Jump to content

Talk:Carl Feilberg

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


POV

[edit]

There is tendency for authorial opinion to be presented in this article. Any opinions must be cited to reliable sources, and if that opinion might be superlative, then the sources should show that the view is held by more than person, or that person must be named, as in "John Doe has said in his Foo publication that Foo is the best thing since sliced bread". The Legacy section in particular needs dealing with. SilkTork ✔Tea time 00:43, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – It is NOT POV - Now this issue has been dealt with and fell short - so this is nothing but yet another attempt to reinvigorate a dead horse.

Anyhow - the lines here simply summarizes the article. His contemporary influence is thus accurately reflected in the lines cited earlier in this article (The people cited are all prominent contemporaries such as the editor of the Sydney Bulletin W.H.Traill and Francis Adams the poet). It is further underlined by the fact that we are dealing here with the editor-in-chief of Queensland’s leading newspaper the Courier-Mail (or as it was known in those days The Brisbane Courier). This journal was and still is the most influential in Queensland. It is further more visible – as is clearly stated in the lines - in numerous obituaries. Anyone with internet access can take the name Carl Feilberg and the date October 1887 (his death) and look these up on the Australian National Library newspaper page. Furthermore - Carl Feilberg is today one of the most cited of all colonial human rights activist from the period, his pamphlet The Way We Civilise (see link below and particularly prominent from which is the article by that name also cited below) is cited in virtually all books dealing with Queensland history and in particularly in books dealing with race relation issues it will probably be almost all dealing with Australia’s race relations in general – let me list just a few of those books in mention Ross Fitzgerald’s From the Dreaming to 1915 (1982) W. Ross Johnston’s A Documentary History of Queensland (1988). Henry Reynolds’ The Other Side of the Frontier (1981), Sharman Stone’s Aborigines in White Australia (1974), Bruce Elder’s Blood on the Wattle (1988), Raymond Evans’s Exclusion, Exploitation and Extermination (1975) Henry Reynolds’ Race Relations in North Queensland (1978), Judith Wright’s The Cry for the Death (1981) Noel Loos’ Invasion and Resistance (1982) Roslyn Kidd The Way We Civilise (she used a citation of Feilberg to begin her book and she reused the title too) Pamela Lukin Watson’s Frontier Lands & Pioneer Legends (1998) she begins her book citing the Way We Civilise Henry Reynolds’ An Indelible Stain? (2001) Roslyn Poignant’s Professional Savages (2004) Just to mention a few It is equally cited on page 71 in the highly profiled so-called ‘stolen generation report’ (Bringing Them Home, 1997) Henry Reynolds: This Whispering in Our Hearts use an entire chapter on Feilberg’s The Way We Civilise p108 – 138. On page 108 he characterised The Way We Civilise as ‘one of the most influential tracts in Australian History’ Henry Reynolds as well as Raymond Evans (Evans has been for many years known as THE race relation historian of Queensland, for those who may not know this) further acknowledges Feilberg in their latest books - Reynolds mentions him on pages 113-14, 115, 128-9 - Raymond Evans on page 137 in his newly published ‘A History of Queensland’ state that (cit) ‘Between May and September 1880, Lukin’s paper, employing a fearless reporter, Carl Feilberg…’ (Lukin’s paper is ‘The Brisbane Courier’ and its weekly the ‘Queenslander’ for those who may not know this) Quotes from The Way We Civilise appears in virtually all TV documentaries on the subject of race relations in colonial days. Consequently it is equally cited in Ben Kiernan’s Blood and Soil: A World History of Genocide and Extermination from Sparta to Darfur (2008).Helsned 09:19, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

None of that is the issue the problem lies in that the article was writen by you citing your work which wasnt even published Gnangarra 10:08, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - unchanged - This very debate - furthering the very same allegations - was taken and resolved under the delete section - are we really now to start all over again to please the wimps of an unhappy minority?Helsned 13:58, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
what it said was he's notable concerns abut bias pov and coi are to be addressed by editing Gnangarra 01:48, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
No Obvious Bias has been located This was also debated under the delete - and no one was able to demonstrate or point at any biases - beyond the fact that some seem to be of the opinion that to mention or write anything dealing with the issue of aboriginal rights in colonial days in itself represents an unlawful and uncalled for bias. The article is simply not biased in any deliberate or obvious way, nor should or need it to be. Helsned 03:33, 1 February 2012 (UTC)
Keep your comments to content not users, the article contain WP:weasel wording and you draw conclusions about his legacy is not a publisher of original ideas nor is somewhere to advertise your works and give them credibility. Gnangarra 03:44, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You need to begin providing some documentation for your continued claims, otherwise we will have to conclude that the only 'bias' 'POV' or 'weasel wording' is your own - and this continually and right here in the talk column. I will be only too pleased to assist in ensuring that any such thing - lack of 'independent sourcing' and 'verifiable sorces' included - are all detected and properly eliminated or rectified with notes. That is, if there are any. Helsned 07:45, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

I am asked to pass on a thanks to you for your effort in improving on our article. None of us think, though, that you managed to prove your case. That is with the slight exception perhaps on the point made about Feilberg going into a kind of 'political exile’ in Melbourne. Not that this was overstated or wrong, but it could perhaps have been better supported with citations. This is now done. We have equally improved on the notes regarding the other points you have made. We are of the opinion that this article must now be the perhaps very best founded and noted of all Wiki biographies, in particular those dealing with Queensland. It is certainly way and above the average. But since the subject is so controversial, and since this story pretty much demonstrate – black on white (so to speak) - that it was entirely to the point when Bill Stanner once claimed that there was a 'veil of silence' covering the truth about white black relations in Australia - it may be quite reasonably that this article should also be way and above average.Helsned 11:52, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

There is still a bit of work to do, I'm planning to spend some time this afternoon local time looking at the old papers and some of the references you've quoted. I think if we keep working together that it'll be ready for a run WP:FAC with the next couple of weeks from there request it be on the main page for 21 August. The article did say that his parents were killed in a tragic accident do you when and what that was as WP may already have an article about it. Gnangarra 00:20, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am told that his mother died in child-bed when he was six and that his father (and old mariner) died of syphilis when he was nine, but I did not think that any of that was of much relevance for this article. 'Tragic circumstances' will suffice, if interested people can read more about it at Oxley Library or when the mentioned work are published. There are quite a bit about this family on Danish websites, also on the Danish Wiki, but the syphilis was not something people wrote about in public in those days.Helsned 00:51, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

neither of those are tragic in an encyclopaedic sense, so not relevant at all. Tragic in an encyclopeadic sense is when its involves an event (eg: shipwreck, storm, fire) not what was a relatively common untreatable diesease at the time and child birth(?), even then we avoid the use of such words to describe the event. Gnangarra 01:20, 4 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just realised that maybe nobody including me ever pointed you in the direction of WP:MOS and WP:WTW which would explain why I see the way you've written the article as being bias/pov, sorry for that. Gnangarra
Constructive criticism is always appreciated, so also assistance which might work to improve the article. The circumstances surrounding the death of his parents was certainly very traumatic, he was a close up witness to both (his fathers mental deterioration implicated some horrific and traumatic events) and it is alleged that this experience had a lasting impact, but all of that is much better described and explained in the book ('child-bed' or childbed, is the medical term).Helsned 02:50, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Re NPOV with no new allegations made in now over a year, and plenty of documentation to support this section, the NPOV must be classified as resolved.Helsned 13:39, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Carl Feilberg. 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}}).

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) 07:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Carl_Feilberg&oldid=1201960143"