Talk:Aboriginal Tent Embassy

message: I removed the following from the article (by 203.10.231.231) as I could not work out whether it was an unattributed quotation or an emphasised opinion of the contributor. --Zigger 13:55, 2004 Jun 29 (UTC)
:The right to free speech on political matters trumps the letter of the law, because it is is precisely this right that gives law its legitimacy as the expression of the will of the people. I think Australians, and Canberrans in particular,  instinctively understand this.
----
The article refers to Aboriginals wanting control of "the Northwest 
Territory" but this Australian has never heard of such a place.  I didn't want to remove it because, hey, I could be mistaken but if no one else has heard of it I'd suggest cutting it.  --Roisterer 02:18, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: . Oh, and the referendum was in '67. --cj | talk 11:14, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Text removed

message: Currently reads "The protesters were angry at comments Abbott had made that morning in which he said that the Embassy may no longer be relevant". Not sure if that quite conveys the events or Abbott's comments. The protesters were misinformed about Abbott's comments and it seems that the instigators of the protest are suggesting the reaction was to the misinformation but the reaction would have been different if correctly informed.  Appreciate Wikipedia notnews but being brief in this case is misleading. 60.230.148.111 (talk) 03:28, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Australia day 2012 

message: A vast majority of this article needs sources/reference.  There are sections that have no sources at all.  CheersCanberraBulldog (talk) 21:26, 31 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sourcing 

message: I am leaving the links below (to video clips from the events of January 2012) on this 'Talk Page', as a record from eye-witnesses. These were originally inserted as footnotes in the article but were edited out. The videos are 'facts' , even though the text that accompanied them on WP may have been open to criticism on the grounds of WP:POV. For such a political and politicised event, the mainstream Australian media may not themselves be giving an NPOV account. In WP we are obliged to have all viewpoints, and especially all evidence, represented:
::
::::In the interests of free speech. Regards  --Greenmaven (talk) 23:46, 2 February 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Second link I've removed per WP:COPYLINK. Bidgee (talk) 08:01, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Let us not obliterate the evidence please; commentary on the evidence is a separate issue 

message: This is an extract from the Australian Broadcasting Corporation's website. It is taken from a transcription of a television broadcast . This is a fair use  of the ABC's copyright material for the purpose of study. (and not part of the 'Tent Embassy' article)
"DEBORAH CORNWALL: Yesterday's flashpoint appears to have been sparked by comments made by Tony Abbott about the future relevance of the Tent Embassy given the gains made by indigenous Australians in recent decades. 
::[cut to an earlier interview]
JOURNALIST: Mr Abbott today is also the 40th anniversary of the Tent Embassy in Canberra. Do you think it is still relevant or should it move?
TONY ABBOTT: Look, I can understand why the Tent Embassy was established all those years ago. I think a lot has changed for the better since then. We had the historic apology just a few years ago, one of the genuine achievements of Kevin Rudd as Prime Minister. 
We had the proposal which is currently for national consideration to recognise Indigenous people in the Constitution. I think the Indigenous people of Australia can be very proud of the respect in which they are held by every Australian and yes, I think a lot has changed since then and I think it probably is time to move on from that.
::[cut back to present  interview]
DEBORAH CORNWALL: Protesters who had been celebrating the 40 year anniversary of the Tent Embassy widely interpreted the comments as a call to demolish the symbolic site. 
TONY ABBOTT: I never, never, said what was attributed to me by some of the people at that protest yesterday and I just ask you, please, I ask you very respectfully, judge me by what I said. 
My understanding is that at least some of the protest leaders now accept that they had grievously misinterpreted what I said."
:::::::Whether or not you agree with what editor's put on this Talk Page, I ask you not to edit out what is placed here. An honest discussion is impossible if people edit out others contributions. --Greenmaven (talk) 20:49, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  This is an attempt to begin getting some consensus on the facts 

message: Sorry... Perhaps I'm missing something, but is this text even noteworthy enough to be included in this article, at all? I also have a problem with the source used, which seems to me to be a self published source on the part of the Tent Embassy.
The whole paragraph seems trivial to me, when put alongside the more important political objectives of the Tent Embassy. ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 04:41, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: theres long term recognition of the scared fire, its been a component of incidents  and even outside of Australia it seems there enough reason to include a mention of it. Gnangarra 05:04, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The mention of the Sacred Fire in those articles seems trivial relative to the greater purpose of the Embassy. ˜danjel [ talk | contribs ] 05:11, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: in each either extinguishing it or appraoching it carelessly has prevoked an incident making it a sigificant feature of the embassy grounds. Gnangarra 05:36, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It was a major issue at the time Wilson Tuckey was the relevant federal minister - he had several goes at trying to shut the Tent Embassy down on the pretext that the fire was breaching fire bans on hot days. The fire brigade was even called in at one point, from memory (also from memory, they refused to get involved once they arrived). Nick-D (talk) 08:54, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

text: Yes, it should be possible dig up some Canberra Times stories about incidents where the fire was put out. Nick-D (talk) 23:33, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sacred Fire text 

message: Substituted at 06:30, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Aboriginal Tent Embassy. 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/20120317141354/http://www.indigenousrights.net.au/subsection.asp?ssID=45 to http://indigenousrights.net.au/subsection.asp?ssID=45
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130513135747/http://reconciliation.org.au/home/resources/factsheets/q-a-factsheets/aboriginal-tent-embassy---five-fast-facts to http://reconciliation.org.au/home/resources/factsheets/q-a-factsheets/aboriginal-tent-embassy---five-fast-facts
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040417221012/http://www.aph.gov.au:80/library/pubs/chron/1999-2000/2000chr03.htm to http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/chron/1999-2000/2000chr03.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120930201310/http://www.api-network.com/main/pdf/scholars/jas67_cowan.pdf to http://www.api-network.com/main/pdf/scholars/jas67_cowan.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:40, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: From the Canberra Times at the time -  - "At the "Aboriginal Embassy" outside Parliament House yesterday Mr Mike Anderson (left)
Mr Bill Cragie and Mr Kevin Johnston demonstrate in favour of -land rights for Aborigines." A fourth man had gone back to Brisbane.
--Matilda talk 23:02, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: The four names in the article are taken from the parliamentary document cited so it would seem there is a discrepancy in the sources. Mujinga (talk) 23:18, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not sure the names of the first protesters are right 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Ningla A-Na and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 27#Ningla A-Na until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Oiyarbepsy (talk) 08:42, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Ningla A-Na" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]