Talk:Honi Soit

	Australia portal Honi Soit 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.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Education in Australia (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Newspapers Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Newspapers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Newspapers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.NewspapersWikipedia:WikiProject NewspapersTemplate:WikiProject NewspapersNewspapers articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Good contributions from everyone, but I think we should focus more on what goes into Honi Soit than the politics around it. It's a newspaper remember. enochlau (talk) 13:36, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It would be better if there was more history of the paper included. A section for history could include people who have edited the paper in past, what important issues it has covered etc.

"A Popular History Of Honi Soit"

Who vomited into the "A Popular History Of Honi Soit" section?

I think the wikipedia policy that applies here is WP:BALLS. Andjam 05:54, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to SRC?

Much of the info here isn't noteworthy or verifiable in a reliable (non-primary) source. Should it be merged to the USyd SRC instead? Andjam 08:39, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that it should remain a separate article, for the reason that it is a well-known entity that deserves its own article. If some of the information is unverifiable, it should be removed from the article, but that is no argument for not having an article in the first place. enochlau (talk) 13:23, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The One Day of the Year

I think some mention should be made in the article about how an Anzac Day feature in the late 50's partly inspired Alan Seymour's play, The One Day of the Year. There are many sources for it which can be found with a simple google search, since the play was restaged in 2003. Sheavsey33 (talk) 05:07, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Commem Day Honis

The reference to humour in Honi Soit shows an unfortunate bias towards recent history. Commem Day Honis from the 60s and 70s should also be mentioned. These are also relevant because they were sold in significant numbers outside the University campus.

I already touched on the commem editions in the 'format' section so I didn't want to double up, but it could easily be moved under comedy. Tough why 60's and 70's in particular? Was there something noteworthy that happened those years that was not present from the 20's-50's processions? In either case it's not so much a case of bias as there not being any referencable material that I came across that would be noteworthy enough to include. If you know something however, please let me know and I'd be happy to try dig up some references from the archives and ad it in. AllTheGoodNames (talk) 15:23, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Honi Soit. 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: 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) 02:27, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]