Talk:John Simpson Kirkpatrick

message: This is more of a correction, than a discussion topic, but I noticed in the page for John Simpson Kirkpatrick that they state it's "ironic" for him to be an Australian Hero since he's English.
I agree that it is strange for him to be known as an icon here in Australia, but it's important that understand that for the early years, Australia was capable of what's known as "dual patriotism".  This means that australian's did not see themselves as separate from the english empire- England was still the "motherland", even to those who were born over in Australia, and australians very much regarded themselves as the same as their english counterparts.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Eccles fan (talk • contribs) 21:47, 27 March 2006
:What's this "English" business?  He was SCOTTISH.  --  JackofOz (talk) 22:19, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Although his parents were Scottish, he was born and grew up in South Shields, which is in England. Jll (talk) 15:48, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: England and Australia

message: The article completely ignores Peter Cochrane's seminal work on Simpson, which analyses the myth and the reality. Simpson was also a socialist, a radical, and, a little shifty, as well. His heroism is not in doubt, but the 'saintly' image which he has been given is
61.68.1.4 10:39, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I have now included the Cochrane book in the references and also tried to balance the article by including some more objective and factual analysis, mainly sourced from the article by Graham Wilson. I have also removed some of the more artistic interpretations about Simpson having been under constant fire or completely ignoring heavy fire etc, because there is just no objective contemporary source for that. Simpson seems to be a figure like Robin Hood or Ned Kelly: there is so much modern fable that it is hard to find what was actually true, and people react negatively when you do. --Mat Hardy (Affentitten) 05:03, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Peter Cochrane's work

message: It should be noted that after Simpson was killed, the task of evacuating wounded by donkey was then continued by New Zealander Lieut. Richard Alexander (Dick) Henderson.  Also, one of the most famous paintings of 'Simpson' by Horace Millichamp Moore-Jones which apparently hangs at Australia's National Gallery (or is it called the National Gallery of Australia?), is actually a portrait of Henderson, painted from a photo of Henderson taken by a fellow New Zealander Sergeant James G. Jackson, New Zealand Expeditionary Force.
:Well it would be pretty hard for anyone to have painted a picture of Simpson when he only lived for about 4 weeks after the landing! :-) --Mat Hardy (Affentitten) 05:03, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Portrait 

message: It needs to be said that whilst several people wrote personal comments attesting to Simpson's bravery, he was never actually FORMALLY nominated for anything beyond his MID. To say that his nominations were turned down by sceptical or petty bureaucrats is really quite untrue and is one of those myths about Simpson that seems to have taken root about 30 years ago and propogated from there. Whether "we" are admiring of Simpson's bravery or not is kind of irrelevant as well. Our admiration is based upon many of the stories that have questionable veracity.
To say that Monash reccommended him for the highest honours is disingenuous. Monash mentioned him in his dispatches. Which is why Simpson is credited with an MID. Check the Wikipedia entry for Mention in Dispatches and you'll see that the Monash quote is a classic example of one.
There is mention in the latest edit of Simpson being reccommended via his unit for a VC on June 3 1915. I'd like to see the citation for that. A unit CO's personal diary entry is not th same as an official VC reccomendation and every bit of research I have seen says there is no record of a VC submission for Simpson in the War Office. --Mat Hardy (Affentitten) 04:06, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See above. A CO mentioning that he would like to get a VC for someone is not the same as that person being formally recommended. Ove the 90+ years since Gallipoli nobody has ever been able to find any shred of paperwork in the multiple avenues that would exist had Simpson been actually recommended. That's why there are no witness reports to be obtained: they were never gathered in the first place because there was no formal need to at the time. The new tribunal is actually NOT considering Simpson. They're saying before they even convene the tribunal that Simpson is not a likely case and they are doing this because Simpson is such a political football. Linking him as a possible first candidate for the (A)VC has been a furphy since the new honours system was implemented. --Mat Hardy (talk) 01:11, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, I see.  Thanks.  I should learn not to believe everything the media tells me.  --  JackofOz (talk) 01:38, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What's notable about the article that you linked to is that it was written by the great-grandaughter of Simpson's CO. She's got a bit of a vested interest there but it's quite inexcusable that she blatantly states as fact that Simpson was recommended for a VC by Sutton.. Really it should be up to the pro-VC people to come up with the proof that he was formally put forward for the medal. But the paperwork just doesn't support it. The belief that there was a VC in the offing has all grown out of a couple of misunderstandings and erroneous assumptions from decades ago. But hell, it makes for an interesting debate about this article! --Mat Hardy (talk) 22:12, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nominations for bravery 

message: This seems to suggest that he was formally nominated for a VC by Sutton.  I don't think the new Tribunal would be spending its time making a ruling about his eligibility or otherwise if it didn't have something formal to consider in the first place.  --  JackofOz (talk) 22:26, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: See above. A CO mentioning that he would like to get a VC for someone is not the same as that person being formally recommended. Ove the 90+ years since Gallipoli nobody has ever been able to find any shred of paperwork in the multiple avenues that would exist had Simpson been actually recommended. That's why there are no witness reports to be obtained: they were never gathered in the first place because there was no formal need to at the time. The new tribunal is actually NOT considering Simpson. They're saying before they even convene the tribunal that Simpson is not a likely case and they are doing this because Simpson is such a political football. Linking him as a possible first candidate for the (A)VC has been a furphy since the new honours system was implemented. --Mat Hardy (talk) 01:11, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah, I see.  Thanks.  I should learn not to believe everything the media tells me.  --  JackofOz (talk) 01:38, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: What's notable about the article that you linked to is that it was written by the great-grandaughter of Simpson's CO. She's got a bit of a vested interest there but it's quite inexcusable that she blatantly states as fact that Simpson was recommended for a VC by Sutton.. Really it should be up to the pro-VC people to come up with the proof that he was formally put forward for the medal. But the paperwork just doesn't support it. The belief that there was a VC in the offing has all grown out of a couple of misunderstandings and erroneous assumptions from decades ago. But hell, it makes for an interesting debate about this article! --Mat Hardy (talk) 22:12, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Recent developments

message: The sections recently added with the quotes from Simposn's commander, Monash etc seem to be plagiarised directly from http://www.anzachouse.com/simpson.shtml
I think the quotes are a great addition because they provide a lot of material on the VC controversy, but the opinion and footnote numbers that have been pasted straight across are a bit naughty! Plus they are causing some page layout problems with the ext box formatting. --Mat Hardy (Affentitten) 04:29, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Plagiarism

message: This article really ignores Kirkpatrick's own politics, and the use of him in the 1920's as an anti-militarist symbol, and this should be corrected. Does anyone want to discuss before I add? Takver
Australian War Memorial acknowledges that Kirkpatrick was "a trade union activist" and it is likely that during his seafaring he came into contact with the ideas of the Industrial Workers of the World. Peter Cochrane in his 1992 book 'Simpson And The Donkey: The Making Of A Legend' goes much further and says "Again and again Simpson’s allegiance to class, his vehemence and anger, have been erased, in favour of the simple tale centred on his alleged loyalty to mother, nation, empire and, in the last instance, to his manhood."
One of Kirkpatrick's letters home to his mother in 1912 gives an idea of his political values when he said "I often wonder when the working men of England will wake up and see things as other people see them. What they want in England is a good revolution and that will clear some of these Millionaires and lords and Dukes out of it and then with a Labour Government they will almost be able to make their own conditions."(ref)Australian History - Donnelly's Donkey by historian Humphrey McQueen, accessed 22 April 2007(/ref)
Kirkpatrick was also used as an anti-militarist symbol. According to a report in the Age in 2003 "1920s, pacifist schoolteachers adopted Simpson (Kirkpatrick) and his donkey to turn Anzac Day commemorations away from militarism and towards a celebration of the mateship that passed for socialism in the bush."(ref)Gallipoli's shadows The Age April 25, 2003 (/ref)
::Seems like something that should be included. But I would say that this should be in perspective and not overwhlem the Anzac side of things. ie. The fact that Simpson, a working man, had sympathies with the working class in one letter home, should not turn the article into "Simpson the Revolutionary". ie. He is not famous for any notable contribution to the labour movement or industrial relations. He is famous as an Anzac icon. (Challenging the basis for that iconic status and explaining how it came about is of course valid.) --Mat Hardy (Affentitten) 23:08, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Kirkpatrick as anti-militarist

message: Can anyone actually offer a reference about the Honorary degree Simpon was supposedly awarded by the University of Adelaide? A quick half hour of looking around has drawn a blank for me. The University of Adelaide certainly seems to contain no information on this within its own pages. --Mat Hardy (Affentitten) 00:29, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sorry.  I meant to remove that when I removed the hoax references for it too.  It's a load of cobblers.  In 1919 Simpson wasn't particularly well known.  It was only much later did the legend grow.  He was never given any honorary doctorate, by anyone! Gillyweed 01:11, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Good on you. How embarassing that "fact" has been there for so long. Initially my suspicion was aroused because I didn't think the giving of honorary doctorates was that prevalent in 1919, especially posthumously. --Mat Hardy (Affentitten) 23:12, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Honorary Doctorate

message: The phrase that Simpson was the “202nd person to enlist in WA” has been deleted. It was claimed that his service number of 202 indicated he was the “202nd person to enlist in WA”. In World War 2, service numbers were allotted by state but in World War 1 they were allotted by unit.  Anthony Staunton (talk) 11:43, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi Anthony. Nice to see a contributor of your expertise here on Wikipedia! --Mat Hardy (talk) 22:16, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  202nd person to enlist in WA 

message: I have included the external links on this ship which may seem peripheral to Simpson's story. However it is thought that they will all those researching the story, especially school students, a winder perspective on what happened on 25/04/1915. Albatross2147 (talk) 04:56, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  SS Devanha 

message: According to Cochrane, Simpson had multiple donkeys so I have removed the reference to his donkey having a name in the lead photo. It only seems to attract debate! Gillyweed (talk) 20:13, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Donkey's Name 

message: The article now seems to contain inconsistencies about the lead photograph, captioned as "J. Simpson (centre) with his donkey,
bearing a wounded soldier." The AWM source at http://cas.awm.gov.au/photograph/J06392 says the photographer was O'Brien, John Aloysius, and taken "c May 1915" Later in the WP article we read, "The photograph of him with the donkey wearing a Red Cross band around its muzzle was taken by Sergeant James G. Jackson of the NZMC on 12 May 1915." The word "him" here appears to refer to Henderson, the subject of the previous sentence. Is this the photo referred to by the person who started the section Portrait on this Talk page? 12 May was a week before Simpson's death, suggesting it is a photo of Simpson not Henderson. Arew there two photos? Can someone else clear this up? Spathaky (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 01:43, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  The photograph 

message: Is there any evidence that his birth name was John Simpson Kirkpatrick? According to this article, which may or may not be accurate, I wouldn't know, he was born John Kirkpatrick and adopted the surname Simpson in Australia. If that is so, it should probably be noted in the article.
Is there any evidence from outside the Australian Army (to which he had given a false name) that his mother was called Sarah Simpson Kirkpatrick? The reference given for that sentence does not give her name, though this document does. It would be most unusual (though not of course impossible) for her to have had her father's surname as her middle name; she would thus have been Sarah Simpson Simpson before her marriage to Kirkpatrick. As I said, not actually impossible; but perhaps not very likely? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:13, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Further to the above, I had a quick look here. There was only one John Kirkpatrick registered in South Shields in July - September 1892. He did not have a second name. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:14, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Names 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on John Simpson Kirkpatrick. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110422185842/http://www.defence-honours-tribunal.gov.au/Websites/dhat/Images/documents/Valour_Terms%20of%20Reference.pdf to http://www.defence-honours-tribunal.gov.au/Websites/dhat/Images/documents/Valour_Terms%20of%20Reference.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 14:56, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on John Simpson Kirkpatrick. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060919115350/http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=28 to http://www.thewest.com.au/default.aspx?MenuID=28
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091029224922/http://www.adelaidereview.com.au/archives.php?subaction=showfull&id=1209002612&archive=1214448240&start_from=&ucat=14& to http://www.adelaidereview.com.au/archives.php?subaction=showfull&id=1209002612&archive=1214448240&start_from=&ucat=14&
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:09, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified