Talk:Brass razoo

Information
Hey, there is a ton of information that could be added from this site. I would like to hear the thoughts of everyone else on how it should be organized please. *Cremepuff 222*  01:09, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Pas un Sou
I know this is not the place for original research but I do think that the "not a sou" source becomes a lot more convincing when translated into the French: "pas un sou". I could well imagine Australian soldiers, in France during World War I, corrupting this to "brass razoo", especially if they already used "razoo" in the raspberry sense.--TristramBrelstaff 21:39, 5 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Well, this says that it is "not a sou," but I understand what you are saying. If we can find a source that follows your thoughts I'd be happy to change it, but like you said, we can't have any original research. *Cremepuff 222*  14:59, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Expand, merge or redirect
This page is a mere dictionary definition (something which Wikipedia is not). It explains the meaning, usage and probable origins of a slang phrase. I can't find any encyclopedic content on this page that rises past what I would expect to read in a truly great unabridged dictionary. The definitions and usage discussions belong over in Wiktionary where folks with the right skills, interests and lexical tools can more easily sort out the meanings and origins.

Options to fix the page here include:
 * 1) Expand the page with encyclopedic content - that is, content that goes well beyond the merely lexical.
 * 2) Redirect the page to a more general page on the appropriate sub-genre of slang.
 * 3) Replace the current contents with a soft-redirect to Wiktionary (usually done using the wi template) once the Wiktionary editors have moved their version out of their inbound-transwiki queue and into a standard page.

Rossami (talk) 14:16, 21 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Firstly, I would argue that the page is already more than a mere dictionary definition. As for the options to fix the page, options 1 or 2 are much more appealing than option 3.  There is plenty of room for expansion, along the lines of other Australian slang terms such as smoko Bonzer, G'day, Mate (colloquialism) and Cooee.  If a merge was to happen, then it should be with Australian English vocabulary.  Either way, this should not happen through a PROD notice but through a merge discussion or, if appropriate, an AfD. -- Mattinbgn\talk 01:45, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I've read the page for a third time now and I still can't find anything that goes past merely lexical content. The content is good, but meaning, usage and origins are dictionary material.  I'm not finding evidence that this particular phrase is so significant that the content would remain in the main article on Australian English vocabulary as more than a minor example.  Because the full discussion of meaning, usage, et al would be most likely to be preserved and visible in the eventual Wiktionary entry, my preference is option three (but as noted above, not until the Wiktionary editors have moved it out of their transwiki queue).  By the way, I also have to note that I don't consider the others in your list to be a compelling precedent for keeping this particular page as is.  Some of them should probably also have been transwiki'd to Wiktionary until and unless they are expanded.  The ones that shouldn't have extensive discussions of significant social impact and commentary.  I can't find any evidence that such social impact and external commentary exists for this page.  Rossami (talk) 04:38, 25 February 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree that it is far more than a mere dictionary definition. I am the admin who deleted it, along with a number of others which were in Category:Proposed deletion that day, many of which were marked as having been transwiki'd to wiktionary.  I support the restoration.  — Athaenara  ✉  00:30, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * On what basis do you support restoration? What is the non-lexical content that you see on this page?  Rossami (talk) 10:56, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Because I followed through on the initial prod by deleting it, I felt it was pertinent to express my support of the restoration. If you wish to argue for its deletion, I recommend the Afd process.  — Athaenara  ✉  17:45, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I think you misunderstand my question. I have never argued for deletion and did not tag it for prod.  I think it should be transwiki'd because the current content is lexical content, not encyclopedic.  Transwikis do not and never have required AFD discussion.  Deletion only applies when you choose to delete the pagehistory.  So, let me ask again - what non-lexical content do you see on the page?  What is here that you wouldn't expect to see in a really great, unabridged dictionary?  Rossami (talk) 01:45, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I think you don't quite understand. Regardless of whether there is more than lexical content or not (and at least two people here feel that there is), the item has been already been transwikied.  Despite this, its deletion is still disputed and therefore it should go to AfD where general consensus can be established.  That is what happens when a PROD nomination is disputed. -- Mattinbgn\talk 08:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, since the Wiktionary editors have not yet moved the page out of their inbound-transwiki queue, the transwiki is not yet complete. Once that is done then, yes, the question of whether there is more than merely lexical content becomes critically important because Wikipedia is not a dictionary. The prod deletion is irrelevant.  The deletion of the pagehistory was properly overturned.  The question on the table now - the only question on the table - is whether this page can reasonably be expected to expand beyond a mere dictionary definition.  If there is encyclopedic content here (and I'm still waiting for anyone to educate me on that point), then clearly the article should stay here.  If not, then it needs to either be expanded or redirected.  (A soft-redirect to the Wiktionary page is usually the best solution but a redirect to some other more general page may also work.)  Redirects are outside the scope of AFD and are not deletion.  To answer Graeme's point below, if/when content is moved, the redirect is considered sufficient to retain tracability and history.  Rossami (talk) 15:10, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Does anyone actually want to delete the article? As the creator I would argue for its retention.  This article has been extracted for a WP:Did you know for the wikipedia front page, so it should be kept accessible online so that it can be read. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:15, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't mind it being deleted if consensus calls for it. *Cremepuff 222*  22:31, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Image?
If this thing doesn't exist, what is that an image of? — sjorford++ 14:08, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Because someone decided to make it and sell it after the term came into use. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 20:36, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * So...you want to mention that in the article perhaps? Along with explaining who "someone" is? And remove the phrase "There is no actual thing called a brass razoo"? You see my point. — sjorford++ 23:40, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


 * A brass razoo refers to a triffling amount of money, notionally less than the smallest coin. In this regard, it is similar to a large number of small coins-references like plank, dam, cash, etc.  The photo shows a novelty token.  You get novelty items in the tourist shops, like packets of bull-dust and bottles of dinkum oil.  Like this token, the idioms do not refer to these novelties. Wendy.krieger (talk) 07:51, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

CONFUSION arises because there are two uses of the word. One Is a reference to the New Orleans version Razz or 'give the Razoo".. Different word, meaning, etymology. Prob a variation on 'razzberry' - along the lines of 'give the finger. It's certainly not a ref to 'a mythical' coin of no value.

I AM 'THE SOMENONE' referred to above: after truly extensive numismatic and lexicological/etymological research, - which proved no such actual coin had existed -I I had the truly 'original one and only Brass razoo' designed by Melbourne artist John Farrell, (profile H Lawson one side, sketch map of Oz on the other, appropriate wording, date) acid etched on 'zinc heavy brass', brass plated then gold plated, attached 18ct gold chain, presented to my Father Kevin Joseph Pickett, as a truly unique gift.( he and family were fond of the saying... Every year at tax time,, he'd be looking thru the records, saying 'Fair bloody Dinkum, A man works hard all his life, makes money raises family.. And what?  I haven't got a bloody Brass Razoo to show for it,  not a Razoo to my name!'.)   I presented it in wrapped jewellers box, saying, there's only one of these in existence.. And you've got it.. BUT, I'm afraid there is ONE. Thing you are fond of saying that you'll NEVER. Be able to say again". He was a gruff old Bushie at heart. Didn't show much emotion. But on his occasion he looked at it in wonder, teared up a bit.. And said "well I'll be buggered.. Err Blowed, I mean.. How about that? My own Brass Razoo! - one& Only, original..."" He was truly touched. Very proprietary. Wore it everywhere - and to my surprise got asked about it by everyone he met.. Even complete strangers who'd ask.. He'd proudly tell the story.. And EVERY. Single person he encountered wanted to buy one! So, as a 23 year old 'super programmer' (mainframes) with no marketing/real entrepreneurial experience (but other Inventions in progress,  I ended up in the 'Brass Razoo Mint" business. I met up with. An Aussie  Pom, Peter Russell whilst doing the copyright/trademark rounds.. He was working on the same idea (common saying in parts of Britain, too, you see). I had half the trademark, he had half the 'Kangaroo' design as a w.i.p.; we decided we'd make better partners than legal foes and joined up, agreeing to split the OWNERSHIP OF. The pooled IP 51/49% in my favour, largely because I'd got there first and we needed to avoid 'ties' in decision making.- no tiebreaker setup... But as 50/50 partners otherwise. We made the coin pictured in the entry.. I have plenty of photos, PR, articles, references and erstwhile Oxford etymologist Ms Angela Ridsdale's and my own work showing that the ref. books all had it wrong: it's much older. An international goldfields term,we're convinced it came as one smart poster suggests from "pas un sous" -1849 thrus 50's the Goldfields were awash in Clif. US, and Oz with small foreign coins of precious metals:, Spanish silver 'pieces of 8' (which broke up.. Thus 2 bits, 4 bits for 25c and 50c etc...small coins from France, Belgium etc.. Were commonly called 'sous' whether they were or not - for simplicity, I think. You can picture a bloke arriving back in camp after a trip to the assay office to a n eagerly waiting mate who asks "what'd we get mate?..   To be told "2000 sous" or " not a sous,mate - bloody 'Brass Razoo, he said... Fools' gold" (Similar to WW1 when Aussies got a taste for wine.. 'Vin Blanc' being a bit much for Aussie tongues... "Give us some more of that PLONK, mate.. It's bloody growing on me")..

I'll be back with more, will seek advice etc. but you should know that whilst over 90,000 were sold thru about 83, they currently fetch anywhere from $45 to US$100 on eBay and such... There are copiests and frauds someone bought some key rings illicitly made from our tooling by manufacturer Astor base metals, in the 1990s, GROUND off  the Keychain part and sold/sells them on eBay etc as 'old coin found in attic/backyard..'-  no provenance or packaging.. I can supply examples of all such if I can figure out how to post images et.. Would love to cooperate with a wikip expert willing to help. I"ll be bringing it back anew after legal action against Astor and others for IP violations, some frauds etc. there serious cancer in the family and i need to raise money.  There'll be a page at originalBrassRazoo.com. There's a new booklet out - not by me - " the story of.. Etc)

And btw, I have at least one solid ref that proves the goldfields.. And it comes from a Newspaper in GALWAY, IRELAND,, in 1853' is quoted/referred to by ManningClarke tho I'm not surei want to announce specifics of it yet for Commercial reasons, because "ref books, Oxford Dictionary  ALL proved wrong" would ake a good PR Approach to a new launch of limited editions.. I hope to have thm produced by disabled folks through a major Charity facility, provinding work & income to those who need it as well as fair profit for my partnership. I DO Vow That important charities will benefit from every one sold whatever the arrangements. Must stop for now. Any willing helpers/advisers please contact me.. I also have several genuine inventions I'd like to record the stories of... Including the AUSTRALIAN. Invention of 2 wy RealTime Telemetry and Engine systems Control... NETCOMM, ME, A TEAM, 1987/88 touring cars live to PITS, TV.. Brock car in 88, Murray carter in 87.. See http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=-5lPRXNvoSc. I'm seen in the story a few times.. computer team member/project.manager & conceived/invented/spec'd the thing. . My team members contributed greatly and are named at my linkedin pages tinyurl.com/jodee-waynet. Me=Tall, dark, bearded. Quite a story. AND SEE the 1988 version & comments naming team members at 89 Sandown, Peter Brock car, http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=zf5Bg3YT48s

Best,

Wayne T - see linkeIn Wayne T. Pickett — Preceding unsigned comment added by SemiGeniusOz (talk • contribs) 01:00, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Razoo
A razoo was a cheap musical instrument from the late 1800's. NealeFamily (talk) 21:23, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * That's a reference to the New Orleans version Razz or 'give the Razoo".. Different word, meaning, etymology. Prob a variation on Kazoo. It's certainly not a ref to 'a mythical' coin of no value. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SemiGeniusOz (talk • contribs) 23:45, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Legal threats
This page has been the target of a couple of legal threats, first in April 2014, and then again today, on both occasions by different IPs. For now, I've redacted the offending paragraph to (hopefully) avoid future problems. Should further threats be posted I will have to raise this at an appropriate venue. -- Aussie Legend  ( ✉ ) 06:23, 7 November 2014 (UTC)