Talk:Timeline of Australian inventions

Quantum Bit

Is the quantum bit really an Australian invention, or is one (prototype of an) implementation for a quantum bit? The qbit as a mathematical entity invented by American researchers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:9:4780:A4F:6434:B591:B941:55F1 (talk) 07:04, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

Drip Irrigation

Someone could add drip irrigation. I cannot find an accurate date but it was certainly invented in Australia and improved in Israel. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.244.35.123 (talk) 14:03, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Polymer banknote

Does this rate as an invention? A banknote made out of plastic is still a banknote. I would call this innovation, or redesign. Its notability as an invention is borderline. Mdw0 (talk) 08:11, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Altered rotary clothes hoist entry

Gilbert Toyne was the first to patent the all-metal rotary clothes hoist in Australia, Lance Hill copied his patent once it had expired. Hills Industries Ltd did patent clothes hoist designs later but not significant to be an inventor on this site.Casonline (talk) 04:40, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Significant ommissions

Florey cant count as the inventor of penicillin as he neither discovered it, nor was the first to use it to kill bacteria as medicine. He was the leader of a team of British scientists. He was also an emigre, having been settled in Britain for years before his penicillin work.

Also the Victa push mower was really just a redesigning to a smaller mower with a different engine. Mdw0 (talk) 06:55, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Major Error

Lawrence Hargrave may have done significant work with box kites (and about 10 years before the Wright brothers first flight) BUT it was most certainly NOT powered flight!! This "fact" should be removed and replaced with an accurate statement about Hargrave's work. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.217.96.4 (talk) 11:19, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

In what way was it not powered flight? I think that title fairly accurately describes the invention. The inventor put together a construction of box kites and used a motor to travel forwards. The claim isn't for flight, or for the aeroplane. Do you have a suggestion as to the change? Mdw0 (talk) 22:54, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Ute/Pickup

Interesting article. However, I question the inclusion of Ute, as the first factory-assembled Pickup truck appears to have been introduced by Ford in 1925, nine years before the description here. According to the article cited above, Chevrolet produced another one in 1931. I'm afraid that this leaves Australia well behind. If there is a significant distinction between the Australian Ute and the American pickup truck, I'd love to have it explained to me. Lexo (talk) 10:59, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

You're right - ute scratched. Mdw0 (talk) 22:45, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I've put it back in, and linked to the wikipedia page for coupé utility. This American site explains the difference too: http://www.pickuptrucks.com/html/stories/history/utes/page1.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.173.132.192 (talk) 04:26, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Metal Storm?

I'm tossing up whether I should include Mike O'Dwyers' Metal Storm ballistics technology in the List of Australian inventions. Does it count as an actual invention or just an innovation/redesign? He didnt invent superposed ballistics. He really just redesigned the projectiles so that they recoiled and sealed in the process, preventing blowback along the barrell. The way some of the literature goes on you'd think it was the ultimate weapon. Any thoughts? Mdw0 (talk) 06:31, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Refrigerator - In Australia???

To preserve this entry, I've moved it here. I am not sure if there is any reason why it is unique and different from an mechanical refrigerator. It was deleted with the edit summary "James Harrison did not invent the refrigerator in 1856. the refrigerator was invented by Oliver Evans in 1805, mechanical refrigeration by John Gorrie, built in 1843."

1856 - Refrigerator - Using the principal of vapour compression, James Harrison produced the world's first practical ice making machine and refrigerator.

Regards, Ariconte (talk) 06:36, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

I reverted, there are often multiple claims about "firsts", because a lot depends on how you define "first". The claim here is that Harrison invented the first practical refrigeration system, and the earlier systems cited were both commercial failures. Gatoclass (talk) 13:28, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:Scanrange.jpg

The image File:Scanrange.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --21:24, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Image removed. It was a fairly crappy one anyway. Request sent to WikiProject Australia for better images for late 20th century inventions. Mdw0 (talk) 07:20, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Jindalee Radar System Description Rewrite

Who wrote this nonsense?

"The United States of America spent $11 billion developing stealth aircraft that could not be detected by radar. Scientists at the CSIRO concluded that if the plane could not be detected, perhaps the turbulence it makes passing through air could be. $1.5 million later, the Jindalee Radar system had transformed the stealth bomber into nothing more than an unusual looking aircraft."

This description does not in any way describe the invention. It sounds as if the author intentionally wrote the description to bash the US military. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thaddeusw (talk • contribs) 11:22, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

In no way describes the invention? Is that really your claim? Did you not read or not understand the bit that said 'if the plane could not be detected, perhaps the turbulence it makes passing through air could be' which describes what the radar system detects? I also think it describes the inventing process quite well, explaining the thinking behind the CSIRO's creation. What exactly is inaccurate in that section which makes it nonsense? There are three sentences there, all accurate. Of course you are welcome to edit that section differently so it doesnt sound anti-American military which was not the intention.Mdw0 (talk) 12:07, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

If you believe that the paragraph about turning "the stealth bomber into nothing more than an unusual looking aircraft" is accurate, then would you mind updating the article pertaining to this radar system to credibly reflect such information? The only reference in the current article seems to be speculative, and is pointing to a dead link. 93.167.100.138 (talk) 20:09, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Checking over that again, you are right. It is unfair and not accurate to say the stealth bomber is only a regular bomber in an unusual shape, but that hardly makes the whole thing nonsense. Mdw0 (talk) 00:31, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

File:Orbital engine patent drawing.jpeg Nominated for Deletion

	An image used in this article, File:Orbital engine patent drawing.jpeg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests August 2011 What should I do?
	A discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 09:25, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

My bush lawyer efforts to keep this picture obviously failed. Mdw0 (talk) 08:00, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

The Melbourne Shuffle?

The dance called, "The shuffle" or "the Melbourne Shuffle" was invented in Australia and by the name suggests invented specifically in Melbourne. I know it's not a significant invention but I'm sure youth would be interested that it was invented in Australia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Calibreslicer (talk • contribs) 00:27, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Its really not significant, and I'd say it could be argued that every separate dance step doesn't qualify as an invention, but if you enter in a section with proper referencing I've got no problem with it.Mdw0 (talk) 06:11, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Underwater torpedo

Insufficient referencing for 'underwater torpedo'. I have searched but found no evidence that it is an Australian Invention.

patc — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.239.120.167 (talk) 04:59, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

CSIRO wins WiFi patent settlement

• Misha Schubert, April 1, 2012, Scientists win a case of high wifi-nance, The Age

We WiFi now. -- 李博杰  | —Talk contribs email 15:07, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

inkjet printer

If i am correct http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kia_Silverbrook has the most patents related to inkjet printing and is the father of high speed inkjet printing? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.138.80.187 (talk) 20:44, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Find a good reference and add it in. Mdw0 (talk) 22:56, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Scramjet?

Not sure if we can claim the Scramjet as our own - the pommies were at it for a while before we got to play in Woomera...--Graham Proud (talk) 14:32, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

True, much of the design was done by Brits, but a lot of that design and testing was done in Australia, as well as the final launch, with Australians from HySHot involved many stages in development. I think that's enough to claim a significant percentage as Australian.Mdw0 (talk) 06:19, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Ettridge vs Sarich Orbital Engine

In 1973 there were a couple of newspaper articles featuring John Ettridge claiming he had patents from 1969 that covered almost every aspect of the Sarich orbital engine. Was an Ettridge engine ever built or demonstrated? It took a long time, but eventually useful production engines were created using the Sarich model. Other than claims and patents and animations on websites, is there an Ettridge model engine working anywhere?Mdw0 (talk) 00:28, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Please add Penicillin to the list

Can somebody please add the invention of penicillin by Australian Howard Florey to the main page.

Also please add the following links as-well.

http://www.abc.net.au/science/slab/florey/story.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Florey — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.250.161.111 (talk) 11:51, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Penicillin is an Australian invention.

Penicillin is an Australian invention as it was invented by Howard florey.

Flemming did not discover / invent penicillin for medical aplications .... he made an observation about the mold. A mold that has been used in the manufacture of Cheese for near 8000 years. going back 8000 years to the Romans & grater Europe some

Penicillium Candidum (white mold) is used to ripen and flavor Brie, Camembert, Coulommiers, and a variety of French Goat Cheeses. It produces a nice, white bloom on the surface of your cheeses. It is highly recommended to use this in combination with Geotrichum Candidum, which helps prevent the skin from slipping off your finished cheese.

CONTAINS: Penicillium Candidum

Flemming made the same observation about the Penicillium Candidum mold that thousands of people made thousands of times before him going back some 8000 years.

Roman soldiers when marching to war use to store their food in caves & it was then when the Cheese developed white mold ( thinking nothing of it ... starving & tired, they ate & marched on. ...... it was from roman writings that we find the first recorded writings of the roman solders talking about how their war wounds & infected injury's had / would heal up afterthey had eaten the Cheese ect ect that had this white mold on it.

8000 years later Flemming made the same observation the roman solders had some 8000 years before.

However .... It was Australian Howard Florey who turned an observation into the worlds first antibiotic.

It was Howard Florey who won the nobel prize for his (( INVENTION ))

Michael Mosley in his Documentary, Pain, Pus & Poison the search for modern medicine also points out that it was Florey & not Flemming who invented Penicillin.

Please add the link.

BBC Pain, Pus and Poison - Pus, The Search for Modern Medicine Episode 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-ffWBITNCw

see BBC Pain, Pus and Poison - Pus, The Search for Modern Medicine Episode 2 from time code 21:40 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.100.163.191 (talk) 12:38, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

As mentioned above, penicillin as an antibiotic can't be an Australian invention as Florey neither discovered it, nor was the first to use it to kill bacteria as medicine. He was the leader of a team that refined and developed penicillin so it became practical to use it in modern medicine. This team was a group of British scientists working in Britain. Florey himself was an emigre, having been settled in Britain for many years before his penicillin work. That means the invention of penicillin as an antibiotic is not Australian.Mdw0 (talk) 02:44, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Australian invention, nuclear weapons/later named the Manhattan project also radar & OTH radar

Sir Marcus "Mark" Laurence Elwin Oliphant AC, KBE, FRS, FAA (8 October 1901 – 14 July 2000) was an Australian physicist and humanitarian who played an important role in the first experimental demonstration of nuclear fusion and also the development of nuclear weapons.

Marcus Oliphant was instrumental in spreading the word of this finding in the United States, thereby starting what became the Manhattan Project. Later in the war, he worked on it with his friend Ernest Lawrence at the Radiation Laboratory in Berkeley, California, developing electromagnetic isotope separation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Oliphant

See ....

Radar & Splitting the attom & creating nuclear weapons & later setting up the Manhattan project.

In 1938, Oliphant became involved with the development of radar, then still a secret. While visiting prototype radar stations, he realised that shorter-wavelength radio waves were needed urgently, especially if there was to be any chance of building a radar set small enough to fit into an aircraft. In August 1939, he took a small group to Ventnor, on the Isle of Wight, to examine the Chain Home system first hand. He obtained a grant from the Admiralty to develop radar systems with wavelengths less than 10 centimetres (3.9 in); the best available at the time was 150 centimetres (59 in).[44]

Oliphant's group at Birmingham worked on developing two promising devices, the klystron and the magnetron. Working with James Sayers, Oliphant managed to produce an improved version of the klystron capable of generating 400W. Meanwhile, two more members of his Birmingham team, John Randall and Harry Boot, worked on a radical new design, a cavity magnetron. By February 1940, they had an output of 400W with a wavelength of 9.8 centimetres (3.9 in), just the kind of short wavelengths needed for good airborne radars. The magnetron's power was soon increased a hundred-fold, and Birmingham concentrated on magnetron development. The first operational magnetrons were delivered in August 1941. This invention was one of the key scientific breakthroughs during the war and played a major part in defeating the German U-boats, intercepting enemy bombers, and in directing Allied bombers.[45]

In 1940, the Fall of France, and the possibility that Britain might be invaded, prompted Oliphant to send his wife and children to Australia. The Fall of Singapore in February 1942 led him to offer his services to John Madsen, the Professor of Electrical Engineering at the University of Sydney, and the head of the Radiophysics Laboratory at the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, which was responsible for developing radar.[45][46] He embarked from Glasgow for Australia on QSMV Dominion Monarch on 20 March. The voyage, part of a 46-ship convoy, was a slow one, with the convoy frequently zigzagging to avoid U-boats, and the ship did not reach Fremantle until 27 May.[47]

The Australians were already preparing to produce radar sets locally. Oliphant persuaded Professor Thomas Laby to release Eric Burhop and Leslie Martin from their work on optical munitions to work on radar, and they succeeded in building a cavity magnetron in their laboratory at the University of Melbourne in May 1942.[48] Oliphant worked with Martin on the process of moving the magnetrons for the laboratory to the production line.[49] Over 2,000 radar sets were produced in Australia during the war.[50] Manhattan Project

At the University of Birmingham in March 1940, Otto Frisch and Rudolf Peierls examined the theoretical issues involved in developing, producing and using atomic bombs in a paper that became known as the Frisch–Peierls memorandum. They considered what would happen to a sphere of pure uranium-235, and found that not only could a chain reaction occur, but it might require as little as 1 kilogram (2.2 lb) of uranium-235 to unleash the energy of hundreds of tons of TNT. The first person they showed their paper to was Oliphant, and he immediately took it to Sir Henry Tizard, the chairman of the Committee for the Scientific Survey of Air Warfare (CSSAW).[51] As a result, a special subcommittee of the CSSAW known as the MAUD Committee was created to investigate the matter further. It was chaired by Sir George Thomson, and its original membership included Oliphant, Chadwick, Cockcroft and Moon.[52] In its final report in July 1941, the MAUD Committee concluded that an atomic bomb was not only feasible, but might be produced as early as 1943.[53] A large oval-shaped structure. Giant Alpha I racetrack at Y-12 at Oak Ridge, Tennessee, used for electromagnetic separation.

Great Britain was at war and authorities there thought that the development of an atomic bomb was urgent, but there was much less urgency in the United States. Oliphant was one of the people who pushed the American program into motion. Oliphant flew to the United States in late August 1941 in an unheated bomber, ostensibly to discuss the radar-development program, but was assigned to find out why the United States was ignoring the findings of the MAUD Committee.[54] He later recalled: "the minutes and reports had been sent to Lyman Briggs, who was the Director of the Uranium Committee, and we were puzzled to receive virtually no comment. I called on Briggs in Washington [D.C.], only to find out that this inarticulate and unimpressive man had put the reports in his safe and had not shown them to members of his committee. I was amazed and distressed."[55]

Oliphant then met with the Uranium Committee. Samuel K. Allison, a new member of the Committee, was a talented experimental physicist and a protégé of Arthur Compton at the University of Chicago. Oliphant "came to a meeting", Allison recalls, "and said 'bomb' in no uncertain terms. He told us we must concentrate every effort on the bomb, and said we had no right to work on power plants or anything but the bomb. The bomb would cost 25 million dollars, he said, and Britain did not have the money or the manpower, so it was up to us." Allison was surprised that Briggs had kept the committee in the dark.[56] Oliphant visited his friend Ernest Lawrence, and also spoke with James Conant and Enrico Fermi. He not only managed to convince the Americans that an atomic bomb was feasible, but also inspired Lawrence to convert his 37-inch (94 cm) cyclotron into a giant mass spectrometer for isotope separation,[57] a technique Oliphant had pioneered in 1934.[33] Leo Szilard later wrote, "if Congress knew the true history of the atomic energy project, I have no doubt but that it would create a special medal to be given to meddling foreigners for distinguished services, and that Dr Oliphant would be the first to receive one."[54]

On 26 October 1942, Oliphant embarked from Melbourne, taking Rosa and the children back with him. The wartime sea voyage on the French Desirade was again a slow one, and they did not reach Glasgow until 29 February 1943.[58] But he had to leave them behind once more in November 1943 after he joined the Manhattan Project in the United States as part of the British Mission. Oliphant was one of the scientists whose services the Americans were most eager to secure, and Robert Oppenheimer, the head of the Los Alamos Laboratory attempted to persuade Oliphant to join. The work on the bomb itself made him uneasy, and he preferred to head the team assisting his friend Lawrence at the Radiation Laboratory in Berkeley to develop the electromagnetic uranium enrichment – a vital but less overtly military part of the project.[59]

Oliphant secured the services of a fellow Australian physicist, Harrie Massey, who had been working for the Admiralty on magnetic mines, along with James Stayers and Stanley Duke, who had worked with him on the cavity magnetron. This initial group set out for Berkeley in a B-24 Liberator bomber in November 1943.[60] Oliphant became Lawrence's de facto deputy, and was in charge of the Berkeley Radiation Laboratory when Lawrence was absent.[61] Although based in Berkeley, he often visited Oak Ridge, Tennessee, where the separation plant was, and was an occasional visitor to Los Alamos.[62] He made efforts to involve Australian scientists in the project,[63] and had Sir David Rivett, the head of the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, release Eric Burhop to work on the Manhattan Project.[63][64] He briefed Stanley Bruce, the Australian High Commissioner to the United Kingdom, on the project, and urged the Australian government to secure Australian uranium deposits.[63][65]

Oliphant returned to England in March 1945, and resumed his post as a professor of physics at the University of Birmingham. He was on holiday in Wales with his family when he first heard of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.[66] He was later to remark that he felt "sort of proud that the bomb had worked, and absolutely appalled at what it had done to human beings". Oliphant became a harsh critic of nuclear weapons and a member of the Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs, saying, "I, right from the beginning, have been terribly worried by the existence of nuclear weapons and very much against their use."[16] His wartime work would have earned him a Presidential Medal of Freedom with Gold Palm, but the Australian government vetoed this honour,[22] as government policy at the time was not to confer honours on civilians.[67] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.100.163.191 (talk) 13:09, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

I think you might be confusing an Australian inventor with an Australian invention. This article is a list of Australian inventions, which means the things in the list need to have been invented by an Australian, or in Australia. This entry would have us include an invention made by a team of American scientists in America supported by the American government. The Australian involvement is as an organiser and agitator, rather than a scientist involved in perfecting the weapon. This means it must be considered how much Australian involvement there really was. Oliphant's distance from the actual creation of the weapon as well as the domination of the heavy American involvement means this is not an Australian invention.Mdw0 (talk) 02:57, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Australian inventions .... pleases add these inventions & links.

http://www.australiangeographic.com.au/topics/history-culture/2014/03/10-aussie-inventions-that-make-your-life-easier

http://www.cnet.com/au/pictures/best-aussie-inventions-of-all-time/

http://www.australia.gov.au/about-australia/australian-story/austn-inventions — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.202.248.243 (talk) 20:42, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Most of these are already in the list. Those things that are not inventions - the minor innovations or improvements such as some work on salt water pool chlorination or a slightly more convenient contact lens - are not and should not be included.Mdw0 (talk) 03:03, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Another non-invention

People, the term 'invention' as a thought exercise is NOT what this article is about. Inventions as related to the begininngs of technology is what counts here;

Would like to discuss the section I added (1966 - Advertising Agency [Strategic] Account Planning Role) which was removed twice, the second time for vandalism. This is a valid invention and there were reference links provided to other Wiki pages (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Account_planning) where the Australian invention of this is recorded ("In Australia the course of history was different. The inventor of the role in 1965 was David Brent, a senior researcher at Unilever who had served as a senior para-military police commander in a long, major counter-insurgency jungle war in Asia and in the national secret service followed by ad agency account service, creative writing and media management. These qualifications, skills and experiences led to the launch of the new role in a Sydney agency in 1966.") as well as to external web pages linked to from that article, such as http://plannersphere.pbworks.com/w/page/17146391/Planning%20Hall%20Of%20Fame which clearly describes the invention of this in Australia.

This invention would seem to be far better supported in the literature than some others that appear on the page.

Please let me know what specific issues there are with having this listed on this page. Stevenbrent (talk) 11:26, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

This belongs on the talk page, not here, but in short - its not an invention. It can't be listed as an invention because its not technological in any way. Its a thought bubble. The entry describes the inventor rather than the invention. You can't seriously think every possible job description of every possible job is an invention. Did he invent advertising? No. A type of media that delivers advertising? No. The most generous I could possibly be might include an entry for a type of accounting called brand health, something so obscure it doesn't even warrant a Wikipedia article on its own merits, but he didn't even invent that. Giving a jargonistic name to a corporate lackey is not an invention. And also, given the obvious similarity in surnames, cheerleading a relative doesn't do much for your NPOV. I mistakenly labelled one entry as vandalism because I assumed that anything to do with 'David Brent' and advertising must be related to 'The Office,' but that appears to be an unfortunate surmise on my part. Mdw0 (talk) 09:02, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Timeline

This article is presented as a Wikipedia:Timeline. If there are no objections, propose moving it to Timeline of Australian inventions similar to Timeline of United States inventions. Whizz40 (talk) 05:46, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Going ahead with the move, seems like an improvement and uncontroversial. Whizz40 (talk) 08:11, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Quantum Logic Gate

A group of Australian scientists at the University of New South Wales has patented the world's first silicon-based quantum logic gate, as well as a method for scaling up the technology to millions of qubits. Could somebody please add this in, as I can't find the relevant research article. Kernel NickM (talk) 09:44, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Australian Aboriginal development of flour and bread, and other artifacts

Academic discussion on ABC Radio National today included an assertion that Aboriginal grinding bowls dated at 35,000 years old indicate the development of flour and bread many thousands of years before any such development anywhere else in the world.

Similarly, many other inventions may well have been developed first chronologically by Australian Aborigines - fish traps, canoes etc. And surely many, many more inventions

The fact that these inventions were superceded and improved beyond the Aboriginal invention, should this override these earlier independent interventions ?

Anyone up for at least putting a paragraph together to cover this?

---

RichardB-enwiki

RichardB (talk) 00:15, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

If it's referenced properly, why not? Mdw0 (talk) 22:32, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Boomerang?

If we're going to have an aboriginal invention area, shouldn't we add the boomerang?

Gamma032 (talk) 12:15, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

The boomerang is not a uniquely Australian invention, with other sorts of throwing sticks both returning and non-returning going back to antiquity in other cultures. So with no proof of the date of Australian invention, it can't be claimed.Mdw0 (talk) 02:00, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Timeline of Australian inventions. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100416135914/http://www.cultureandrecreation.gov.au/articles/inventions/ to http://www.cultureandrecreation.gov.au/articles/inventions/
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090903004711/http://www.wi-fi.org/organization.php to http://www.wi-fi.org/organization.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:49, 2 July 2016 (UTC)