Talk:Cue, Western Australia

Hoover as Shire President first disputed
The first paragraph proclaims: A former shire president was Herbert Hoover, who later became the President of the United States. It is unlikley the Herbert Hoover was ever the mayor, chairman or president of Cue. He is not in the list of such people in Heydon's Just A Century Ago: A History of the Shire of Cue. Hibeach (talk) Hibeach —Preceding undated comment added 09:57, 2 August 2011 (UTC).

Disputed
I agree with HiBeach that this is almost certainly false information. Hoover did spend time in Western Australia over a period of years, mostly around Coolgardie and Leonora, although he may have spent time in Cue on various flying visits to mines all over the Eastern Goldfields and Murchison fields it is highly unlikely that he was ever Shire President. KHS Boab 09:18, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

A former shire president was Herbert Hoover, who later became the President of the United States. - have taken it out - rubbsish SatuSuro 11:00, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I can't find him in the gazettes either. I will look further when in the State Library today, though, as I may not have gone far back enough in years terms. Orderinchaos 23:59, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * This is what i found : https://web.archive.org/web/20190210063137/https://www.cue.wa.gov.au/images/public_documents/Community%20Profile.pdf

"The then ‘Murchison Chambers’ was also built in 1895 and was built by the London and Western Australian Investment Company. The building was two storey’s high with 18 offices and two shops. The offices housed, among others, Messrs Fox, Weekes and May, licensed and authorised surveyors of WA, VIC and SA, and Bewick & Moreing Co. Herbert Hoover was employed by Bewick & Moreing Co. as a mining consultant, was later appointed to General Manager of the Sons of Gwallia mine near Leonora in May 1898 and went on to become the President of the USA. Hoover usually stayed at the Murchison Chambers when work commitments occasionally brought him to Cue"


 * Greetings Skaldis (talk) 06:55, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Cue, Western Australia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070930014846/http://trails.heritage.wa.gov.au/ht_pdf/Cue.pdf. to http://trails.heritage.wa.gov.au/ht_pdf/Cue.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.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 00:12, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Usage of the term "Queen"
I think the paragraph about the term "Queen" should be removed. Mentioning several completely unrelated uses of the word in the context of the town is not noteworthy, and contrary to WP:TRIVIA, WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Mitch Ames (talk) 01:16, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

I strongly disagree, and knowing your understanding of rules over sense, consider your comment above a brilliant indication of where you understand things. You are wrong, and the usage of the term was and is a specific Cue related item that is both notable and connected. JarrahTree 01:42, 23 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Use of the term "Queen" to name a mine is not unique to Cue, e.g.:
 * Queen of the May in Yundamindera, Western Australia
 * Copper Queen Mine
 * Desert Queen Mine
 * Sand Queen mines
 * Fibre Queen Mine
 * Queen of the West Mine
 * Use of "Queen" to name a festival is not unique to Cue:
 * Queen of the Land Festival
 * Queen of Moomba
 * Queen of the Peak
 * Queen of the Bay
 * It's fine to mention specific notable events or mines in Cue, but to explicitly bundle them together simply because they all have the word "queen" in them is false etymology. The current sentence "the usage of the term 'Queen' has had different nuances" is complete nonsense. Several mines and several unrelated events are not nuances. Mitch Ames (talk) 04:17, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Complete nonsense - you clearly are the custodian of truth in this very strange internet realm wow - how come full stops and spaces are your dominant piece de resistance? You have totally missed the point - in your own special way. One thing to roll out lists - another to address the issue at hand.

If you checked the mining fields of western australia - (which is the context that one needs to focus upon, rather than the whole universe) - the Cue field had, in the naming of leases and mines, a preponderance over the other fields (ie mining history of western australia...) of the usage of the word 'queen'


 * Queen of the lake - mine


 * Queen of the hill - mine


 * Queen of the Murchison - mine


 * Queen of the mat - mine


 * Queen of the May - lease (also found as May Queen)


 * Jasper Queen - mine


 * Queen Carnival - event -

If indeed other mining fields have leases with similar usages of terms - please! lets see them ~

The 2002 event was a very specific allusion to that of the 1940s - and it might be lost by you, but to the organisers of the event it wasnt. (clue - straight in the 40s and 50s, 2002 different..)... If you dont get it, sorry cannot help you...

Into the realms of mining lease history, it is a dominant practice of 'start-ups' in the 1890s and 1900s that if leases with no known survey or asay history tended to be named by the nearby larger mire successful ventures, so that the investors in the eastern states and overseas would know nothing about the local context bar the names of the startups. Almost all mining fields extant in that era had such patterns. Knowing your extended skills at searching deep into trove and similar online sources, I await your rejoinders with fascinated anticipation. JarrahTree 05:10, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * the Cue field had ...a preponderance ... of the word 'queen' — So write that into the article (with an appropriate citation) as the introductory sentence to the paragraph.
 * "The 2002 event was a very specific allusion to that of the 1940s - and it might be lost by you, — It was lost on me, and will be to other readers, because it's not stated in the article. (On the contrary, the article currently explicitly says "two very different events" - with nothing to say that the latter was intentionally named after the former.) Again - add some of this detail (with refs etc) to the article, so that a reader who does not already know this stuff can make sense of the article (without having to read the references or the talk page or search Trove).
 * Note that the assertion that Cue had "a preponderance over the other fields" would require an explicit citation. Any number of cited examples of things named "Queen" in Cue does not support any statement about other fields.
 * Mitch Ames (talk) 05:46, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Likewise any assertion that the "queens" of the events were so-named to match the mines would require a source. The use of the term "queen" in the context of such events is common, and not specific to Cue or mining (see my first post above for other examples of "queens").Mitch Ames (talk) 06:46, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * the article ... explicitly says "two very different events" — it doesn't now, because there's nothing in the references to support their being "very different". (clue - WP:SYN) Mitch Ames (talk) 06:46, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
 * It would probably also help the readers if the text in the article matched what the references actually said. . Mitch Ames (talk) 06:48, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Having checked references fom the 1980s and 1990s in book form, the paragraph is removed for improving - rather than be beleagured by details to have to explain. JarrahTree 10:21, 23 January 2021 (UTC)