Talk:Perth/Archive 6

Regarding these edits: ...

@Gnangarra: did you intend to revert "Robert Menli Lyon" to "Beeliar"? Mitch Ames (talk) 13:10, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes! Beeliar described the area south the river, I really dont care if you want to play pedant with its being described, called. named, or referred to but those terms not the way Noongar language and place worked, its literally described as Beeliar. Its talking about the region not the person which proves that there is no equivalent Nyungar word for the area that is the Perth Metro area as this article talks about. The North has multiple regions, less well define Yalgorup is most common name. Stop trying to apply English & European language concepts to Nyunagr they arent the same not matter what all the MOS and style guides say. Gnangarra 13:51, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

not the way Noongar language ... worked,Stop trying to apply English & European language concepts — The English Wikipedia is written in English, with English grammar and punctuation, for the English-speaking/reading reader. I realise that the Noongar concepts don't translate word-for-word, and I am trying to express the concepts as accurately as I can in English. That means fixing ambiguities, and using grammar and punctuation in accordance with conventional written English. Mitch Ames (talk) 14:07, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Disengaging you really lack AGF with a primary purpose is being disruptive with word games, no shit sherlock I know this is english Wikipedia. When translating concept across cultures to make sense you first need to respect and understand the original culture methods and terms. From that stand point you then use english words to describe the meaning. It's also good etiquette to actually let someone edit without constant harassment, removing, changing, and so that the meaning can be clear Gnangarra 14:15, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

Re . For the sake of clarity, could you please state whether "Beeliar" in "Beeliar described the section of Whadjuk country..." means:

• Beeliar, the country - "He learned that the name Beeliar was used to describe Midgegooroo’s country"^[1]
• The Beeliar people
• "the language of Midgegooroo’s people, which he also called Beeliar"^[2]

Something else? Mitch Ames (talk) 14:23, 1 May 2022 (UTC)

• Well you can work that out, the original claim was Booroloo was the equivalent for Perth as described in this article about the whole Metro area, cited to those ever reliable sources of FIFA and a reporters opinion. I changed that text and wrote there is no equivalent Nyungar name or term for what this article is about. Yet before I could expand you started making changes adding tags, this disruption meant I was chasing your nonsense disruptive actions rather than expanding and clarifying the whole of what this article refers to. It reached a point where your disruption was so bad I just disengaged, the information is clear surely you can decide if this article about an area of land or in Nyungar terms a country, about the people who were responsible for that country, or the languages used in that country, or some other nonsense you dream up. You know all this, so its hard to assume that question is not and never was for clarity, but assuming it really is for clarity then perhaps you should consider go playing Minecraft instead. Gnangarra 00:05, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

  Well you can work that out... — I did deduce that it was probably the Beeliar people, and updated the article to say so explicitly and grammatically correctly - but you reverted my change with no meaningful reason.

  Another possibility is that you meant "Beeliar [the land area] was described [by Lyon and/or by the Beeliar people] as the section of Whadjuk country ..."

  The article as currently worded - "Beeliar described the section of Whadjuk country" - is not meaningful when parsed in English.

  I don't want to keep guessing and being reverted until I get it right, and then be accused of edit-warring, so I am trying to determine what you are actually trying to say in the article so that I reword it so that it both reflects your intent and makes unambiguous sense. Mitch Ames (talk) 13:01, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Actually, the sentence in question is in the Etymology section, where etymology is "the study of the history of .. words". But:

• The first sentence of the paragraph says "There is no equivalent Noongar terminology ..." - but mentions (reasonably enough) the name of the land that includes Perth metro area.
• The second sentence (or any plausible interpretation thereof) talks about the land, not the words used to denote the land - i.e. the second sentence is not etymology, so does not belong in an etymology section anyway.

Is there any way to reword the sentence so that it is etymology - a description/history of the words, rather than the land - eg etymology of "Whadjuk country"? If not, I propose it should be deleted as not etymology. Possibly the text could be merged into Whadjuk#Country if appropriate. Mitch Ames (talk) 13:26, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

I think to be neutral we should get rid of the Gregorian calendar fe., because it's white and patriarchal. Also we should not use terms like European sightings. Europa is a white patriarchal construct. Also white, patriarchal and construct are white patriarchal terms and constructs. We don't want to be political and ideologically driven do we ? Wikipedia should dissolve itself if it wants to be neutral. Well it's coming anyway. Let's fight for control over the bot. Skaldis (talk) 02:58, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Perth density.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:53, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Perth density.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:54, 15 December 2022 (UTC)