Talk:Boyup Brook, Western Australia

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

William Forrest[edit]

I've deleted the link to William Forrest (the US actor), because it is clearly wrong. However there is no Wikipedia page for the "correct" William Forrest (the father of John Forrest, the Australian explorer and first Premier of Western Australia). Someone more experienced than I might like to create one, and a disambiguation page. Mitch Ames (talk) 04:58, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually the William Forrest (5 Nov 1842 - 12 Apr 1899) mentioned in the article is the brother of John Forrest, according to [1]. (John's father was also named William, born 19 Feb 1819 died 7 Jun 1899, a few weeks after William junior.) Source: Forrest Family, Pioneers of Western Australia, 1842-1982 ISBN 0959288309. Mitch Ames (talk) 13:10, 9 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Name of the town[edit]

Don't worry about the "title" mess in the two gazettals I added - I'm literally just about to head into the library to get that info, the text of the gazettals, and hopefully a look at 1378/99 in the SRO. (As a curiosity, I'm building an Access database of land related stuff for WA - it's a project I started in 2007, but have revitalised in recent weeks - will be happy to share it once it's in a more complete state.) Orderinchaos 23:31, 23 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've renamed this section of the Talk page from "Quick note" to the more descriptive "Name of the town". Mitch Ames (talk) 12:19, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for you input on this. I was contemplating going to State Records Office myself to resolve the discrepancy, but I didn't know exactly which record(s) I would need (and a search for "Boyup Brook" returns quite a few), and they have to be requested individually, so it would take far more time and enthusiasm than I have. I've moved your refs out of the Landgate quote, because I think it may be misleading to put them there, because we aren't citing the gazette for that quote, and there's nothing on Landgate's page to indicate that they cited those sources when they wrote that paragraph. I had to put them somewhere, so I've added a somewhat lame sentence to attach them to - and so I've also added {{unclear section}} as an admission that it's not very good. Once we have the details from the gazette and/or the SRO records, we should be able to write a coherent section stating the true facts. (And perhaps a note that Schorer is not accurate, in case anybody else reads the whole book!)
Incidentally, I would like to obtain a copy of the relevant gazette and SRO record if that's possible. Do you have a scanned image available somewhere on the web? Is it possible or appropriate to upload it somewhere (Wikipedia, Wikimedia Commons or elsewhere) I can see it? Or if not, could you e-mail it to me directly (I don't know if Special:EmailUset allows attachments, but if not I can send you my e-mail address so you can send it by external e-mail.) Thanks, Mitch Ames (talk) 12:39, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Gazette (as transcripted below) is at [2] (easiest way to transmit :)) I'd be happy to receive your email address so I can send you some of the SRO stuff. Because it's rare archival material it can't be photocopied so the only tool I'm allowed is my own ability to take notes and my non-flash digital camera (they actually encourage it). The file is over 100 pages (thankfully everything of interest's in the first volume) but I grabbed some useful shots of particular letters and pages - anything quoted below came from those shots. Orderinchaos 13:01, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've sent you an e-mail from Special:EmailUser, so you should get something with my return address on it. Thanks. Mitch Ames (talk) 13:19, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The SRO file had a lot of interesting info:
  • Surveyor General 7/3/99 (p.6) "The Residents of the Upper Blackwood request that a townsite to contain about 200 acres be declared [...] and that some lots should be cut up within it and thrown open. At the present time I do not consider the demand for small holdings in this locality would justify the Department in going to the expense of surveying any, but in view of possible future requirements I recommend that the area [...] to be reserved for the purpose of a townsite." (Later pages suggest the progress committee paid for their own survey, which was then accepted.)
  • I didn't copy that page but there was a slightly earlier page bemoaning the choice of location for the townsite as it was not near a road, and noting that Reserve 3379 (I did take an image of the map, though, and this reserve is at 33°54′09″S 116°22′20″E / 33.9024°S 116.3721°E / -33.9024; 116.3721) on what is now Jayes Road might be more suitable.
  • First referred to as "Booyup Brook" on 20/10/99
  • Cyril Jackson, Insp General of Schools, 15/12/99, re a strange gazettal tendering work for a school house at "Throssell, Upper Blackwood": "Sir, we were under the impression that the site at Boyup on the Blackwood had been named Throssell by you. I shall be glad to hear from you whether we were justified in this impression. Sir James Lee-Steere thinks the native name of Boyup should be retained, and I entirely concur in his view."
  • Under Secretary for Lands (R. Cecil Clifton) writes to the Surveyor General on the same day saying "I find that the Progress Committee asked that this place might be called "Throssell", but it has never been approved, although I see some person has written the name on the Standard Plan." He also reiterates Lee-Steere favoured the name Boyup as it had always been known by that name. The Surveyor General wrote back on the 20th: "I have unsuccessfully endeavoured to ascertain who most improperly wrote on and erased from the Working Plans, the name "Throssell". He notes the duplication of the name with various things in the Northam area and formally recommends "Boyup". On the next page, a town plan titled "Boyup Townsite" appears.
  • The gazettal (authorised by the SG on 17 Jan 00) says the area "should be classed as Town and Suburban Lands under the name of "Boyup" and reserves Lot 17 for a school site (contracts for which had already gone to the gazette).
  • Various pages, including a letter on p.100 (27 October 1908) refer to both the town or station "at Boyup Brook" and the gazetted townsite of "Boyup". It seems from various correspondence that the locals are using "Boyup Brook" and post arrives at "Boyup Brook, via Bridgetown".
  • The change in 1909 came because the railway station had been named Boyup Brook so it made sense to rename the town to match.

The gazettal on 5 February 1909 (p.207 of GG) reads: 

     CHANGE OF NAME OF BOYUP TOWNSITE.
              Department of Lands and Surveys,
                    Perth, 5th February, 1909.
1378/99.
His Excellency the Governor in Executive Council has
been pleased, under Section 7 of "The Land Act, 1898,"
to alter the name of Boyup Townsite, gazetted 9th February,
1900, to that of "Boyup Brook", and such Townsite shall
hereafter be known and distinguished as "Boyup Brook."
      R. CECIL CLIFTON,
           Under Secretary for Lands.

Orderinchaos 12:52, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BTW I did image the 1900 gazettal but it failed thanks to Battye only having it on microfilm (they have post-1901 in paper) - it's come out blurry and unreadable in my photo. UWA has the gazette in paper form but isn't open until the holidays are over. Orderinchaos 12:54, 24 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are the holidays over yet? It would be nice to get this part of the article tidied up. Mitch Ames (talk) 03:17, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Argh... I was in there on Thursday and forgot :/ It will have to wait another 2 weeks as I'm overseas until then. Unless another Western Australian can go to UWA and get the 1900 gazettal from p 501 of the first 1900 volume on the 3rd floor of the Reid Library, Government Publications section :) Their photocopiers have a flash drive thing so you can scan onto it for free (PDF), or you can just do what I do and take a quick digital camera shot of it. Orderinchaos 08:53, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Are you back yet Orderinchaos? Mitch Ames (talk) 02:51, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Boyup Brook, Western Australia. 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:

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

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 23:35, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Boyup Brook, Western Australia. 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:

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) 07:37, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Boyup_Brook,_Western_Australia&oldid=1200309116"