I noticed in the timeline the date given for the name change was 1856. On the documenting democracy website there's a order-in-council document from 1855that changes the name to tasmania. Should this be changed on the timeline to 1855 or is there some reason why it's 1856? jgillett
It is a misquote to say that "most people thought that the last surviving Tasmanian Aborigine was Trugernanner,[2] who died in 1876." Early history books taught that the last "full blooded" aborigine was "Truganini". It is still accepted that, Trugernanner (1812–1876) and Fanny Cochrane Smith (1834–1905), were the last people solely of Tasmanian descent. It was never taught that there were no descendants from the original Tasmanians. Many Tasmanian families know and acknowledge their Tasmania ancestors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.208.249.132 ( talk) 10:32, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
There's some good information here that is supposedly under a creative commons license. Maybe we could incorporate some of this? Jgritz 13:21, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
And another link with a wealth of information, that I will one day try and incorporate into this article. It's mainly to do with Matthew Kneale's The English Passengers, a must read for any Tasmanian.. Jgritz 2 July 2005 18:45 (UTC)
Evenin' all. I have removed the link to dab from this entry:
I am unsure of the type of exhibition, but it struck me this was after a definition not a type, and the dab page does not do that. If there is a better direct link (just check out the dab page) please correct my temporary insanity. LeeG 18:56, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
It is erroneous to say that the history of any place started at any time before there were written records of that place. Hence the history of Tasmania, as opposed to its pre-history, starts when eye witnesses wrote down in some language what it is that they saw. If Abel Tasman wrote down what he saw in Dutch that is Tasmanian history; geological events in 10,000 BC are not. Oral myths and legends are part of pre-history, not history. Or what do you think the term "pre-historic" means in English? 62.134.80.136 02:38, 22 August 2006
This article is more of a timeline than anything else, perhaps the title should be chaned to reflect that or reformatted to reflect its current title? - Bozzio ( talk) 08:26, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
British colonisation of Tasmania got prod'ed. I'd prefer to see the content merged to here. ˜ danjel [ talk | contribs ] 17:04, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
I am removing the split tag because it is not needed. An article History of Tasmania can just be created and this article linked to it when appropriate. Op47 ( talk) 14:16, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
I noticed in the timeline the date given for the name change was 1856. On the documenting democracy website there's a order-in-council document from 1855that changes the name to tasmania. Should this be changed on the timeline to 1855 or is there some reason why it's 1856? jgillett
It is a misquote to say that "most people thought that the last surviving Tasmanian Aborigine was Trugernanner,[2] who died in 1876." Early history books taught that the last "full blooded" aborigine was "Truganini". It is still accepted that, Trugernanner (1812–1876) and Fanny Cochrane Smith (1834–1905), were the last people solely of Tasmanian descent. It was never taught that there were no descendants from the original Tasmanians. Many Tasmanian families know and acknowledge their Tasmania ancestors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.208.249.132 ( talk) 10:32, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
There's some good information here that is supposedly under a creative commons license. Maybe we could incorporate some of this? Jgritz 13:21, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
And another link with a wealth of information, that I will one day try and incorporate into this article. It's mainly to do with Matthew Kneale's The English Passengers, a must read for any Tasmanian.. Jgritz 2 July 2005 18:45 (UTC)
Evenin' all. I have removed the link to dab from this entry:
I am unsure of the type of exhibition, but it struck me this was after a definition not a type, and the dab page does not do that. If there is a better direct link (just check out the dab page) please correct my temporary insanity. LeeG 18:56, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
It is erroneous to say that the history of any place started at any time before there were written records of that place. Hence the history of Tasmania, as opposed to its pre-history, starts when eye witnesses wrote down in some language what it is that they saw. If Abel Tasman wrote down what he saw in Dutch that is Tasmanian history; geological events in 10,000 BC are not. Oral myths and legends are part of pre-history, not history. Or what do you think the term "pre-historic" means in English? 62.134.80.136 02:38, 22 August 2006
This article is more of a timeline than anything else, perhaps the title should be chaned to reflect that or reformatted to reflect its current title? - Bozzio ( talk) 08:26, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
British colonisation of Tasmania got prod'ed. I'd prefer to see the content merged to here. ˜ danjel [ talk | contribs ] 17:04, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
I am removing the split tag because it is not needed. An article History of Tasmania can just be created and this article linked to it when appropriate. Op47 ( talk) 14:16, 24 August 2012 (UTC)