Talk:Caledon Bay crisis
|WikiProject Australia / Crime / History / Indigenous peoples / Northern Territory||(Rated Start-class)|
Having read many articles on the matter I found the version prior to 30 March 2014 to lack neutrality and put forward claims that are not substantiated in the writings. I do not have time now to correct all of the factual errors but have dealt with the three most blatantly unsupported allegations. 1. That it was the Japanese who first attacked the Aboriginals 2. That the Japanese had raped multiple Aboriginal women as a catalyst to this event. 3. That McColl had raped Tukiar's wife on Isle Woodah. The last example was the most telling. While at trial one witness said that Tukiar had told him that, others recount different motives and both the alleged victim and other Aboriginal women witnesses denied those events then and in first hand accounts years later (Ted Egan's book Justice All Their Own). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carpentarian (talk • contribs) 14:57, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
I'd be inclined to agree that the article has some NPOV issues. The quotes "natives were restive" and "teach the aborigines a lesson" sound like verballing, and anything starting with "It should be noted that" is likely to be a problem as well.
The opening paragraph, including "it instead became a turning point towards reconciliation" sounds a bit like an opinion. Andjam 03:10, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
- I've copyedited the article and removed the NPOV tag. I think I addressed these specific concerns. --Scott Davis Talk 05:34, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
- "teach the Aborigines a lesson", though referenced, still seems to be verballing from a POV writer. At least the verballing isn't being done by a wikipedian, though. The phrase "it should be noted that" was removed, but the implication associated with it seems to be somewhat original research. If "punitivie expeditions" are often violent, ideally there should be a reference saying so. Nothing seems to have changed with regards to "it instead became a turning point towards reconciliation". Thanks, Andjam 08:20, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
- Apologies - some of those were mine during my early days of wikipedianing (is that a word?). I hasten to say they weren't my views! They were quoted and I should have given the citation. I'll see if I can still find the reference, and then put it back, because I think those quotes are quite useful to understand popular sentiment at the time. But I totally agree - they shouldn't be there without a context.RayNorris 10:42, 16 March 2007 (UTC)