Talk:Gwion Gwion rock paintings

message: I feel discusion of the "deer" Bradshaws should be included in a sub-section of the Controversy section. There has been sufficient controversy over what they depict and the repercussions regarding who painted them and when. Personally I dont see enough evidence supporting that they are costumed people. A favourable comparison with the corroboree ("giraffe") image is stringing too long a bow for me. I see them as possibly depictions of spirits. They may even have been ancestral memories handed down since Indigenous arrival as deer certainly existed on nearby islands they may have visited. Dating may clear this up (40-50K date would support this?) so what is happening in this area? Wayne (talk) 01:43, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I brought this up on Ebbsey's talk page. He hasn't responded to my follow-up question regarding the age of Bradshaw paintings. - HappyWaldo (talk) 06:59, 1 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  The "deer" paintings 

message: Evidence of ENSO mega-drought triggered collapse of prehistory Aboriginal society in northwest Australia paper in GRL proposes that a mid-Holocene El Niño–Southern Oscillation forced collapse of the Australian summer monsoon and ensuing mega-drought spanning approximately 1500 yrs was the likely catalyst of the change in rock art from the fine featured anthropomorphic figures of the Gwion Gwion or Bradshaw paintings, to broad stroke Wandjina figures,  following a hiatus of at least 1200 yrs. . .  [note text copied by me from abstract without sufficient rewording for use in our article]  . . . . . . . dave souza, talk 09:11, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I've had a go, using the abstract only, it would be useful to have this reviewed by someone with access to the full text. Richard Keatinge (talk) 09:57, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I have the full text. I can expand the mention but will need to check a few other sources it cites as some of the dating conflicts with this article. The source for this articles (most recent) dating for the Bradshaws is Rock Art Research 16 (2): 127-129 dated 1999, while the ENSO article (published 28 November 2012) uses dating from Watchman et al., 1997 and Morwood et al., 2010. The difference, though small, is significant in regards to how mention can be written. One interesting point is that the ENSO article neatly ties in with (and explains) the existance of Bradshaw style paintings to the east of the Kimberleys so I need to look at those as well. Wayne (talk) 05:26, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I expanded it by adding more detail and mentioning Veth's critique although I have problems with his reasoning in regards to linguistics. I still need to check out the Bradshaw style paintings to the east of the Kimberleys. Wayne (talk) 16:57, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: ENSO and change in rock art

message: Another point that could be investigated. The four variants represent a changing artistic style over time. The tassel and clothes peg Bradshaws use multibarbed spears while they are not present in Sash, or historically... because Kimberley Point spears superseded barbed spears? Thus, Tassell Bradshaws seem to be the earliest artistic style as Shaw posited. The discovery of an image of a thylacoleo carnifex with superimposed tassel and clothes peg figures implies a date of more than 46,000 years for the very earliest Kimberley art. Wayne (talk) 04:57, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I added a bit about the thylacoleo image (and added the image). Let me know what you think re neutrality. Wayne (talk) 16:51, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dating of Bradshaw variants through historical context. 

message: The Watchman paper appears to be from the May 1997 issue of Rock Art Research... many of the footnote citations are not complete.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.56.59.143 (talk) 21:26, 8 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations 

message: Just putting this here as a source:
:http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-29/explainer-who-were-the-first-australians/6576364 Explainer: Who were the first Australians? 702 ABC Sydney By John Donegan Posted 29 Jun 2015, 10:38am. 
:"Dr Michael Westaway, biological anthropologist from Griffith University, said genome sequencing dispels the myth that Indigenous Australians were not the first Australians." 
Interesting! 220 of Borg 06:35, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  DNA evidence 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Bradshaw rock paintings. 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/20121220122109/http://www.australiangeographic.com.au/journal/mega-drought-caused-demise-of-aboriginal-culture-study-says.htm to http://www.australiangeographic.com.au/journal/mega-drought-caused-demise-of-aboriginal-culture-study-says.htm
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) 12:49, 24 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I don't understand this, it makes no sense to me:
"A 2020 study estimates that most of the anthropomorphic figures were created 12,000 years ago, based on analysis of painted-over wasps' nests. These aspects have been debated since the works were seen, and recorded, in 1891 by pastoralist Joseph Bradshaw, after whom they were named until recent decades."
How has Joseph Bradshaw debated the results of a 2020 study? Or:
How does Bradshaw having seen them in the 1890s cast doubt on the results of the study? What is this supposed to be saying? 211.29.226.41 (talk) 22:06, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unclear sentence