Talk:Jim Grahame

Please use proper footnotes

@RomeoHT: please convert the numbers in parentheses into proper footnotes. Please see H:FOOT for more information on using <ref></ref> tags. Peaceray (talk) 16:32, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Here, expanding on what Peaceray has written, is how to start the process, RomeoHT.

Delete "Family letter to Phillipa Hollenkamp (Jim’s great-grand-daughter) Fri 24 April 2009": If you can't even specify where this may be found in a publicly accessible archive, it's worthless.

Specify where (magazine title, date, page number) "an article, 'Poet of the Bush: 80,000 Miles in a "Literary Sulky" ' " appears.

Opt to edit the "source" of the article as a whole. While in editing mode, go to the lowermost entry within the section titled "References:". Currently, this is "## Daily Advertiser (Wagga Wagga, NSW : 1911 - 1954) Saturday 13 August 1949, page 2"; let's suppose that this is indeed the lowermost entry. Delete "##" from it. Cut (as in "copy", "cut", "paste") the remainder. Move upwards in the draft to the point where you want the index number for this note to appear. At this point, add <ref></ref>. Paste within this, resulting in: <ref>Daily Advertiser (Wagga Wagga, NSW : 1911 - 1954) Saturday 13 August 1949, page 2</ref>. I see no reason to provide either the publication span of the newspaper or the day of the week, and so suggest deleting both. The newspaper title should be italicized. The title of the newspaper article should be provided, but let's put this aside for now. As a stopgap, you should now have <ref>''Daily Advertiser'' (Wagga Wagga, NSW), 13 August 1949, page 2</ref>. You should make no attempt to number the footnote; the numbering process will be automated. Click "Show preview". The numbering will be odd; but the numbering aside, does the result seem to be OK? If so, click "Publish changes". Repeat the process, with what's now the lowermost entry. Repeat. Repeat. Repeat. Et cetera. Until the content of the section titled "References" [no need for the colon] is no more than {{Reflist}}

When all of that's done, look for the title of each cited article, and add it. -- Hoary (talk) 22:16, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

This article should be entitled "Jim Grahame"

It seems that he was better known by linked data as Jim Grahame. That is what he is known as in Trove, Viaf, & DNB:

• "Grahame, Jim, 1874-1949". VIAF. 2024-09-04. Retrieved 2025-05-29.
• "Grahame, Jim (1874-1949)". Trove. Retrieved 2025-05-29.
• "Grahame, Jim" (in German). Deutsche Nationalbibliothek. 2025-03-24. Retrieved 2025-05-29.

Indeed, the very first citation in the draft identifies him as Jim Grahme:

• "Jim Grahame". AustLit: Discover Australian Stories. Retrieved 2025-05-29.

Peaceray (talk) 17:46, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Also has a WorldCat Entities ID (P10832)

• "Jim Grahame". WorldCat Entities. Retrieved 2025-05-29.

Peaceray (talk) 18:03, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

He even autographs his pictures as "Jim Grahame".

• upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/a/ae/20250529190900%21Jim_Grahame_photographed_by_Ken_Cunningham.jpg

Peaceray (talk) 19:46, 29 May 2025 (UTC)

Please see WP:COMMONNAME. Peaceray (talk) 06:30, 30 May 2025 (UTC)

Most of the sources refer to Gordon. Grahame was one of three pen names. I would name the article James Gordon with a redirect from Jim Grahame. ash (talk) 15:03, 2 June 2025 (UTC)

Personal letters

@RomeoHT:: if you've got more information about the letters, add it below and we can work on improving the references.

• Personal letter from Henry Lawson, posted Coolac, NSW March 22 1920

• Family letter to Phillipa Hollenkamp (Jim’s great-grand-daughter) Fri 24 April 2009

- ash (talk) 12:55, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

Requested move 3 June 2025

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. There is a clear consensus that "Jim Grahame" is the common name here, so much so that the only editor to disagree tried moving it already. (closed by non-admin page mover) Toadspike [Talk] 16:24, 16 June 2025 (UTC)

---

James Gordon (poet) → Jim Grahame – Jim Grahame is clearly the common name.

• The following linked databases identify him as Jim Grahame:
  • "Grahame, Jim (1874-1949)". Trove. Retrieved 2025-06-03.
  • "Grahame, Jim, 1874-1949". VIAF. 2025-06-03. Retrieved 2025-06-03.
  • "Grahame, Jim" (in German). Deutsche Nationalbibliothek. 2025-03-24. Retrieved 2025-06-03.
  • "Jim Grahame". WorldCat Entities. 1949-08-12. Retrieved 2025-06-03.
  • "Jim Grahame". AustLit: Discover Australian Stories. 1949-08-12. Retrieved 2025-06-03.
• The photo in the Infobox comes from a web page identifying him as Jim Grahame: "Jim Grahame / Ken Cunningham. Photograph - 1940-1949". Trove. Retrieved 2025-06-03.
• There is a page for Jim Grahame on Facebook.
• Searches on WorldCat:
  • search.worldcat.org/search?q=au%3AJim+Grahame&author=Grahame%2C+Jim: Five items associated with Jim Grahame.
  • search.worldcat.org/search?q=au%3AJames+William+Gordon+&author=Gordon%2C+James&limit=10&offset=11 returns no items associated with James William Gordon nor is there anything with both Australia and James Gordon.
  • search.worldcat.org/search?q=au%3AJim+Gordon+&author=Gordon%2C+Jim returns nothing associated with an Australian Jim Gordon.
  • search.worldcat.org/search?q=au%3ABalm+Oral&offset=1 returns nothing with an author name of Balm Oral.
  • search.worldcat.org/search?q=au%3APoor+Hawk&offset=1 returns nothing with an author name of Poor Hawk.

I can only come to the conclusion that Jim Grahame is the subject's WP:COMMONNAME. Peaceray (talk) 19:21, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

I have no problem with that, it all looks rather convincing. Theroadislong (talk) 19:38, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

Hardly. These searches don't tell us what he was called at the time only what databases that would favour his literary name have him listed as. Would we make the same argument if he had kept either of the names Balm Oral or Poor Hawk. Or is just the fact that Jim Grahame resembles a "real" name that the suggestion is that this be the page name? ash (talk) 01:07, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

I concur KylieTastic (talk) 20:10, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

Of course. -- Hoary (talk) 22:49, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

Disagree As background, I converted all but four of the sources to actual citations and looked up all of the URLs. The guy was called Jim Gordon, and Grahame was only a pen name. Suggest search actual Trove articles. Gordon also had life and family outside poetry (including a daughter and two sons who served in WWII including one who died). I've previous suggested that you create a "Jim Grahame" page and redirect it here. Either way, a redirection will be needed so why move it?! (Personally, I would leave it the way the page creator suggested.) - 00:36, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

ash (talk) 00:36, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

My interpretation of Wikipedia:Naming conventions (people) and this part and this one of Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography is that the article's title should be prescribed by the instruction "The name used most often to refer to a person in reliable sources is generally the one that should be used as the article title, even if it is not the person's 'real' name". (Thus for example "Lewis Carroll" is an article about the person who lived as Charles Lutwidge Dodgson and who even published books under the latter name.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:58, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

Yes, and my point is he is referred to as Jim Gordon in most references. The publication of his poems don't count because those are primary sources and they don't "discuss" him. He wasn't Lewis Carroll or Dr Seuss. He was a man that most of us never heard of before @RomeoHT created the page so the only way to find out is to look at sources from the day, not how other databases just like this one have listed him. ash (talk) 03:51, 4 June 2025 (UTC) ash (talk) 03:51, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

Mmemaigret who pipes their user name as ash: So you are more authoritative than the National Library of Australia, Deutschen Nationalbibliothek, & WorldCat?

His obituary names him as Jim Grahame:

• "'Jim Grahame' Dies at Leeton; Well-known Australian Poet". Narandera Argus and Riverina Advertiser. Vol. 72, no. 65. 1949-08-19. p. 4 – via Trove.

Here is a citation that named him as Jim Grahame that you removed with this edit:

• "To Honour Jim Gordon; Excellent Response to Organiser's Mission". The Murrumbidgee Irrigator. Vol. 32, no. 49. 1947-06-27. p. 2 – via Newspapers.com.

It does not matter that he is referred to as Jim Gordon in most references. His personal life would not be notable except for his authorship by the name of Jim Grahame. That is how he is most well known. WP:COMMONNAME is a policy, not an optional choice. This individual is most well known as Jim Grahame, not James Gordon. Peaceray (talk) 05:41, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

You're right. ash (talk) 06:47, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

If you were really trying to find his common name, you would present both sides and not just the material that supports your argument.

This article alone, you've ignored:

"To Honour Jim Gordon: Excellent Response to Organiser's Mission". Murrumbidgee Irrigator. Leeton, New South Wales, Australia. 27 June 1947. Retrieved 2 June 2025.

"Death at Leeton of Poet James Gordon; Wrote as 'Jim Grahame'". Daily Advertiser. Wagga Wagga, NSW. 13 August 1949. p. 2. Retrieved 2 June 2025 – via Trove.

"Wonderful Scenes of Pageantry and Glamorous Music of the Bush; At Gordon Honour Night". The Murrumbidgee Irrigator. Vol. 32, no. 94. 2 December 1947. p. 2 – via Newspapers.com. ash (talk) 02:16, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

Noting that with this edit on their talk page, RomeoHT wrote:

Happy for the name to be changed to Jim Grahame.........think either will work ok.

Does the listing on the WP page "List of Australian Poets" need to be changed accordingly (and then linked to Jim's page?) - not sure that the link is there yet.......??

Really pleased to see Jim on the list - we feel it is an important addition.

Thanks for everybody's help

Peaceray (talk) 07:06, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

Page moved per consensus. ash (talk) 06:59, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

@Mmemaigret: Reverted. The discussion will be closed by an uninvolved editor after at least seven days have passed; the article should not be moved while the discussion is ongoing. Please see WP:RM. 162 etc. (talk) 16:12, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

Sorry, my bad. ash (talk) 02:18, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Yes yes, I already know

Despite not being Australian and having spent very little time in Australia, I know that NSW stands for New South Wales and I know that this is in Australia. And I know that Sydney is in Australia. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that either name was also employed elsewhere in the "dominions"; but it's blazingly obvious to me that, unless noted to the contrary, a reference to either in an article about an Australian versifier is a reference to the well-known one in Australia. When I'm reminded that it's in Australia, then (regardless of the writer's innocent intentions) my intelligence is insulted. Can't these reminders be dispensed with? -- Hoary (talk) 23:11, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

Who and what are you responding to? ash (talk) 00:52, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

What I am responding to: The frequent (and to me, entirely superfluous) reminders in the article that NSW and Sydney are in Australia (plus other, similar, but less frequent reminders). Who I am responding to: The person who put in all those reminders. Who I am addressing: Anyone sufficiently interested in this article to read its talk page. -- Hoary (talk) 01:35, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

In the article itself, I only see an instance of what you are in the infobox. If you are referring to the citations, well, that's probably a function of the software that creates the citations. I do not see much relief there. Peaceray (talk) 07:16, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

If the citations are created by software, then the software is oddly inconsistent, wavering between "NSW" and "New South Wales". Anyway, Peaceray, software-created citations can easily be "manually" rewritten. -- Hoary (talk) 12:23, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

@Hoary: Wikipedia:Citing sources#Generally considere helpful allows for imposing one style on an article with inconsistent citation styles & making citations added by other editors match the existing style, so feel free to rectify the situation. Peaceray (talk) 16:34, 4 June 2025 (UTC)

But why? Just like the name change, this just seems to be more about you winning a point. The system puts in that numbering in visual editing. If you're an experienced editor, you know this. It's the difference between convenience and efficiency. Surely you can insert different labels, but why? - ash (talk) 02:02, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

I am not sure why you are bringing up numbering here, which had not been mentioned earlier. If you are referring to changes edits that I had made such as changing ":5"→"Stewart 1947", I had explained this in the edit summary: as per Wikipedia:Citing sources#Generally considered helpful: 'replacing opaque named-reference names with conventional ones, such as "Einstein-1905" instead of ":27"'.

The only winning that I am interested in is improving the article consistent with English Wikipedia policies & guidelines, which should be a win for us all. Peaceray (talk) 16:35, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

You're talking about the citations? I agree Sydney should be known but I don't think NSW is widely known outside Australia, NZ and probably the UK. But if I'm adding the location in the citation (because it's not clear from the newspaper/journal), I usually put in a fuller location independently of what's in the article or in other citations. Also, in Australia most people would not know where Leeton is and there are numerous place names that exist in multiple states, hence the state. - ash (talk) 02:12, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

Mmemaigret, I'm talking about the citations, and not about their numbering. (Incidentally, though I'm an experienced editor, I know nothing about visual editing and hope that I have never suggested that I do.) Yes, either "Leeton, New South Wales" or "Leeton, NSW" is an improvement over plain "Leeton"; but should it also be explained that New South Wales aka NSW is in Australia? (My suggestion is no it needn't.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:06, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

Numbering: Sorry @Hoary, that numbering comment was directed at Peaceray.

Location: Yeah, I see your point - in my case, I include Australia because that's the approach I would take generally but if someone's reading an article about an Australia subject, I suppose we can expect them to either know or figure it out. ash (talk) 09:02, 5 June 2025 (UTC)

Letters

How may a reader of this Wikipedia article consult the "Personal letter from Henry Lawson, posted Coolac, NSW March 22 1920", or the (anonymous?) "Family letter to Phillipa Hollenkamp (Jim’s great-grand-daughter)"? -- Hoary (talk) 23:11, 3 June 2025 (UTC)

Btw: I created a topic for this above. Like everything on Wikipedia, it's temporary but it's a signpost of what needs to be perfected. If you delete the information, no one will know where the fact came from and next thing, someone will put a "citations needed" template. I'm being pragmatic - since the page is new, I suggest that we try to find copies of the letter, for example in a book. They can also be put below in the primary sources or in notes to show that they're not reliable but I don't see the point in deleting them and losing the info. -ash (talk) 00:21, 4 June 2025 (UTC)