. Very few contributors are working in these areas. I suggest that my in good faith contributions will add significantly to Wikipedias data base over a wide range of topics in this regardAusthistory99 (talk) 05:48, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You have not addressed the reasons for your original block and have blamed other people. Declined. GeneralNotability (talk) 20:48, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

  1. ^ Darmangeat, Christophe (2020). Justice and Warfare in Aboriginal Australia. Lexington Books.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Austhistory99&oldid=1032504806"