Talk:Ballarat Reform League

Australia: Victoria / Crime / History Low‑importance

	Australia portal Ballarat Reform League is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Victoria (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian crime (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian history (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Victoria.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Eureka Rebellion#Stockade|stockade]] Anchor Eureka Rebellion#Stockade links to a specific web page: Stockade (film). The anchor (#Stockade) has been deleted by other users before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Untitled

I'd like to call into question the neutrality of this article. It appears there is a lot of editing done by the family of John Bentley who are seeking compensation from the current government. Not sure how to tag it as such though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.39.15.125 (talk) 04:39, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As a part of the Wikipedia Australia Project, I will attempt to address all the issues. It could take time to find relevant sources and deal with the question of neutrality. SurveyorMJF (talk) 20:20, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Ballarat Reform League" duplicates existing "Eureka Rebellion" wiki page

To the Project Committee.

The Ballarat Reform League page is listed as a To Do item for Project Australia - History, so I have been checking it & reading several good history reference books.

I have three findings regarding the article, in addition to the issues raised by previous Wiki reviewers: i.e. that it lacks references and it lacks neutrality (seeming to be more for the purpose of promoting a local history group seeking funding):

1) The topic is already well-covered in the wiki page Eureka Rebellion, which is of a higher standard than the page in question here.

2) Intrinsically, the Ballarat Reform League is of low importance. It was short-lived, lasting only a matter of weeks. And the League's pacifist president, Humffray, was over-ridden by the more pugilistic and charismatic Lalor whom the rebels followed into the fight known as the Eureka Stockade or the Eureka Rebellion.

3) The legacy of the Ballarat Reform League was the Ballarat Reform Charter, or the "Diggers Charter". This demanded enfranchisement of the diggers. It enjoys a certain amount of puffery, often being claimed as a seminal document for Australian democracy, although authoritative historians such as Geoffrey Blainey do not agree that it was.

Conclusion

I recommend that this article is removed, on the grounds that it duplicates the information in an existing and more competent article Eureka Rebellion.

I've also put this message on the Project Australia To DO talk page.

SurveyorMJF (talk) 18:47, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quote from G Blainey ..."In fact the new colonies' political constitutions were not affected by Eureka, but the first Parliament that met under Victoria's new constitution was alert to the democratic spirit of the goldfields, and passed laws enabling each adult man in Victoria to vote at elections, to vote by secret ballot, and to stand for the Legislative Assembly." Blainey, Geoffrey (1963). The Rush That Never Ended. Melbourne University Press. pp. 56–7.SurveyorMJF (talk) 06:43, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reconsidering delete

After yet more research of academic texts on the topic, I think it may be possible to rescue this page. I've placed a note on the article stating that it is 'Under Construction'. More soon... SurveyorMJF (talk) 23:13, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

May 14 2017. After several weeks' work, the issues have been addressed, and the article is hopefully now up to scratch. SurveyorMJF (talk) 22:15, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]