Talk:Jindyworobak Movement

message: As there are several hundred distinct aboriginal languages, I have added the word "an" before "aboriginal language" in the sentence:
"  . . .applied the name in 1937, which means "to join" or "to annex" in aboriginal language."
---------------------------------
I recall reading once that some of the Jindyworobaks opposed Australia's war with Japan, an odd position for an ostensibly nationalist movement to adopt, but can find currently no online support for this claim.
:My guess is that they thought perhaps if they avoided declaring war on Japan, it would leave them alone. ! --MacRusgail 19:47, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: these guys were opposed: Australia First Movement, what you were thinking of?  ⇒ bsnowball  17:59, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Misc

message: Replacing "Aborigine" with "indigenous Australian" is one thing (presuming you are literate enough to work out "aborigine" means "original inhabitant" - which judging by your spelling, and e.e.cummings impression, you're not), but I provided several sources in my piece. Oh, and by the way, despite its post-modern guise, your own comments are somewhat racist - a European is someone born/bought up/naturalised in Europe, and your argument seems to run that people should only engage in the cultural activities of their own racial group. That the Jindyworobaks were amongst the first whites to promote native rights in the white press, or had a fair number of women in them for the time, seems to have escaped your attention entirely... --MacRusgail 12:05, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You're a troll, I think a third opinion is needed here. You seem unable to refute any of your claims, and despite complaining about unsourced material elsewhere, seem unable to provide sourced material yourself. fcn illiterit! --MacRusgail 16:55, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: References

message: I added some material to the beginning of the article, there may be some duplication. I propose to change some of the section headings and shift stuff around accordingly. I also added a reference, in a different citation style to the others. Disputed  material can be verified with a quote and full citation using the style I have added. I have no objection to moving it to a bibliography section and using a footnote instead.
Most of the stuff is fine as far as I can see, it could make a good article. Any else have a view on changes? ☻ Fred|☝ discussion|✍  contributions 23:34, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  rewite 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Jindyworobak Movement. 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/20061025010656/http://www.history.sa.gov.au/chu/programs/history_conference/StephanyEvansSteggall.pdf to http://www.history.sa.gov.au/chu/programs/history_conference/StephanyEvansSteggall.pdf
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) 23:25, 30 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified