Jump to content

Talk:Rottnest Island

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

earlier comment

[edit]

NPOV is required in this article, it reads with too many superlatives, and it is not a travel article! "happy and fun experience!" is not a style to be encouraged. There are better ways of putting it. User:JarrahTree 05:19, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image

[edit]

I have added an image of The Basin to replace the image an admin deleted and left a redlink behind. If anyone has a better one please feel free to replace. Nachoman-au 11:57, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just came across this message. I can't say the image I have is any better but it's an option - here you go - it's a slightly different vantage point. Actually I'm not even sure if it is a picture of the basin or taken from the basin....

It is, but its dark! Its probably the basin some time ago, the basin beach has changed a lot in the many years that I have known it. User:JarrahTree 01:02, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cottage Names

[edit]

Needs separate article, 'List of Cottage Names on Rottnest' with them in alpha order, otherwise difficult to follow while still in this state in this art. User:JarrahTree 15:51, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please Help

[edit]

The new List is List of features on Rottnest Island, please check the alpha order and completeness of the lists, thank you! User:JarrahTree 13:03, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I presume you mean List of features of Rottnest Island, but I have to ask: is this really necessary? Couldn't we just add the main features into the main article? -- Ian ≡ talk 15:02, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quokka Soccer

[edit]

There may have been mistreatment of quokkas in 1986 (and other times), but I doubt the nimblest of soccer players would be capable of catching or kicking a quokka. More likely somebody found the juxtapositioning of the two words to be quite funny, and people then assumed a poor quokka was used as a soccer ball. 136.153.2.6 00:12, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The subject is a problem. First, do you speak from experience? It is possible to apprehend quokkas in a nunber of ways, and it is also possible to mistreat them in ways that have earnt some people criminal prosecution. The less said the better. Second, the expression is no fantasy, it has happened. Do not try it, its against the law. 60.230.231.74 02:07, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This is the sort of thing I think needs a citation (though I doubt any exist beyond repeated hearsay). Kicking a quokka is one thing (they're pretty trusting and docile). Australian black humour is another. MuJoCh 19:28, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Here is a reference to cruelty in 2005 [1] but the cruelty was handling the animal not kicking it. The person charged was 19 and offered in his defence drunkenness. The more neutral language used in the media release is probably worth adopting. This 2000 report from Curtin uni National Drug Research Institute [2] does mention the words "quokka soccer" as a quote from one student and refers to a prosecution for cruelty in 1998 to a quokka by kicking the animal.
General perception was that this year’s group was the best behaved group of leavers for quite a few years, but with the behaviour that occurred in ’98, it was fairly easy to look good by comparison. Negative expectations of the leavers were created by two major incidents in the previous year. These were a major diving accident and the student caught (and eventually prosecuted) for kicking a quokka. These events really marred the ‘98 celebrations and the bad press put pressure on the ‘99 group.
--Golden Wattle talk 21:36, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers for that. I should stress that I in no way dispute that there is cruelty or a term 'quokka soccer'. I merely find a chicken/egg problem with the term and act, if you follow me (irrelevant to the article, probably). Stories of gruesome quokka massacres have reached urban legend status. Other exagerrations have travelled[[3]]. I'm curious to see the origins of this stuff pinned down. MuJoCh 02:56, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Note commercial links are not part of the main text of article. User:JarrahTree 12:59, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Crayfish

[edit]

This doesn't particularly fit here, imho. Rottnest is not the only place for crays, amateur or commercial (it's of little significance to the commercial fishery).

Stories about crayfishing and the season should be added to Western rock lobster, if attested.

The list of recreation on Rotto should certainly include diving & snorkelling, but also cycling, swimming, offshore surfing, reef fishing etc.

The channel swim seems much more significant than what Gage Roads Brewing do as a promo.

The above anonymous comments were posted by user:Callophylla, before I knew how to sign. Callophylla 08:21, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Salt Lakes

[edit]

Removed the 'unique feature' part of the caption on the Salt Lake picture, as Rotto is hardly the only island in the world with interior salt lakes. -- Ghostreveries 10:58, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Australian places named by Dutch explorers in the 17th Century

[edit]

The section "Australian places named by Dutch explorers in the 17th Century" seems unnecessary for an entry about a single geographical location. Peewee2007 (talk) 03:03, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, probably. It is called a navigation box; it allows you to navigate between allegedly related articles. They are all the rage ATM. :-( Hesperian 03:12, 25 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

new comment

[edit]

The Aboriginal Prison entry is incomplete and misleading.

I propose it be replaced with the following:

From 1838 to 1931, Rottnest Island was an Aboriginal prison for 3700 men and boys from all parts of Western Australia. At least 370 Aboriginal prisoners are buried in unmarked graves next to The Quod in the former Tentland tourist campsite. Five Aboriginal men were hanged in the Quod courtyard. Hundreds more died of disease, malnutrition and prison beatings in tiny overcrowded stone cells now used for premium-priced tourist accommodation. Most of the island's historic Settlement - including Government House (Hotel Rottnest), the Church, Salt Store, Museum & Gift Shop, original waterfront cottages and The Quod itself - was built by forced Aboriginal prison labour working under extremely harsh conditions. See also Wadjemup; Neville Green & Susan Moon "Far From Home - Aboriginal Prisoners of Rottnest Island", University of Western Australia ISBN 1-875560-92-0.

{{editprotected}} Williewagtail (talk) 05:55, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: {{edit protected}} is not required for edits to unprotected pages, or pending changes protected pages. Please make the edit yourself. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:33, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

John Pilger

[edit]

A recent (2013) John Pilger article supports that above suggestion. In fact, his writing suggests the situation was if anything worse than noted above:

John Pilger article

What was done was the torture, humiliation and murder of the First Australians. Wrenched from their communities in an insidious genocide that divided and emasculated the indigenous nations, shackled men and boys as young as eight endured the perilous nine-hour journey in an open longboat. Cold, sick and terrified prisoners were jammed into a windowless "holding cell", like an oversized kennel. Today, an historical plaque refers to it as The Boathouse. The suppression is breathtaking.

In the prison known as The Quod, as many as 167 Aboriginal prisoners were locked in 28 tiny cells. This lasted well into the twentieth century. I booked a room there. The prison is now called Rottnest Lodge. It has a spa and there are double bunks for children: family fun. Noel Nannup stood in the centre of the room and described its echoes of terrible suffering. The window looked out on where a gallows had stood, where tourists now sunbathed. None had a clue. A "country club" overlooks a mass grave. A psychopath who ran the Quod was Henry Vincent, who liked to whip prisoners and murdered two of them, an inquiry was told. Today, Vincent is venerated as a "pioneer" and tourists are encouraged to follow the "Vincent Way Heritage Trail". In the Governor's Bar, the annual Henry Vincent Golf Trophy is displayed. No one there had a clue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.232.250.50 (talk) 17:35, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pilger is more of a polemicist than a journalist and is certainly not a "neutral historian". The Aboriginal Prison part of the Island's history is very notable and needs to be properly presented (albeit not in some propagandist manner), we don't need Pilger's say so to know that! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.161.78.193 (talk) 02:10, 15 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relationship to Perth Tourism

[edit]

Trips out to Rottnest Island (don't let the name put you off, its quite friendly place as a side note) is a MUST as this is what a lot of people do when they come to Perth so I think that fact should be included in the article. Also Rottnest Island is one of the most isolated inhabited islands in the world I think that should be in the article also hehehehe 118.209.46.14 (talk) 20:01, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How is it isolated? Fremantle is 18km away. Tristan da Cunha in the South Atlantic Ocean, is 2,816 km from South Africa. Refer Extreme_points_of_Earth#Remoteness. –Moondyne 00:16, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ofc Freo' is 18km away, why would I say that Perth tourists have a trip out to Rottnest? Duh!! 118.209.3.187 (talk) 09:24, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Winnit Club

[edit]

Is the Winnit Club a significant/notable organisation on the Island? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:06, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quokka viral internet fame

[edit]

Re: this edit - The cited article does not mention "viral", "internet", "fame" or anything related. Even if the quokkas have found such fame and there was a reliable reference saying so, it still does not belong in the lead section of an article about the island. Mitch Ames (talk) 07:07, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, it is in fact properly covered in the Quokka article. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:10, 27 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
More edits [4][5] and reversion (by Moondyne, who beat me to it).
I'm happy to concede that the "quokka selfie" is a real internet meme, but it is still not appropriate for the lead section of the Rottnest Island article. As Dodger67 points out, it is covered quite well in Quokka#"Quokka selfie" viral sensation, which is the appropriate place for it. Mitch Ames (talk) 02:12, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Concur with Moondyne, Rodger Dodger and Ames the mitch, - this is an online encyclopedia about the island, not internet memes, and the specific article is that about quokkas - as to real internet meme it is doubtful that they are ever notable in wikipedia notability terms, let alone the capacity of anyone to be able to ascertain happiness ratings of marsupials JarrahTree 02:24, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Quokkas and Rottnest were around long before internet memes were thought of. Such stuff is barely ok on the Quokka article but definitely not here, esp. in the lead. Moondyne (talk) 06:54, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Rottnest Island. 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) 14:21, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dates

[edit]

In the section 'Aboriginal Prison' there is an ambiguity. Herre is the text:

"A quadrangular building was constructed in 1863–1864 and generally referred to as "the Quod"; it was used until 2018 for tourist accommodation.[20] There were about twenty prisoners there in 1844; by 1880, there were 170. Vincent retired in 1867 after complaints regarding cruelty to prisoners; he was replaced by William Jackson. In the early 1880s, an influenza epidemic struck, killing about sixty inmates."

Herein lies the ambiguity: were there 20 prisoners in general on Rottnest in 1844? Or were there 20 prisoners in the quadrangular building in 18SIXTY-four. ie is the date given correct?

If the former might I suggest a clarification, to read: "In 1844 there about twenty prisoners on Rottnest in total. By 1880, this had swelled to 170."

If the latter, then a change to "There were about twenty prisoners housed in the quadrangular building in 1864" would be in order. Koryushka (talk) 02:46, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wadjemup or t Eylandt 't Rottenest

[edit]

@Simulaun: regarding these edits: [6][7][8] ...

The name Wadjemup is in use today [9][10][11][12] to refer to the island , whereas t Eylandt 't Rottenest is not used (other being mentioned as the name given by de Vlamingh). Thus the former (a "significant alternative name") ought to be listed as a synonym in the lead, per MOS:BOLDALTNAMES, whereas the latter need not.


@Mitch Ames: Agreed - it makes much more sense to use Wadjemup as the significant alternative name. It is used in many contexts as the alternative name for Rottnest. http://inherit.stateheritage.wa.gov.au/Public/Inventory/PrintSingleRecord/4c2a567b-d2ca-40f4-8687-8f5c22cfcf6d

't Eylandt 't Rottenest' is the first name by which the island became known to the world. It was used extensively throughout the world until it was culturally appropriated approximately a century later by the British. The name 't Eylandt 't Rottenest' is, however, of great relevance and historical interest as it reflects the pioneering explorations of Nieuw Holland (renamed 'Western Australia' by the British) by mariners from the Netherlands. The name 't Eylandt 't Rottenest', therefore, warrants being prominently displayed in the lead as, in addition to being the actual/non-Anglicized name of the island, it provides Wiki users with highly relevant insight and broad historical context regarding the exploration and mapping of Australia's entire west coast.Simulaun (talk) 01:35, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The historical context of 't Eylandt 't Rottenest' is why it is mentioned in the intro and the history section, but there is no indication that it is used at all as the actual name of the island and is still currently relevant. Wadjemup is in current use as the significant alternative name of Rottnest Island and so warrants inclusion as the synonym in the lead. The Logical Positivist (talk) 02:14, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Simulaun: re [13][14][15][16] please stop trying to cram so much into the lead sentence, especially when it's factually wrong (for details see my edit summaries when I remove it). Per MOS:LEADCLUTTER, it's just too much. The historical information is in covered appropriately in another paragraph of the lead section and the article. Mitch Ames (talk) 12:41, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

First European people

[edit]

@Simulaun:, re [17][18][19] - the reference clearly says "European", not "people" (including those who were not European). Please don't remove "European" from the article unless you can provide a reference that says no non-Europeans landed before them. Mitch Ames (talk) 06:55, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

LGA removed

[edit]

"City of Cockburn[1][2]"

I removed this from the Info box, the information refers to July 1999 minutes from a City of Cockburn meeting wanting to make a claim to of holding a position on the Rottnest Island Authourity because of a reference from the Heritage Council also in 1999, and referring to WAEC. Checking Current City of Cockburn records none of the wards indicate Rottnest as part of the Cities voters, the CoC map shows the City's boundary again it doesnt indicate Rottnest. Checking the Rottnest Island Authority Act 1987 as revised in 2017 there is no mention of the City of Cockburn and there are no representatives on the Authorities Board. The is no reason to support the claim of it being part of City of Cockburn. Gnangarra 11:12, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would consider inHerit to be a reliable source. But also
  • Inherit isnt an LGA sepcialist, electoral boundaries have no baring on LGA authorities. The defining information is the Rottnest Act which doesnt mention nor define City of Cockburn as having any authority over the island including planning decisions related to it. Gnangarra 12:38, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Inherit isnt an LGA sepcialist — Neither are your or I, but I would think that the Heritage Council of Western Australia, the City of Cockburn, the AEC and Landgate would generally be accepted as reliable sources. Is there a reliable source that says Rottnest is NOT part of the City of Cockburn, e.g. that "Rottnest is part of some-other LGA" or "Rottnest is not in any LGA" or "Rottnest is its own LGA"?
    @Dan arndt: can you shed any light on this? Mitch Ames (talk) 13:01, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Rottnest Island". InHerit. Heritage Council of Western Australia. Retrieved 2022-05-01.
  2. ^ Agenda - Ordinary Council Meeting, City of Cockburn, 27 July 1999, p. 35-36, retrieved 2022-05-01

LGA cockburn contradiction

[edit]

in the drop down info summary of the article is says rottnest is part of the city of cockburn, but later in the introduction it says it is not part of any LGAs. none of the cited links in regards to it being part of cockburn LGA lead to anything actually saying it, and i'm also fairly certain it's simply not the case? Ames171 (talk) 11:53, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rottnest_Island&oldid=1218880352"