.svg){kind=small} | This article is written in Australian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, program, labour (but Labor Party)) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=logo}
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 50 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
I feel it's too early to include Football World Cup 2006. If we include every major sporting achievement Australia has partaken in, it would soon flood the rest of the folklore articles. Whilst there is a place for sporting achievements, such as Phar Lap, it's because these events have ingrained themselves in Australia's national identity. I don't think the recent World Cup qualification fits the bill. Cnwb 22:38, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
- You've probably already guessed that deep down I feel the same! I thought I'd put it up and I would see what would happen. The basic truth we all understand to varying degrees is that if the socceroos bomb out first round with 2 or 3 defeats in Germany next year - the qualifying game against Uruguay will probably become a distant memory pretty much like Germany 1974 is.
ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ -
(waarom? jus'b'coz!) 22:55, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
- Done! Perhaps we can make a mental note to revisit this talk page in 10 years time to see if it has made the cut yet. :-) ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 22:57, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Cnwb - great minds think alike - I think we have just posted Eureka stockade at the same time - but I had created a new category called Socio-political events. What do you think?
- Yes, we're obviously connected via some
Philip K. Dick telepathic twin thing :). Your edit is way more thorough - well done.
Cnwb 23:33, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
- I added two of the main points you had made to the larger version in Socio-political events which rounds it off nicely.
- Some may view the use of the term "multiculturism" controversial (seeing that we are talking about the 1850s). Whether that is the correct term or not, I am not sure, but at least we know that there were many nationalities involved and at a minimum we can say that it was one event amongst many that gradually led to a chipping away at English hegemony (remembering that, at a minimum, the celtic element has been as big an influence as anything else on the Australian character and identity). But if someone wishes to replace the use of the term "multiculturism" with something more accurate or of the times, fair enough.
ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ -
(waarom? jus'b'coz!) 00:04, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
- I don't think the modern notion of 'multiculturalism' is appropriate at all. In terms of ethniciy you could say there was irish animosity towards english hegemony, but the whole issue was not inflated and elevated to a universal level. We should simply delete "and multiculturalism" and leave the sentence as "...the event itself remains an early expression of the Australian identity: disdain for the ruling elite, egalitarianism, a fair go". bdavidos
- Some may view the use of the term "multiculturism" controversial (seeing that we are talking about the 1850s). Whether that is the correct term or not, I am not sure, but at least we know that there were many nationalities involved and at a minimum we can say that it was one event amongst many that gradually led to a chipping away at English hegemony (remembering that, at a minimum, the celtic element has been as big an influence as anything else on the Australian character and identity). But if someone wishes to replace the use of the term "multiculturism" with something more accurate or of the times, fair enough.
ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ -
(waarom? jus'b'coz!) 00:04, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
- I added two of the main points you had made to the larger version in Socio-political events which rounds it off nicely.
Should Canberra really go in here? I live in Canberra and dont think its part of our folklore?? Astrokey44 23:55, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
- I thought that at a minimum the whole "good sheep run ruined" deserved an airing - and that that got the perception of Canberra off to a pretty ordinary start, from which it could be argued it has never recovered. So I am thinking more of the average Australian's negative perception of Canberra than the city itself - I would have thought that is an important element of the Australian make up. By the way - I too live in Canberra (have done so for 20 years), and obviously reject that notion - but we are only 1.5% of the population! Let's be honest, at times, we are flat out trying to convince other Australians that it's an ok place. But this article really isn't about reality - it's as much about myth, legend, perception, exaggerated notions of self, identity, etc.
ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ -
(waarom? jus'b'coz!) 00:04, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
- Canberra seems more like something people would like to pretend isnt there rather than folklore which are stories people like to tell. Wikipedia's large Canberra community may be putting a Canberra-bias to the article. It maybe should be included under the Sydney-Melbourne rivalry heading
Astrokey44 00:24, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
- A fair enough concern - this is what the article Folklore says: Folklore is the body of narratives, including tales, legends, oral history, proverbs, jokes, popular beliefs current among a particular population, comprising the oral tradition of that culture, subculture, or group.
- I think it could be probably be argued either way, and I am happy to hear a diverse range of views and go with the flow. Maybe one for the forum to ponder? ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 00:28, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
- Canberra seems more like something people would like to pretend isnt there rather than folklore which are stories people like to tell. Wikipedia's large Canberra community may be putting a Canberra-bias to the article. It maybe should be included under the Sydney-Melbourne rivalry heading
Astrokey44 00:24, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
- You may have a point about the Canberra bias of at least three editors for this article :-). I think the ruination of a sheep station deserves to be there; as does Prince Phillip's comment about cemeteries.-- A Y Arktos 00:30, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
- I removed this part: "*
Canberra - the capital city of
Australia. While market research indicates that the majority of Australians display some pride in the national institutions and monuments located in Canberra, such as Parliament House and the Australian War Memorial, the relationship between the majority of Australians and their capital city has been, at best, a mixed one since its founding." and put the rest under Sydney-Melbourne, something just looks wrong with having a Canberra heading in our folklore article
Astrokey44 00:32, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
- I agree that reads much better and looks better. Canberra bias?! Fair suck of the sauce pan! - it was portraying the negative views often held by Australians, rather than portraying it as the wonderful, awe-inspiring, beautiful, culturally-rich, magnificent, healthy, ecologically sound city it really is!! Me biased? Never! ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 01:04, 29 November 2005 (UTC) ps: does POV stand for patently obvious verbage?
- I removed this part: "*
Canberra - the capital city of
Australia. While market research indicates that the majority of Australians display some pride in the national institutions and monuments located in Canberra, such as Parliament House and the Australian War Memorial, the relationship between the majority of Australians and their capital city has been, at best, a mixed one since its founding." and put the rest under Sydney-Melbourne, something just looks wrong with having a Canberra heading in our folklore article
Astrokey44 00:32, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
Can someone explain how it was determined that Sydney Harbour Bridge is "Australia's most famous national landmark," thereby declaring it to be more famous than Uluru, The Great Barrier Reef, and The Sydney Opera House? There is no possible way that claim can be proven or justified and, as such, it needs to be changed... FillsHerTease ( talk) 16:13, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Australian folklore. 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051214134618/http://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/npws.nsf/Content/Lyrebirds to http://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/npws.nsf/Content/Lyrebirds
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: 18 January 2022).
- 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) 05:21, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
- Curiously, the section on External links is empty. What also catches my eye is all the red links to the folklore of Oceania, including New Zealand. No folklore in New Zealand? πιππίνυ δ - (dica) 23:47, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
- Opening sentence: "...contemporary folklore including People, Places and Events" - is there a reason why we would capitalise these words? πιππίνυ δ - (dica) 05:13, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
|
| This article is written in Australian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, realise, program, labour (but Labor Party)) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
|
| This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 50 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 5 sections are present. |
I feel it's too early to include Football World Cup 2006. If we include every major sporting achievement Australia has partaken in, it would soon flood the rest of the folklore articles. Whilst there is a place for sporting achievements, such as Phar Lap, it's because these events have ingrained themselves in Australia's national identity. I don't think the recent World Cup qualification fits the bill. Cnwb 22:38, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
- You've probably already guessed that deep down I feel the same! I thought I'd put it up and I would see what would happen. The basic truth we all understand to varying degrees is that if the socceroos bomb out first round with 2 or 3 defeats in Germany next year - the qualifying game against Uruguay will probably become a distant memory pretty much like Germany 1974 is.
ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ -
(waarom? jus'b'coz!) 22:55, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
- Done! Perhaps we can make a mental note to revisit this talk page in 10 years time to see if it has made the cut yet. :-) ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 22:57, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Cnwb - great minds think alike - I think we have just posted Eureka stockade at the same time - but I had created a new category called Socio-political events. What do you think?
- Yes, we're obviously connected via some
Philip K. Dick telepathic twin thing :). Your edit is way more thorough - well done.
Cnwb 23:33, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
- I added two of the main points you had made to the larger version in Socio-political events which rounds it off nicely.
- Some may view the use of the term "multiculturism" controversial (seeing that we are talking about the 1850s). Whether that is the correct term or not, I am not sure, but at least we know that there were many nationalities involved and at a minimum we can say that it was one event amongst many that gradually led to a chipping away at English hegemony (remembering that, at a minimum, the celtic element has been as big an influence as anything else on the Australian character and identity). But if someone wishes to replace the use of the term "multiculturism" with something more accurate or of the times, fair enough.
ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ -
(waarom? jus'b'coz!) 00:04, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
- I don't think the modern notion of 'multiculturalism' is appropriate at all. In terms of ethniciy you could say there was irish animosity towards english hegemony, but the whole issue was not inflated and elevated to a universal level. We should simply delete "and multiculturalism" and leave the sentence as "...the event itself remains an early expression of the Australian identity: disdain for the ruling elite, egalitarianism, a fair go". bdavidos
- Some may view the use of the term "multiculturism" controversial (seeing that we are talking about the 1850s). Whether that is the correct term or not, I am not sure, but at least we know that there were many nationalities involved and at a minimum we can say that it was one event amongst many that gradually led to a chipping away at English hegemony (remembering that, at a minimum, the celtic element has been as big an influence as anything else on the Australian character and identity). But if someone wishes to replace the use of the term "multiculturism" with something more accurate or of the times, fair enough.
ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ -
(waarom? jus'b'coz!) 00:04, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
- I added two of the main points you had made to the larger version in Socio-political events which rounds it off nicely.
Should Canberra really go in here? I live in Canberra and dont think its part of our folklore?? Astrokey44 23:55, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
- I thought that at a minimum the whole "good sheep run ruined" deserved an airing - and that that got the perception of Canberra off to a pretty ordinary start, from which it could be argued it has never recovered. So I am thinking more of the average Australian's negative perception of Canberra than the city itself - I would have thought that is an important element of the Australian make up. By the way - I too live in Canberra (have done so for 20 years), and obviously reject that notion - but we are only 1.5% of the population! Let's be honest, at times, we are flat out trying to convince other Australians that it's an ok place. But this article really isn't about reality - it's as much about myth, legend, perception, exaggerated notions of self, identity, etc.
ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ -
(waarom? jus'b'coz!) 00:04, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
- Canberra seems more like something people would like to pretend isnt there rather than folklore which are stories people like to tell. Wikipedia's large Canberra community may be putting a Canberra-bias to the article. It maybe should be included under the Sydney-Melbourne rivalry heading
Astrokey44 00:24, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
- A fair enough concern - this is what the article Folklore says: Folklore is the body of narratives, including tales, legends, oral history, proverbs, jokes, popular beliefs current among a particular population, comprising the oral tradition of that culture, subculture, or group.
- I think it could be probably be argued either way, and I am happy to hear a diverse range of views and go with the flow. Maybe one for the forum to ponder? ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 00:28, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
- Canberra seems more like something people would like to pretend isnt there rather than folklore which are stories people like to tell. Wikipedia's large Canberra community may be putting a Canberra-bias to the article. It maybe should be included under the Sydney-Melbourne rivalry heading
Astrokey44 00:24, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
- You may have a point about the Canberra bias of at least three editors for this article :-). I think the ruination of a sheep station deserves to be there; as does Prince Phillip's comment about cemeteries.-- A Y Arktos 00:30, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
- I removed this part: "*
Canberra - the capital city of
Australia. While market research indicates that the majority of Australians display some pride in the national institutions and monuments located in Canberra, such as Parliament House and the Australian War Memorial, the relationship between the majority of Australians and their capital city has been, at best, a mixed one since its founding." and put the rest under Sydney-Melbourne, something just looks wrong with having a Canberra heading in our folklore article
Astrokey44 00:32, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
- I agree that reads much better and looks better. Canberra bias?! Fair suck of the sauce pan! - it was portraying the negative views often held by Australians, rather than portraying it as the wonderful, awe-inspiring, beautiful, culturally-rich, magnificent, healthy, ecologically sound city it really is!! Me biased? Never! ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ - (waarom? jus'b'coz!) 01:04, 29 November 2005 (UTC) ps: does POV stand for patently obvious verbage?
- I removed this part: "*
Canberra - the capital city of
Australia. While market research indicates that the majority of Australians display some pride in the national institutions and monuments located in Canberra, such as Parliament House and the Australian War Memorial, the relationship between the majority of Australians and their capital city has been, at best, a mixed one since its founding." and put the rest under Sydney-Melbourne, something just looks wrong with having a Canberra heading in our folklore article
Astrokey44 00:32, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
Can someone explain how it was determined that Sydney Harbour Bridge is "Australia's most famous national landmark," thereby declaring it to be more famous than Uluru, The Great Barrier Reef, and The Sydney Opera House? There is no possible way that claim can be proven or justified and, as such, it needs to be changed... FillsHerTease ( talk) 16:13, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Australian folklore. 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051214134618/http://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/npws.nsf/Content/Lyrebirds to http://www.nationalparks.nsw.gov.au/npws.nsf/Content/Lyrebirds
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: 18 January 2022).
- 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) 05:21, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
- Curiously, the section on External links is empty. What also catches my eye is all the red links to the folklore of Oceania, including New Zealand. No folklore in New Zealand? πιππίνυ δ - (dica) 23:47, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
- Opening sentence: "...contemporary folklore including People, Places and Events" - is there a reason why we would capitalise these words? πιππίνυ δ - (dica) 05:13, 2 January 2018 (UTC)