Talk:Thomas Austin (pastoralist)

Untitled

This page is important as it outlines the individual who is widely believed to be soley responsible for the introduction of a noctious pest into Australia.

I have searched through wikipedia and as yet found no reference to his life.—Preceding unsigned comment added by U4233161 (talk • contribs) 05:57, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Incompatible birthdates?

The given birthdates for Austin (1870 or 74) seem to contradict the timeline for his introduction of rabbits in 1859. Perhaps the birthdate belongs to a different individual?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.238.117.31 (talk) 14:44, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

I've removed the birth, death and family tree information. It is clearly the wrong Thomas Austin. Rocksong 02:56, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Rabbits!

Why is it that the only thing anyone seems to know about Thomas Austin is his contribution to Australia's rabbit saga? I've added an external reference as a prelude to writing a more balanced biography. MulgaBill 21:19, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Because it's the only thing of historical note which he ever did. Rocksong 23:41, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Rewrite

I've rewritten the article and moved all the info on rabbits to Rabbits in Australia. MulgaBill 23:47, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd still like rabbits to be given more prominence; such as a mention in the first paragraph. If it wasn't for the rabbits, Austin would be a person of extremely minor historical imporatance, and he wouldn't deserve a Wikipedia article. Rocksong 00:07, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Redlinked names

I've undone Peter Ballard's removal of the redlinked names. Thomas's brother James, and his wife Elizabeth were notable in several ways (James = Mayor of Geelong & Glastonbury, Eng; Elizabeth = benefactor of Austin Hospital, Melb, and Austin Homes, Geelong). Just because no one's written an entry on them yet, doesn't mean one couldn't or shouldn't, and the redlink serves as a prompt (Yeah, I know, I should write something myself - one day, one day!) Oh, and whether Thomas was of 'extremely minor historical imporatance' [sic] depends on your perspective, doesn't it, Rocksong? There are plenty of people with entries who seem rather trivial to me, but I respect the contributions they have made, and the significance that others attribute to them. I'm frequently looking up 'minor' people or events to check a fact, or flesh out a topic. After all, isn't that the purpose of a comprehensive, accessible encyclopedia like Wikipedia? MulgaBill 21:16, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Credited?

Perhaps 'credited with' should be changed to 'noted for' or something similar? Surely there's nothing positive about the introduction of rabbits to Australia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joystick74 (talk • contribs) 10:00, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough, I'll change it. --Money money tickle parsnip (talk) 09:18, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just added archive links to one external link on Thomas Austin. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060828103328/http://www.sbs.com.au/gold/story.html?storyid=130 to http://www.sbs.com.au/gold/story.html?storyid=130

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know. Y 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:10, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 2 January 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Consensus to move to the (pastoralist) (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 10:26, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

---

• Thomas Austin → Thomas Austin (Australia)
• Thomas Austin (disambiguation) → Thomas Austin

– no clear WP:PRIMARYTOPIC per page views [1] Joeykai (talk) 08:47, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

• Support the footballer gets more views (1,276) than the settler (342) also the civil servant gets 63, the politician has 12 and the cricketer has 1. I'm note sure "Australia" is appropriate as a disambiguator especially given Tom Austin (politician) is completely Australian while this one is from England, perhaps Thomas Austin (settler)? Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:46, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
• Support move, Thomas Austin (pastoralist) seems like the best title. Ivar the Boneful (talk) 10:57, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
• Support Thomas Austin (pastoralist). He was most certainly not an Australia and we don't disambiguate in this way. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:04, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
• Support per nomination; Crouch, Swale; Ivar the Boneful and Necrothesp. There are five men listed upon the Thomas Austin (disambiguation) page, with no indication that English settler in Australia has a historical standing of such significance that it overwhelms the remaining four entries. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 08:01, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.