Talk:Australian Aboriginal artefacts

  This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 15:01, 16 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Australian Aboriginal artifacts. 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/20060819012447/http://www.bushcrafts.com.au/Info_pages/Aboriginal_art.html to http://www.bushcrafts.com.au/Info_pages/Aboriginal_art.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060830125152/http://www.bushcrafts.com.au:80/Info_pages/Didgeridoo_art_and_artists.html to http://www.bushcrafts.com.au/Info_pages/Didgeridoo_art_and_artists.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 21:01, 21 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Australian Aboriginal artifacts. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.bushcrafts.com.au/Info_pages/Didgeridoo_art_and_artists.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120317085033/http://www.bushcrafts.com.au/Aboriginal_Artifacts_and_Paintings.html to http://www.bushcrafts.com.au/Aboriginal_Artifacts_and_Paintings.html

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) 02:38, 12 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

(Sorry.*)

Boomerang tells us: "Traditionally, most boomerangs used by Aboriginal groups in Australia were non-returning." This is referenced rather hazily, to a book that I can't get hold of.

This article tells us: "Boomerangs are curved throwing sticks which, when thrown, will return to its thrower." This is clearly referenced, but to a paper published 85 years ago. I'd hope that we are more knowledgable now than we were then (*rather as I hope we are less racist now than we were then). And less importantly, there's a horrible plural/singular mismatch here.

(Possibly this is a matter of definition: that the importance of traditional non-returning missiles is widely acknowledged but these are sometimes classed as "boomerang" and sometimes not. But this is merely idle guesswork. Over to somebody with better access to boomerang material than I am: PippaHav, perhaps?) -- Hoary (talk) 23:19, 27 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for bringing this to my attention, I will look into this and fix the information. PippaHav (talk) 01:01, 28 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have asked the Teahouse about whether or not this article needs an infobox, and if so what template should be used. I was told that adding an infobox here would be "superfluous." So there there is no need to add one to this article, for those who might have also been questioning this. PippaHav (talk) 01:35, 28 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

• Well said. (Does anyone seriously believe that it would help?) -- Hoary (talk) 02:21, 28 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

For "aborigine", "aboriginal", "indigenous", and perhaps others: capitalize ("Aboriginal") or not ("aboriginal")? Each of these words is ... a word, and thus needn't be capitalized; but in reality is more ("Aborigine") or less ("indigenous") used as a name, and thus should be. There should be more consistency (other than within direct quotations). Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Capital letters#Peoples and their languages gives commonsensical, flexible advice. Suggestion, PippaHav? -- Hoary (talk) 02:21, 28 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hoary, in Australia, there are conventions for using respectful language for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders (the groups of Indigenous Australians), which I started doing some work on ages ago but it still needs work and consensus for approval as a style guide. We capitalise Indigenous and Aboriginal when referring to people. PippaHav, you may be interested in having a look at the draft guide I started some years ago, still incomplete. The background work for it, showing the sources I trawled through, is here. There is some discussion on the talk page, which I must try to revive and get the page completed, approved and parked somewhere for easy reference. (I haven't had a chance to go through this article yet, but at a quick glance I can only see a few instances that need change, such as Aboriginals.) Laterthanyouthink (talk) 01:50, 29 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Laterthanyouthink, this article was very helpful thank you. Hoary Thank you for raising this issue and correct me if I am wrong, but from what I can understand, the issue with this article is the term "Aboriginals" being used rather than "Aboriginal peoples." I will fix this issue now. PippaHav (talk) 03:31, 30 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Actually, PippaHav, the question was about consistency of capitalization (or of course of non-capitalization). Or that was my intention, but I might have misphrased what I wrote. -- Hoary (talk) 08:08, 30 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Like most articles, this one necessarily uses both past and present tense. Mostly this is unproblematic. But at times tense wobbles disconcertingly. This can be in the description of a tradition. If a tradition has clearly been discontinued, a present-tense description risks becoming mere fantasy. If it continues (however attenuated), a past-tense description risks being misleading. If it's no longer practised but is nevertheless still understood and esteemed widely (not just among anthropologists, other academics, and other outliers), then I don't think the choice of tense is obvious. Suggestions? -- Hoary (talk) 02:21, 28 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hoary, I will try to look into this further, generally I've found it quite difficult to determine whether or not a tradition is continued or not.

I'd be happy to see it as a C, or even a B, according to the WP Australia quality scale. Well done, PippaHav - I can see that you've put lots of work into this one!

Yes, feel free to label it "B". -- Hoary (talk) 12:17, 30 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Please note this convention. -- Hoary (talk) 06:01, 31 May 2021 (UTC)Reply