Talk:William Buckley (convict)

Untitled
His biography http://www.williambuckley.org/biog_overview.html says he died on January 30.

There are other worthy explanations for the derivation of the expression (common still in Australia) "Buckley's chance", which should perhaps be mentioned. See http://www.anu.edu.au/ANDC/Ozwords/Oct%202000/Buckley's.html

I believe it is most likely that it comes from the large store called Buckley and Nunn's. That is, "You have two chances, mate: Buckley's, and None."


 * I agree with the date and reference to "Buckley's chance" above. In my original submission of "William Buckley (convict)" I had 30 Jan as the date Buckley died, and "Buckley’s chance" was deliberately omitted due to its irrelevance in relation to William. These errors were edited in by Tannin – who should have known better as he lives in Ballarat, just a blip on the map from where Buckley lived with the Aborigines. If anybody wants to fix up Tanin’s faux pas be my guest. I don’t see it as my job to go around "wiping his bottom". Tell 05:15, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I changed the sentence relating to Buckley's chance, because the Macquarie Dictionary (4th ed, 2005), entry on this (p. 192), states: " ? from William Buckley, influenced by the pun on the name of the Melbourne department store Buckley and Nunn." Which seems slightly more positive about the William Buckley etymology. The "?" seems to mean "unknown" or "uncertain" in Macquarie entries. And the reference linked in the article, to an article by Fred Ludowyk of the The Australian National Dictionary Centre, says there is a slight chance (not Buckley's :-) that the term originated as a reference to the convict, but no one knows for sure. Grant65 | Talk 18:21, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Phew!! I am glad that this has been resolved...

When Major Mitchell came through the (now named) Gundagai area on his returning north leg of his Australian Felix expedition, he recorded William Buckley being just south of Gundagai adjacent to the Wantabadgery area. William Buckly was making bread and Mitchell noted his huge size. This Wantabadgery/Hills Creek area is where Major Mitchell got 'lost'. I am not sure who conjured up this 'got laost' tale as Mitchell went up Nacki Nacki Creek and must have called on Hannibal Hawkins McCarthur the slaver who lived up there at 'Ellerslie'. Perhaps Mitchell was trying to get Hannibal Mcarthur lost rather than being lost himself. Mitchell then went back to the Murrumbidgee and crossed it where William Buckly was cooking at/near present day Wantabadgery/Hillis Creek where these days, the heritage listed Yabtree Station is near Mundarlo Bridge. Recorded in Mitchell's 'Three Expeditions' Journals online.

Biography assessment rating comment
The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Crested Penguin 09:09, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Languages
Um if he forgot english, how was he able to communicate with John Batmans men, or become a translator soon after? Enlil Ninlil (talk) 06:36, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

John Morgan's biography of Buckley makes this quite clear. When Buckley first met whites after 32 years, he couldn't understand what they were saying but when one of them "offered me bread - calling it by its name - a cloud appeared to pass from over my brain, and I soon repeated that, and other English words after him." It appears that, once triggered, English returned to him quickly. (Gerry246 (talk) 04:23, 14 May 2009 (UTC))

Life and Adventures of Buckley
Buckley left several accounts of his 32 years with the Wautharong people. Its true that because he was illiterate, the written account by John Morgan has been ignored or mentioned directly only in passing. Tim Flannery's most recent edition of "Life and Adventures" makes it clear that most academics now regard the book as more factual than not. With the help of George Langhorne's previously unpublished reminiscence of Buckley, the value of the account now seems to be acknowledged. So "Buckley was always reluctant to reveal much about his thirty-two years with the Aborigines, but in later life he dictated a few stories to John Morgan for inclusion in his adventure books" hardly does justice to the published account of his life. By the way, in Flannery's account there is strong evidence presented that he had at least one child with a Wautharong woman. --Nickm57 (talk) 21:45, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I have added a section on Morgan's book, to try to flesh out the issue of its value as history. Will also find some way to mention the Langhorne account. Sorry - wasnt logged in at the time accidentally. --Nickm57 (talk) 02:49, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I have edited the section on life with the Wautharong, to more closely reflect the recent writings on Buckley by Tim Flannery. There's a bit more to do. --Nickm57 (talk) 03:27, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Possible new external link
Hi, I moderate Culture Victoria. We have a William Buckley story in CV, created by the State Library of Victoria, which includes high resolution images of the manuscript of Buckley's reminiscences. I've had a look at the guidelines for adding external links and thought that a link to CV would be relevant and appropriate. Please let me know what you think.Eleworth (talk) 04:39, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Great idea!--Nickm57 (talk) 07:04, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, will add--Eleworth (talk) 05:22, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Alexander Thomson
I think the link to Alexander Thomson is incorrect. The Thomson in the linked article didn't arrive in Victoria until 1836. Under the page for John Batman his servant's name is also spelled Thompson with 'p'.

-Shannon — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.174.167.29 (talk) 01:21, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

the side bar says he fell out of his vagina (Carriage) This is clearly vandalism

Thank you for noticing. Joseph2302 (talk) 01:21, 14 March 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on William Buckley (convict). 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/20111018235314/http://www.slv.vic.gov.au/portphillip/inter/7335.shtml to http://www.slv.vic.gov.au/portphillip/inter/7335.shtml

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 01:24, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Title William Buckley (convict)
I am not sure that the title William Buckley (convict) is the best one for this case. What makes him worth learning about was not that he was a convict, it was that he lived among the Wathaurong. How about:
 * William Buckley (bush tucker man)
 * William Buckley (wild white man)

or something else?–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:24, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your work on this. Re the title - I think the current title is the best. "Wild White Man" has connotations of colonialism, while "Bush Tucker Man" is also a reference to Les_Hiddins, a well known Australian media personality. Also, re your categorising Buckley as a bushranger, can you tell me what RS you were relying on with this? I cannot recall any sources that use the term in relation to him. But happy to be convinced. Nickm57 (talk) 02:54, 3 October 2022 (UTC)


 * , Thanks for your feedback. Buckley is listed on Convicts in Australia - in the "Bushranger and convicts" grouping.


 * I hastily removed the Bushranger option when I read the article. In the states (and as the daughter of a previous ranger), "ranger" has such a nice connotation. So, I needed enlightening. Yikes, did I!–CaroleHenson (talk) 04:05, 3 October 2022 (UTC)


 * , Followup question: I see your point about the suggestions above. What do you think about William Buckley (adopted Wathaurong)?–CaroleHenson (talk) 04:07, 3 October 2022 (UTC)


 * No worries. Carol it might be worth consulting Tim Flannery's 2002 edition on Buckley. I think the Evan McHugh book may have led you up the garden path re bush tucker man, and as you may be the person who currently has it borrowed from the Internet Archive I cant check any of his other claims! Yes William Buckley (adopted Wathaurong) sounds better. If you dont mind I will ping the Australian WP noticeboard as there may be other valuable opinions Nickm57 (talk) 04:16, 3 October 2022 (UTC)


 * , Yes, I have been pulling from Flannery, too.


 * It is easier for me to go through one source (ANB, McHugh, Flannery) at a time for each section. I am just about to go through Flannery and absolutely will explain deviations. I too think that Flannery is likely the best source. (I am not quite seeing how McHugh led me down the wrong path. If I have added something you don't agree with, please feel free to edit. It's a work in progress. And, I am absolutely getting your other points.


 * Yes, if you could post the issue at the Australian WP noticeboard, that would be great!–CaroleHenson (talk) 04:26, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Disambiguators used in a title should be immediately understood by most readers. With respect, I do not think that Wathaurong is helpful in that regard. A title such as William Buckley (adopted Aboriginal) would be much more widely understood, with the Wathaurong mob being introduced in the lead. WWGB (talk) 04:59, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

I don't really see a problem with the current title. To be more specific you could use William Buckley (escaped convict) but this and all of the above suggestions are not as WP:CONCISE as they could be and WP:NCPDAB says If possible, limit the tag to a single, recognizable and highly applicable term. The title is to help people find the article not to demonstrate What makes him worth learning about, so I don't have much conviction (pun intended) in the need for a change. Vladimir.copic (talk) 05:36, 3 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Same here. In any case, this should really be decided through the WP:RM process. StAnselm (talk) 13:42, 3 October 2022 (UTC)


 * The consensus seems to be to leave the title as it is, so I am dropping the issue.–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:34, 3 October 2022 (UTC)

John Maynard
I just noticed the comment ( from just under the infobox that John Maynard information is not credible. I have gotten some specifics (like amount of time, place names) and have not run across anything that seems skeptical. Anyhow, should I just remove the Maynard info that I added? Or, see if I can find other sources for Maynard info?–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:43, 4 October 2022 (UTC)


 * I am going through and checking the info and either using another source or removing the info. When I get done, there will be no Maynard citations.–CaroleHenson (talk) 23:18, 4 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Yikes, I just realized the issue was with John Morgan - but I think the source changes and edits are better. So, I'm ✅.–CaroleHenson (talk) 23:58, 4 October 2022 (UTC)


 * , I just happened to notice this name on my way through - not going to get bogged down in this page now as I am busy with other stuff, but John Maynard (historian) is on my list of possible future articles; he is quite a respected historian (see incoming links), so I would think that sources by him are credible. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 22:57, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Terminology
I want to be sensitive to word usage.*

From this article, I am going to make edits to
 * Ensure no use of "Aborigines" (I don't think I have read that.)
 * Use "Aboriginal person", "Aboriginal people", or "Indigenous Peoples"
 * Use their clan or tribe name where possible
 * It looks it is ok to use nation, tribe (collection of clans with essentially the same customs, language, and cultural practices), and clan (family group of a tribe).

I don't think that this will make many changes to be consistent throughout the article.

If this plan doesn't make sense to anyone, or there is differing terminology in practice, please let me know.–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:47, 5 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Edits made here, along with some other copy edits.–CaroleHenson (talk) 23:28, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
 * On that point, we don't tend to use the word "whites" in Australian history anymore. Hence Ive deleted "Penal colonies and European settlement in the area brought whites in increasing numbers..." Actually I dont think its necessary anyway. Nickm57 (talk) 01:24, 6 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Ok. That's good to know.–CaroleHenson (talk) 01:29, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

British English vs. Australian English
Currently the tag on the article. Should it be changed to Australian English with a new date?

I am not sure the policy on this. I once tried to change the language and had it reverted because it had been long-standing.–CaroleHenson (talk) 01:33, 6 October 2022 (UTC)


 * It's seems common sense to make it Australian English.–CaroleHenson (talk) 01:38, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
 * yes but it’s generally the same. I’d leave it.Nickm57 (talk) 01:39, 6 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Ok, will do.–CaroleHenson (talk) 01:57, 6 October 2022 (UTC)

Linnell's Buckley's Chance
I see that there are two places where this book is cited (his death and a plaque), but there is a lot more information unearthed about Buckley in this book. Like the fuller story of his mother, father, stepfather, and why he seems to have been adopted by his grandparents in the chapter "Your mother, 16 and unwed". I read reviews for the book and I don't see any issues, but I am just wondering why it may not have been used more.

Is there any issue with using this book?–CaroleHenson (talk) 18:04, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I can't speak for others, but I think you should bring the actual ideas for further inclusion here first - eg whether to add details on his mother, father, stepfather etc, rather than whether to use a particular source. My only thought about including lengthy detail on his extended family is that this might dilute the intercultural story, which is so significant. However, I haven't read Linnell's book, it may be a wonderful resource.(Must admit I was a bit put off by the comment in the intro along the lines that it is not a conventional biography) Finally, surely the reason it hasn't been cited thus far is that it was published on the eve of the pandemic in 2019, while the Tim Flannery edition that included his introduction, Morgan and Langhorne's accounts (Langhorne for the first time I think) was first published by Text publishing twenty years ago. And of course I note there are other books - like Robert Larkin's 2020 book "The Personal History of William Buckley...." Nickm57 (talk) 21:45, 6 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Linnell's work is a true biography and looks to be the best modern scholarship that I have seen on Buckley. As such, it will add new concepts /learnings, which I think in the end will be good. Regarding the updating of the family, I am guessing it would be rewriting of a couple of sentences and perhaps two more sentences.


 * Whether's it's about Linnell's book - or content that could be added, it seems to me that's intertwined, and really will get down to the quality of the research and writing of the book. But, I am happy to proceed in whatever way makes sense.


 * I don't know what you mean about it not being a conventional biography. Is it something I said?


 * Thanks re: Larkin's book. I will look for it.–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:01, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
 * In the introduction (intro) to Linnell's book he writes words to the effect this is not a conventional history or biography. I take it you have the book - so I'm sure you can find the statement. As I didn't buy it or read it I cannot recall his exact words. I skimmed the intro when I picked it up in a bookshop. That is what my aside, above, was referring to, not something you have written. All the best. Nickm57 (talk) 22:52, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I have a copy of the book in pdf form, but I cannot figure where I found it. I think it's quite fair to say it's not a conventional historical biography. Linnell likes to provide a LOT of context about how events in history (even back 1,000 years), places from his childhood, and the people in his life may have shaped who he became.–CaroleHenson (talk) 01:31, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

The issue with frequent violence
This sentence "During one battle, the family who had taken him in and many other members of the clan died", is truly exposing a rather ugly side of revisionist history. Did they die or were they killed? This other one is also somewhat untrue, "They had little illness and lived long lives." It is hard to make such a claim when in the book about Buckley, killings, vendettas, stealing, use of women as bargaining goods etc were quite frequent. In my opinion it's far more interesting, fair and appealing to represent their full history rather than a westerner's looking lens to what a tribal society should be like. Those thing were not moral failings but their customs and the way of life. P.s: I will change it from "died" to "killed" IValmirM (talk) 14:00, 31 March 2023 (UTC)