Talk:War of Southern Queensland

Latest comment: 5 years ago by Caltraser55 in topic Propose renaming this article

Propose renaming this article

edit

I propose we rename this article Frontier conflict in Southern Queensland (perhaps with some time frame added) or and removed the military conflict infobox. Based on WP:TITLE, I think the current name is not a commonly recognised name WP:COMMONNAME nor an accurate description of events. I'm not disputing that there was a lot of frontier conflict (which is a common term) at that time, but the description of it as a war and the use of a military conflict infobox I think misrepresents it to the reader. The principal citation here (Kerkhove) commences by pointing out reasons why it might not be described a war and is an exploration of whether elements of "war" from a military history perspective were present. The conclusion says there are some elements of "military strategy, inter-tribal co-ordination, and military adaptation" present but brackets that with statements about the need for further analysis, having an incomplete understanding, and saying that it was mostly " economic sabotage, the disruption of transport, and a great deal of harassment". Kerkhove is a professional historian and never calls the "War of Southern Queensland". He calls it "southern Queensland’s ‘Black War’" noting the quotation marks around Black War, which suggests he is distancing himself from that term. Kerkhove is a professional historian and he is active in Indigenous history projects and this is an interesting article, and worthy of citing. But I don't think the paper gives support to the existence of the "War of Southern Queensland" led by Queen Victoria as suggested by the infobox. Kerry (talk) 01:08, 24 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

I suggest the quotation marks around Black War are just definitional, and would support Black War (southern Queensland) which is what is used in the UTS source. The proposed name would be my second preference, but I believe the infobox should stay, but with modifications to bring it more into line with the Australian frontier wars article one. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:34, 24 August 2019 (UTC)Reply
Well perhaps you should read Dr Kerkhoves papers on this topic of which i have, but have not had the time to add more information. There are battles associated with this conflict, such as the Battle of One Tree Hill, the Siege of Fort Helidon, and the Battle of Rosewood. In fact, Kerkhove argues this conflict was the most sustained in action than any others of the Australian Frontier Wars. Where did the conflict occur? Modern day southern Queensland. So using Kerkhoves "Black War of Southern Queensland", I simply dropped the racial epithet of which there is no need, and simply used the geographic placement for the conflict. Either read the papers and add them to the article, or stop with your blatent racism and attempt at whitewashing history.--Caltraser55 (talk) 04:06, 24 August 2019 (UTC)Reply
Fort Helidon mind you, was the only fort ever built to defend against Aboriginal attack, and yes it was sieged for about 3 days. Kerkhove has dozens of papers on the subject not just the ones mentioned here.--Caltraser55 (talk) 04:08, 24 August 2019 (UTC)Reply
Then cite them, especially where this period is called "War of Southern Queensland". Further, the material in the infobox badly needs reliable sources. Lastly, I suggest that Australian frontier wars#Queensland is a better place for this subject. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:11, 24 August 2019 (UTC)Reply
Go read them yourself, you won't because your motives are based on pure racism--Caltraser55 (talk) 09:17, 24 August 2019 (UTC)Reply
Please familiarise yourself with Wikipedia policies regarding WP:V and WP:BURDEN. Further, you've now called me twice a racist, above and here. I'll ask you to strike those remarks and observe WP:AGF. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 11:40, 24 August 2019 (UTC)Reply
Caltraser55 this is your first and only warning from me. Any more personal attacks will get you swiftly blocked. Strike your personal attacks and apologise. Also watch how you thread, as your first comment could easily be construed as being aimed at me. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:42, 5 September 2019 (UTC)Reply
I haven't attacked anyone, I only defend.--Caltraser55 (talk) 13:22, 6 September 2019 (UTC)Reply