Talk:Geoffrey Blainey

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Biography / Science and Academia (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the science and academia work group.
WikiProject Australia / History (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon Geoffrey Blainey is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Australian history.
Note icon
Need help improving this article? Ask a LibrarianWhat's this? at the National Library of Australia.
edit·history·watch·refresh Stock post message.svg To-do list for Geoffrey Blainey:
  • gather up a more extensive bibliography
  • find out what other awards he was a recipient of
  • search for more biographical information

**Where was he born? - in Melbourne - added to article

D.O.B=March 11, 1930 --Randolph 04:08, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The Tyranny of Distance (album)[edit]

A page on the The Tyranny of Distance would be worthwhile (currently a disambig page).

Some text in The Tyranny of Distance (album) should be edited and moved/copied to the appropriate page.--Singkong2005 02:50, 27 January 2006 (UTC)


The balance of this article is POV in itself. His early career needs fleshing out. His contribution to Tasmanian history, and considerable energies in many directions came well before any of the points in this article so far, it does him a disservice. 15:38, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Well knock yourself out. Add it. Lao Wai 16:10, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

This article as it stands is a complete distortion of his career and needs to be rewritten (yes, yes, I should do it myself.). Adam 13:34, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree, to say that Blainey is most famous for his anti-immigration rhetoric is dishonest at best. Previous authors have seen it fit to include unreferenced or verifiable information and anecdotes that have no place in an encyclopaedia. I would recommend a complete re-write. So I'll get cracking. Cheerio. Lord Gallahad 05:34, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Assertions about Hanson[edit]

Although commentators have linked Hanson's speech and Blainey, a transcript for her maiden speech contains no direct reference to Blainey - see . Many Google references link Hanson and Blainey in the same breath but I don't see a ref from Hanson linking herself in any way with Blainey. For example within her site, his name does not appear [1]--Golden Wattle talk 19:15, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

A cursory search of Geoffrey Blainey in Google will show that most mainstream commentators, including the Australian Parliament have linked him to radical right-wing politics Aust. Parliament Research Paper. Yet references to this obvious part of his life are being often deleted from information about his career. Wikipedia has never been about censorship in cases where reliable sources support the information.

I contend this information should be included, "He has been a controversial figure too, and according to the Australian parliament is most often associated with radical right-wing politics Parliament Research Paper. Blainey has also been accused of being anti-Asian immigration to Australia, leading to claims of racism. He has been closely aligned with the government of John Howard in Australia, with the Prime Minister shadowing Blainey's conservative views on some issues, especially the view that Australian history has been hijacked by social liberals."

This is not partisan information, but reflects historical facts, as supported by the Australian Parliament. The information is really beyond dispute. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deathdefying (talkcontribs) 03:27, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Thats a crock of shit and you know it. The source you provided says nothing of the sort and certainly not in the terms you've presented above. At most it says that Howard's views often mirror those of Blainey's, much like Keating and Manning Clark held similar opinions. But to attempt phraseology such as "often associated with radical right-wing politics" and "Australian history has been hijacked by social liberals." is dishonest and misleading. And where does it discuss "anti-Asian immigration"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 15:54, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I have come to this discussion late, but I see no reason the information about Blainey being part of the radical right should not be included. To quote from the Australian Parliament [2] report: "Leading historians such as the late Professor Manning Clark and Professor Geoffrey Blainey have become strongly identified with the partisan politics of the liberal left and the radical right respectively." To say this is a "crock of shit" is simply untrue. It is there in black and white. Blainey does not days hide his close association with the right wing fringe. If Wikipedia is to hold any relevance, it should be honest enough to portray history truthfully. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 08:23, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

"Thats a crock of shit and you know it." A good edit is one that is not based on emotion. It would seem you are so keen to defend Geoffrey Blainey you cannot look at the evidence.

Blainey has been clearly connected to the radical right throughout his career. The Australian parliamentary library no less says he is is a member of "radical right". There is no room for negotiations on this and no confusion. Blainey is a right winger of the most radical kind. He has been his entire career.

You should seek to put aside your personal bias and accept that the great historian cannot, himself, undo history on this point.

Your dismissal of the evidence is akin to denying Lenin was of the left, or that Mussolini was on the extreme right. I would urge you to try and give up your personal agendas for the sake of a legitimate history of this important Australian. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deathdefying (talkcontribs) 03:37, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Atrociously written[edit]

I've taken the liberty of removing some of the clearer POV stuff. If you're going to accuse someone of contributing to bullying of asian children, lets at least have a source for it. Michaeles 05:17, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

  • I had added citation tags - the normal course is to request sources - not remove material befoe giving people a chance to respond. On the other hand I am not inclined to revert the changes - I don't disagree that strongly that the material was unsourced and I had looked and could not find out any stand out sources to support the assertions.--Golden Wattle talk 08:58, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
    • The grammar and syntax is appalling. For example, there is a two-word sentence fragment orphaned out there all by its lonely self -- "quoted in [21]." Why is "quoted in" treated as a sentence? Who was quoted and in what? There are numerous examples of what appears to be evidence that portions of this entry were written by myopic simians. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:18, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

The reference to the 1999 referendum reads like republican propaganda - "After the decisive failure in 1999 of the referendum to make Australia a republic, Blainey and the constitutional lawyer, Professor Colin Howard, were singled out by the Australian republicans’ leader, Malcolm Turnbull, as deserving a special share of the blame" - that doesn't read like a neutral comment to me. (talk) 06:20, 4 August 2012 (UTC)