Talk:List of massacres of Indigenous Australians

Data Source - Monticone 1999

A potentially significant data source on this topic is a PhD written on this topic by Judith Monticone. She interviewed Aboriginal elders from around the country and documented the stories. I came across a map of significant incidents on Twitter, and sought the source data. I found the book in the State Library of Victoria (March 2017). A list of locations of the book is found in the National Library Catalogue - Trove. Trove notes this book in 28 libraries around the country.

See Monticone's (p.9) image of what she calls "inter-racial massacres since invasion", where she sets a lower limit of 100 deaths. In Victoria, alone according to the map, she documents around 100 incidents and many more around the country. A brief scan of the book suggested each dot in the map is documented in a page with details of the incident. I passed this data source on to the researchers at Newcastle (Dec 2017). This activity is documented in a Twitter thread.Areff2000 (talk) 23:06, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

More details including sample State maps, now included at Twitter thread above, and sample of cases. Total Cases, with one chapter per State/Terr noted: NSW - 217, Tas - 160, Qld - 413, Vic - 166, SA - 94, WA - 151, NT - 106, ACT - 7. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Areff2000 (talk • contribs) 04:28, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Content and purpose of article

I'm wondering if there can be an improvement in layout and content. I'm not very knowledgeable about a lot of Australian history myself (although have educated myself by reading quite a lot over the years), but I'm just looking at this from a practical and readability point of view and seeking input from others. These are some of my ideas:

• Is the division pre- and post-federation really useful in this context?

• As a list article, I think that where the topic has a main article, the info and citations in this article can remain brief, to reduce length and unwieldiness.

• There's been discussion about what constitutes a massacre and people adhere to different definitions. Having yesterday read about the 1789 smallpox outbreak when editing it, I'm not sure it should stay in this list, without certainty as to the origin of the outbreak. I don't know if there are other examples (not having read the whole list), but I'm wondering if this belongs in a separate section, either up front or below, perhaps as part of mass deaths of indigenous people brought about by the settlers, whether intentional or not?

• Having just found History of Indigenous Australians, some cross-referencing and tie-in both ways might be useful?

(This is very much in the background for me, but there's been a bit of overlap with some other articles I've been editing.) Laterthanyouthink (talk) 02:42, 2 March 2019 (UTC)

Having added a bit to the lead from the first of the Guardian articles in their special report (The Killing Times) the other day, am just noting a few others for possible future use. There are few memorials to Australia's bloody history but that's changing and Living on a massacre site: home truths and trauma at Warrigal Creek and 'Conspiracy of silence': how sabotaged inquiries fed massacre denials. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 04:47, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

Laterthanyouthink, it should be an article. cygnis insignis 12:59, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Use of primary sources

I've left some long quotes in the footnotes for now, because I didn't have time to complete all of the cleaning up needed, but The Journals of George Augustus Robinson would in this context, I think, count as WP:Primary and in any case don't need quoting at such length. @Austhistory99:, perhaps you would like to do a bit more cleaning up here, as you added this material? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 07:27, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Whiteside poisoning

Concerning '50 or more killed in the Whiteside poisoning', Kiernan (Blood and Soil, p. 303) and his sources (e.g. Reece, Aborigines and Colonists, p. 49) are referring to the Kilcoy poisoning of 1842. There seems to be a conflation here with the Whiteside poisoning of 1847 related in the Australian (a Sydney newspaper published between 1824-1848), Tuesday 13 April 1847, p.3. No numbers are given for fatalities in that poisoning in the Australian. The source given at Colonial Frontier Massacres in Central and Eastern Australia 1788-1930 [1] (The Moreton Bay Courier, Saturday 24 April 1847, pp. 2-3) is a reply to (and refutation of) the Australian article and also does not give fatality numbers.

I've now changed the date of the Whiteside poisoning and inserted sources with details of the events and number of deaths.Rosenkreutzer (talk) 10:37, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Warroween Massacre

This should be removed immediately. It's a colonial rumour with nothing substantiating it other than the second hand musings of an unreliable witness - barely mentioned on one or two pages in a couple of books, and a family's papers from some ultra obscure library, surely more than this is needed to accuse the Kurnai peoples ancestors of a horrific crime. This colonial rumour lacks any quality sourcing, the only quality source used merely quotes the aforementioned unreliable witness. This claim is out of step with mainstream academia on the subject, it is based on a sensational colonial account, the language used in this primary source demonstrates a strong bias and profound racism, far better secondary sources are needed. The office of the Protector of Aborigines is certainly not a reliable source in this context. some of the claims are clearly fabrications: the Boro Boro Willum tribe, for example, never existed - I can find no other mention of this tribe in any book on the subject nor can I find one with a similar name, it's almost certainly a colonial fiction. Bacondrum (talk) 10:06, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

• although you may not believe this warrants an entry on this list i think it may be a little presumptious to remove it until after the afd has concluded, i have therefore reinstated it. Coolabahapple (talk) 04:12, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
  • I re-removed it. There's no reliable sources supporting the existence of the event. In the AFD nobody even claims there is a reliable source that definitively states the event occurred.   Also, the mere existence of an article, doesn't warrant it's inclusion here. This list is for verified occurrences of actual massacres. It is not for unconfirmed stories of massacres, even if, it was deemed notable enough for an article. Note, the lead reads: "The following list tallies some of the better documented massacres..." This is not a "better documented massacre" by a long stretch. --Rob (talk) 08:03, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
    • A scholarly source states that it occurred. I'm troubled that this is being dismissed on the basis of what some Wikipedia editors happen to think. What sources state that the ANU press author was mistaken in giving this claim credence? Nick-D (talk) 09:36, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
      • An explanation is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Warrowen massacre. There are reliable sources to say that there was a claim of a massacre. There are no reliable sources that say the massacre actually occurred. --Rob (talk) 15:01, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

A scholarly source mentions that William Thomas claims to have heard about something that might have happened from an unknown third party. The source does not claim it happened, it briefly mentions Thomas' account. I'm troubled that anyone thinks this event is notable or verifiable with such scant information available. Apparently we've started setting the bar very, very low. Bacondrum (talk) 21:20, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

Largest massacres?

I was disappointed that this does not tell me which are the largest massacres - the only way would be to manually go through the entire article looking for the largest. I think the article would be improved by adding a section of say, the events with the ten highest mortalities. --Gronk Oz (talk) 02:42, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

I am always uneasy about ranking this type of thing. Firstly it seems in some ways crass. Secondly the variances are so large that it can be almost meaningless. How do you rank 40-100 against 60-80?

Thirdly the quality of sources varies. We have somewhere a list of serial killers by body count - the top entries are (or were) almost all disputable. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 13:47, 10 June 2020 (UTC).

Gronk Oz Hi, I can see how it's a pain to go through all this info, but I think it's best to present the information in a matter of fact way. These events are tragic, sure we do not censor, but we can still be sensitive about how we handle such tragic loss of life. I oppose ranking massacres in anyway, shape or form - it's not a competition. Bacondrum (talk) 01:37, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Gronk Oz if the question you're trying to answer is "What was the largest massacre of Indigenous Australians?" then the answer is the "Colonization of Australia." Much of this history has murky whole-part relationships, huge variances, deliberate prevarication, and spotty documentary and oral history coverage, making unsuitable for quantitative methods. Stuartyeates (talk) 02:28, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for your thoughtful responses everybody. --Gronk Oz (talk) 04:54, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

When did we decide to include inter-tribal Aboriginal massacres

These "inter-tribal Aboriginal massacres" seem to have been slipped into the article by Austhistory. There was never any discussion about their inclusion or how to handle these events if we were to include them, it just turned up https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_massacres_of_Indigenous_Australians&type=revision&diff=888159996&oldid=887638664 I'm particularly concerned about Austhistory's focus being solely on inter-tribal Aboriginal massacres after they admitted to being responsible a site focused solely on attacking an Aboriginal academic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bruce_Pascoe/Archive_1#Some_New_Input_from_Dark_Emu_Exposed https://www.dark-emu-exposed.org/ Was this added as part of an attempt to play down the significance of colonial massacres, is this a case of a culture war WP:SEALION? Bacondrum (talk) 22:11, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

• I believe it is appropriate to include inter-tribal massacres of Indigenous Australians as these cases clearly fit this page's opening paragraph descriptor - "This list of massacres of Indigenous Australians details groups of Aboriginal people and Torres Strait Islander people who were killed following the colonisation of Australia by the British Empire, in 1788." There is also evidence that in some cases inter-tribal massacres were a direct result of tribal pressure caused by British colonisation, so it is proper to include them. I do not aim to play down Colonial massacres but rather think the page should reflect that colonisation sometimes caused increased massacres in which both the perpatrators and the victims were indigenous. The list already contains several inter-tribal massacres which were added over the past years with no problem by other editors. The recent work of Christophe Darmangeat is internationally significant and acclaimed by several Australian academics and begins to explain why massacres occurred in Australia which can only add weight to this page - see Review tab here : https://rowman.com/ISBN/9781793632326/Justice-and-Warfare-in-Aboriginal-Australia. This page has nothing to do with Bruce Pascoe as far as I am aware and I have reinstated to allow further editor comment. Austhistory99 (talk) 10:17, 29 December 2020 (UTC)]

Perhaps I've been a little hasty to assume bad faith here. But I still think that recent addition is undue and consensus is needed, the burden is on you to seek consensus at this point. I don't oppose adding pre-colonial massacres, as long as the purpose is not to demonize Aboriginal Australians, make light of this nations tragic history or create a false equivalence between colonial and pre-colonial violence. I think the fact that you've told us you basically run a page solely dedicated to attacking an Aboriginal academic is relevant, but it doesn't exclude you from editing. I apologise for assuming bad faith. Bacondrum (talk) 03:32, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Blatant advocacy and conflict of interest violations

I'm removing all surreptitiously added advocacy by User:Austhistory99 who is now indef blocked for blatant advocacy and conflict of interest violations. This editor was only here to attack Aboriginal Australians. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Serious_conflict_of_interest_issues,_blatant_advocacy_and_defamation Bacondrum 00:41, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Heathcoate 1965.

User Mconnoll64 introduced "Heathcoate 1965." as a reference in the article. It's their only contribution, so I cannot ask them. I cannot find any book written by a Heathcoate in 1965 with a similar topic. Can anyone help me to find the book? --Ecelan (talk) 15:08, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

@Ecelan: I had a quick look in Worldcat - not an exhaustive search, but either this book this one or this journal article by the same author seem most likely. Unfortunately the journal is only available (via my state library) electronically to me from 1998, and the book only in Denmark! I think that with such a vague and unverifiable citation, I would remove the content that they refer to except where supported by another source. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 04:37, 24 June 2021 (UTC)

@Laterthanyouthink: Thanks! --Ecelan (talk) 14:59, 24 June 2021 (UTC)