User talk:Billenben

Welcome!

Hi Billenben! I would like to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! — Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 20:02, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

William Joseph Taylor

Hello @Billenben thank you so much for your detailed contributions to the Taylor page - they are appreciated. Whilst you get the hang of editing, I have temporarily moved them to the talk page. The reason is that the majority of the material you added is unreferenced (when starting out it is best to reference every sentence) and without those references it wasn't quite clear whether some of the content is WP:Original research. It's fantastic to see new editors contribute, but I would recommend familiarising yourself with some of the standard guidelines, then finding reliable secondary sources that support the infomation you added, before then adding the content onto the page. Please message if you need a hand. Alternatively, the Teahouse link above is a really great place to get advice. Lajmmoore (talk) 10:10, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Billenben I noticed that you added the content that was removed from the William Joseph Taylor article without fixing the issues with sourcing. Please could you return to the article and ensure that every statement is supported by a reliable secondary source. Lajmmoore (talk) 15:13, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Hodgkin

I've removed your additions to the article Thomas Hodgkin because they seem to be about a possibly entirely different person called Thomas Hodgkin. You need good secondary sources to support this (not a primary source like a contract). Note that Thomas Hodgkin is not an uncommon name (his nephew for instance was also called Thomas and over 21 when this took place). Even if he were involved it needs only a line or two since it was at most only a minor part of his life (and for that matter who Thomas Hodgkin of the Kangaroo office was seems to have played only a small role in it). Erp (talk) 01:44, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is the same Dr Thomas Hodgkin as evidence by the contract found at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Stamping_press_sales_document_1853

Everyone in numismatics who is anyone knows it is Dr Hodgkin who is the Hodgkin in the Hodgkin, Tindall, Taylor, Kangaroo Office story..

Do i need to emphasis to you the Doctor part here. Dr Thomas Hodgkin, to distinguish him from these others. With a son in law named Reginald Scaife. Seriously; you think we are talking about some other Dr Thomas Hodgkin? You go too far.

Wiliiam Taylor is a very common name yet you do not seem to be applying the same standard to the flap trap about him found in other parts of the pedia. I look at the Taylor material and feel your pedia has little credibility given such bollocks can end up the apex information on the Kangaroo Office.

What gets me is the referencing for highly erroneous story of Taylor being the protagonist in the Kangaroo Office is rubbish. It amounts to hear say and conjecture in a lot of instances.

Not impressed. Billenben (talk) 21:13, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In the garbage narrative found under William Taylor for the Kangaroo Office it says:

They arrived at Hobsons Bay on 23 October 1853.

Actually they arrived on the 25^th of Oct 1853 according to the Argus of 26 Oct 1853.

https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/4798626

Where is the reference for the incorrect claim?

The piece on the pedia goes on

“unfortunately the press was too heavy to move and Scaife and Brown had to dismantle it in order to transport it to the site of the new mint”

That is just one of several narratives and is somewhat contradicted by the Museum Of Victoria’s Sharples.

The pieces goes on

“The office began minting gold coins in May 1854. These coins featured a kangaroo on the obverse and the words PORT PHILLIP and AUSTRALIA on the rim; the reverse showed the weight and the words PURE AUSTRALIAN GOLD. One complete set was displayed at the Melbourne Exhibition in 1854, but it is unknown how many sets were produced.

Again this relies entirely on the narrative from Coinworks in the 21^st century with no historic foundation..

William Morgan Brown claims on more than one occasion 27 sets were made.

I can give references.

The press was not operation until perhaps June late July, I can give references.

I will not go on because it seems painful to go over it.

The narrative under Taylor (if that is even his real name) is rubbish and the referencing poor.

If Hodgkin isn’t as I claim then none of these people are who it is claimed thy are.

I am annoyed and to be frank I am almost prepared to walk away and let the pedia purport rubbish.

Is that part of your mission to achieve that result?

And you want me to donate. Billenben (talk) 21:50, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Look up Hodgkin's signature. Just Google it ; you will find it.

It is the same as the one on the contract in my Hodgkin piece.

"I've removed your additions to the article Thomas Hodgkin because they seem to be about a possibly entirely different person called Thomas Hodgkin"

It is Dr Thomas Hodgkin.

I would love to know on what you based your highly erroneous removal. Billenben (talk) 08:58, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If well known in numismatics, surely someone has published an article about him? However as it stood the section seemed to be entirely original research by you with no citations of reliable secondary sources supporting it. See WP:NOR for why this is frowned upon in wikipedia entries. I've started a discussion on the Thomas Hodgkin talk page which would be the appropriate place for it. It is entirely possible that you are correct, and, I would be interested in seeing your secondary sources. On another note changes marked as 'minor' should not include content changes like adding an entire new section. Erp (talk) 04:02, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"If well known in numismatics, surely someone has published an article about him?"

What is well know is that the Hodgkin is Dr Thomas Hodkin's. What is not well know is that it is most likely it is his 'baby; not Taylors.

Everyone writes about Taylor because of what W S W Vaux did in 1864. Everyone thinks Taylor was the instigator and one person started that story long and no one ever questioned it because Taylor is the medalist.

"However as it stood the section seemed to be entirely original research..."

A nice excuse to distract from the erroneous "not Dr Hodgkin' reason. Billenben (talk) 07:01, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]