This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current main page.
Use of this notice board
I'm not sure what should go on the notice board and what should go on the Talk page. Maybe discussion and debate should be on Talk and once consensus is reached, the agreed convention detailed here. Let's start by using the notice board as the discussion page. If need be we can always move stuff to the Talk page later as this page evolves. I'll kick things off by moving here sections from Talk:New Zealand that are not about the New Zealand article and are better here. Will reformat the sections a little. Nurg 07:44, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Need policy on places and naming (from Talk:New Zealand)
(Discussion moved here from Talk:New Zealand 07:44, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC).)
It would be nice if we could agree on a policy for naming and classifying places in New Zealand. There seem to be two major problems:
article scope: some names refer to areas of different scales, centred on the same place, for example "Wellington" can refer to the city council area, the built-up urban area, the four cities or the area covered by the regional council
the term "city": it's ambiguous, it refers to (a) a populated place of a certain size (e.g. Rotorua); and (b) the administrative area of a city council (e.g. Waitakere).
One solution is to write several articles for each place: Wellington (city council area); Wellington (urban area); Wellington (region). The problem with this approach is that the interesting content will migrate to one article, and the remainder will be nothing more than stubs.
I'd favour a solution where we merge all articles for a single place into a single article, introduced by a section that outlines the variations in usage. This is consistent with the approach used by most other articles that have a number of related meanings, see God for instance.
The term "city"
I'd like to see something like "Rotorua is a city in the central North Island of New Zealand. It is administered by the Rotorua District Council." I don't see this as a contradiction.
I would like to use "city" as an informal word meaning "a town of a certain size" without necessarily conveying any legal status. On the other hand, there are times where it is important to distinguish between a local authority and an urbanised area, so I think we need terms that make this clear. I would suggest:
city council (or city council area)
urban area
For example:
Nelson is a city at the north of the South Island of New Zealand. Nelson has an urban area population of 57,700 and a city council population of 44,400.
One advantage of these terms is that they are accurate. The term "urban area" is used by Statistics New Zealand to define the urban population of the country independent of city and district council boundaries. "City council" is wordy but avoids confusion. Imagine trying to convince an Aucklander that the biggest city in New Zealand has only 400,000 people.
Ben Arnold 05:00, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)
Note further that many of our bigger places now have a cleverly-designed and well-executed table that pulls together the region and urban area and similar ideas. Robin Patterson 22:33, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Adding ", New Zealand" to names
This has been touched on from time to time. There's no overall WP standard, except things like "Article title should be the name the thing is commonly called".
A few months ago there was an unopposed move to cut the "NZ" off the names of NZ places that are either unique (e.g. Wainuiomata) or easily the most prominent one in the world (e.g. Auckland).
Now there may be another Lake Pukaki somewhere, but I rather doubt it. World Lakes doesn't think there is. My first 69 hits on Google looking for "Pukaki" were all in NZ, mostly around the lake but a few in a Manukau locality. If we add "nz" to it, we have to do lots more typing and/or pasting every time we make a reference to it, AND we are not using its common name.
Agree. And now User Nevillednz is adding ', New Zealand' to lots of unambiguous articles. dramatic 18:07, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Maori Wikipedia (from Talk:Wikipedians/New Zealand)
(Discussion moved here from Wikipedia_talk:Wikipedians/New_Zealand 07:44, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC).)
Hello, fellow-kiwis! To those of you who haven't been harangued already: please have a look at the Maori Wikipedia - so that you can at least say you are aware of it and can urge your Maori acquaintances to look at it. At present, over 90% of the 40-odd articles have been created by someone whose Maori extends to watching Maori Television, speaking half a dozen phrases, recognising 200 words (most of them names of trees), and using two online dictionaries, so it's possible some of you can improve on that! Robin Patterson 22:23, 10 May 2004 (UTC)
Yeah I saw that, it's good to see it out there in the Real World :-) Sadly I know even less Maori than your current contributors (although I do occasionally watch MTS). But you have to remember that something like this begins slowly, then eventually starts to see exponential growth. Hopefully you'll get more contributors soon! (And hey, maybe even more use of Maori in NZ!) --Ejrh 10:49, 2004 May 12 (UTC)
January 2005 update
Now over 200 articles, but still only a handful written or added to by anyone seeming to be comfortable and/or competent using the language. I've learnt a bit about chemical elements (e.g. nickel) since I got a new dictionary for Christmas! Lists and suchlike are really pretty easy to do for those of us who have very little grammar but can use dictionaries and the English Wikipedia.
Have another look every so often, please, fellow-Kiwis! Robin Patterson 07:44, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Hey, folks, now definitely not enough Kiwis in Wikipedia Maori - main contributors recently, apart from yours truly, are Taiwanese and Spanish. Robin Patterson 12:23, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Grammar and Te Reo Maori words (from Talk:New Zealand)
(Discussion moved here from Talk:New Zealand 07:44, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC).)
As someone who is currently working in New Zealand as a journalist (although not a New Zealander by birth), I have been told that when using Te Reo Maori words (such as Maori, kiwi and moa), one does not add an `s' (or anything else) to signify plural. So, one moa, two moa etc. When using the word Kiwi to refer to a New Zealander, this law doesn't apply. Anyway, I have been doing some proofreading and removing any stray s's but if anyone knows of any other Te Reo Maori grammar rules (or if I have misused this rule in anyway), it would be great if they could pass it on.
--Roisterer 02:59, 25 May 2004 (UTC)
Roister, yes, the Maori language doesn't use S`s to signify plurals. Maori words, when spoken in English, have long had S`s affixed to signify plurals. In recent times, it has become politically correct to follow Maori-language conventions when utilising these words when speaking in English. This probably has origins in Maori-speakers using Maori-language conventions while speaking in English (partially through habit, and partially as a statement of strength), and politically-left individuals employing socio-politically conciliatory and affiliatary behaviour in adopting them. Leftist individuals wish to be 'with' Maori interests as they perceive rightists as being anti-Maori. Affixing an S to a Maori-language word is basically a statement of political orientation, because it is not normal practice to be expected to pronounce in English another language's vocabulary in the original pronunciation, accent, and inflexions. Kiwis seems to be excluded from this because it is, in this context, not thought of as being a 'Maori' word; culturally nationalistic Maori(s) disassociate themselves from any notion of being a part of a New Zealand identity.
I agree that using plurals without an "s" is a (relatively) recent development, maybe the last 15 years or so. However...
I believe that no-s is now the generally accepted style for formal written works (journalistic or academic for example)
I disagree that this is a left-vs-right issue
I think there are sound grammatical grounds for the no-s stance
By sound grammatical grounds I am referring to the precedent of the way we adapt words from other languages into English. Many words and phrases (in Greek and Latin in particular) have been co-opted for use in English, and their plural form is retained. Examples are numerous: medium/media, forum/fora, formula/formulae, axis/axes.
Maori is simply being co-opted in the same way. By keeping to Maori grammar for fragments of Maori used in English sentences, it is easier to maintain consistency when longer fragments are used, e.g. Te Reo Maori (instead of Te Maori Reo).
Two more points:
English has words where the plural and singular form are the same (e.g. sheep).
"Kiwis" is different, the word "kiwi" never referred to a New Zealander in the Maori language, the word has been given a new usage. I see no inconsistency in a sentence like the following:
To many Kiwis, kiwi are the most treasured of the New Zealand fauna.
I would definitely agree with this - the main difference between "Maoris" and "Maori" is not one of right versus left. Rather, it's simply one of old versus new. "Maoris", with an S, has been steadily dying out for some time now. "Maori", without an S, is now used quite freely by politicians from both sides of the spectrum - the National and ACT parties seem to use the term quite happily, as can be seen in their speeches and manifestos. Even Don Brash's speech at Orewa (which was hardly pandering to the "politically correct" sections of political debate) used "Maori" over "Maoris". -- Vardion 08:06, 25 May 2004 (UTC)
I would agree with both these comments, there is no right and no wrong, there is no law about it. But leaving out the s from plurals is generally acceptable and actually feels better when speaking. Roisterer you probably already know this; but Maori indicate plurals by changing the article, te for singular the and nga for a plural the. Hence no need to modify the noun. ping 08:17, 25 May 2004 (UTC)
Fisheries management (from Talk:New Zealand)
(Discussion moved here from Talk:New Zealand 07:44, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC).)
I'm thinking of creating a page for NZ's bit of the Fisheries management subject - this vast subject (where we have the 4th-largest EEZ in the world, and where a mere 20% of the "quota" - the specifically Maori share - has produced voluminous reports and expensive lawsuits over about 15 years and MAY soon be settled by Parliament). Any ideas for the best name for the page? Any other countries got anything similar? (Nothing obvious on "Fishery") Robin Patterson 06:08, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Categories for NZ, NZ locations, etc (from Talk:New Zealand)
(Discussion moved here from Talk:New Zealand 07:44, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC).)
Suggestions re category for towns
Alexandra and Dunedin (examples) do not have categories, but Opotiki and Hamilton (examples) both have Category: Locations in New Zealand. Should all NZ towns/cities be given that category, or is there a better one? Suggestions? Cheers. Moriori 22:10, Aug 28, 2004 (UTC)
The Locations in New Zealand and similar categories seem to be a bit confused at the moment. There's New Zealand, New Zealand Geography, Locations in New Zealand... With the large number of recent items on the southern South Island, it has made sense to start categories for Otago, Southland, and the West Coast. Perhaps it would be best to have towns and cities linked to categories for their regions, then link the regional categories and any trans-regional categories (e.g., Rivers of New Zealand) linked together into one all-encompassing New Zealand Geography category, itself a subcategory of the overall category New Zealand. Remove the Locations of New Zealand category altogether, since it just seems to double up on others. Just my 2/5 of a tuatara. Grutness 05:07, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
There is now a category Cities and towns in New Zealand. This should solve the initial problem. Grutness 07:04, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
"Hypercategory" and "subcategories"
Over the past week or so, I've been giving a lot of thought to the New Zealand and New Zealand locations categories and how they overlap. I know I'm new here and don't want to come across bouncing on anyone's toes like a deranged tigger, but I think I've hit on a possible solution to this which also makes the categorising of New Zealand pages a lot more logical - I'd appreciate some feedback on it (for that purpose I'm putting this argument on a couple of different discussion pages in the hope that more people see it.
IMO, the New Zealand category is the top category - a hypercategory covering all NZ pages. It should have several subcategories, including the NZ locations one - others could include NZ history, NZ Maori, NZ politics, NZ arts and literature, NZ people, NZ sport etc. Each of those could then have its own subcategories: NZ locations could have NZ islands, NZ mountains, NZ rivers, Canterbury, Taranaki, Otago, etc.; NZ history could have Pre-European history, 19th century history, NZ at war, plus a link to NZ people and NZ politics, etc.; NZ Maori could have Maoritanga, Maori folklore and legends, Pre-European History, Maori and politics, etc.; and so on.
About 90% of the straggly articles currently cluttering up the lists at New Zealand and New Zealand locations would then find natural homes in the subcategories. Only articles which didn't belong in any category, or covered several categories, would need to be listed there. The hypercategories would become simply the lower part of a tree that branches into more readily understandable branches. It wouldn't take much work - simply recategorising the pages currently listing only to New Zealand which should go into subcategories, and slowly adding other pages found to the categories to which they belong. Grutness 00:08, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
This suggestion is so sensible that I have to wonder why it hasn't been done before. Go for it.
ping 06:36, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Me too, providing there's a logical flowchart which everyone can follow. Some of the amendments to categories on NZ articles lately have been plain daft. And Hey Ping, where have you been? Fishing, you lucky bugger? Ka kite. Moriori 08:07, Oct 31, 2004 (UTC)
OK - I'll leave it a couple of days to see whether anyone's got any good reason against it, and if no-one seems anti the idea then I'll start moving things. as for a flow chart, I'm pretty sure it'll become obvious pretty quickly where things would go. Even if the New Zealand category becomes a temporary holding category for new articles until someone else wikifies them fully - sort of the warehouse floor from which someone with a forklift comes and hoists them into place - then it'll be an improvement. Grutness 09:47, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Categories revamp
Well... the revamp mentioned in "Hypercategories..." above has started. My aim is to get the following done with the geographical items.
The New Zealand category will have one subcategory, New Zealand geography for all geographical articles. Hopefully, other categories such as New Zealand history, New Zealand culture and the like will make the main category of New Zealand as a sort of root directory.
Each of these categories will have further subcategories - New zealand culture, for example, might have New Zealand art, New Zealand sport, and New Zealand cuisine as subcategories. The New Zealand geography category - which I'm working on at present - will contain, as articles, all the "lists of" articles (list of rivers, list of lakes, etc.), plus the articles named New Zealand geography, North Island, and South Island. This category will have, as subcategories, things like New Zealand rivers, New Zealand coastline, and New Zealand locations.
This last category (probably better titled New Zealand regions, but I'm chary about renaming categories) will contain one subdirectory for each of the traditional regions of New Zealand. At the moment, there are directories there for Otago, Southland, Canterbury, West Coast, Nelson, Marlborough, Auckland, Waikato, and Northland. At the moment, it's also a "holding pen" for articles that haven't yet got regional categories (e.g., Rangitikei River).
If anyone has any suggestions about this, please comment quickly, before I get too far into this!
Grutness 07:55, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Hi there! I've just hit upon this page now. I am wondering about the traditional regions named above and I have a question. Where do Wellington, Manawatu, Taranaki, Bay of Plenty, Coromandel and East Coast fit? Also, I am the type of person that would really benefit from a tree or flowchart for NZ categories. Does this exist? I see that there was talk of one. Thanks, Mona-Lynn 20:05, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Have a look in Category: Locations in New Zealand and you will see the full list of 17 subcategories as finally created. Actually, it's worth listing here as well. The region categories are:
Geographical categories now more logical (I hope!)
Well, it's taken a **** of a lot of work (much more than I thought), but finally New Zealand's places have a logical categorisation system. It works like this.
Every "place" article in New Zealand should have (read "hopefully, eventually will have") a minimum of two categories: a location and a type. Thus, for instance, Clutha River is in both the Otago and New Zealand rivers categories. This means that all New Zealand places can be selected based on what they are or by where they are. Some places, of course, will need more than two (if a river flows through two regions, or is a river running through a cave, for instance).
The New Zealand category (a sort of root menu) has as a subcategory New Zealand geography. This has further subcategories - NZ lakes, rivers, islands, etc., etc... and New Zealand locations. The New Zealand locations category has 17 subcategories for different parts of the country - 10 N.I. regions, 6 S.I. regions, plus "outlying islands".
So far, the main missing category is one for NZ towns, cities, and settlements - which I suspect will have a lot of articles in it. Other than that, it's a case of hunting down uncategorised articles and categorising them, and categorising any new articles.
Apart from that, it's a case of trying to make other sections of the New Zealand root category as logical (NZ history, politics, natural history, culture, etc.). Grutness 06:38, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
PS: At the moment, it's more important to get things categorised by location than type - it's easier to track places down and note what kind of places they are later than the other way round! Grutness 09:30, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Maori phrasebook - merge, or not? (from Talk:New Zealand)
(Discussion moved here from Talk:New Zealand 07:44, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC).)
It might be useful to merge Maori Phrasebook [1] from Wikitravel into Maori_language here on Wikipedia. Any comments? Moriori 00:20, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)
A large portion of it would be great here. (Are we allowed to have lots of it in BOTH places?) Robin Patterson 03:18, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
Answering myself, it seems we are NOT: different "permission" rules. Robin Patterson 07:44, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Waka - what should we call an article on our one (from Talk:New Zealand)
(Discussion moved here from Talk:New Zealand 07:44, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC).)
I think it's time we had an article devoted to "our" waka. Only question - what should we call it?
Waka (New Zealand) (my preference)?
Waka (Polynesia) (in case nearby languages use the same word)?
Alternatives could include Waka (transport) (rather than "canoe" - bearing in mind the 21st-century meaning "car"), but that moves away from the "tribal affiliation" concept. Robin Patterson 21:47, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Waka (New Zealand sounds fine with me, plus a redirect from Waka (Maori) -- New Zealand instead of Maori because it wasn't only Maori who had waka, Moriori did too. The Waka link should not go direct to Japanese poems, but to the disambiguation page. Moriori 23:34, Oct 21, 2004 (UTC)
I'd recommend something like Waka (tribal grouping). Disambiguation text typically clarifies meaning rather than just describing usage patterns.We have Jaffa (insult) rather than Jaffa (New Zealand). This also avoids the problem if it turns out that other countries in the pacific have waka too. Besides the term waka has two main meanings in New Zealand, "tribal grouping" and "canoe". "Canoe" is probably covered adequately by a link to the canoe page from the disambiguation page, but if someone wrote in detail about Maori canoes there could be a page Waka (canoe). Ben Arnold 00:51, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Point taken -- I'd agree on Waka (canoe). Incidentally Tahitians use the name Vaka and the Hawaiians use Va'a. Cheers Moriori 01:19, Oct 22, 2004 (UTC)
Sounds good to me. Ben Arnold 04:27, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Are/were all waka canoes or are some catamarans? Hec Busby's Te Aurere is sometimes called a cat and sometimes a double-hulled canoe, for example. I don't know which is technically correct. Nurg 06:22, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Are/were all waka canoes or are some catamarans? Yes, yes, yes and yes, and trimarans too!
Waka are canoes
Waka are catamarans (some of them)
Waka were canoes
Waka were catamarans (some of them)
Waka can be trimarans of sorts (with double outrigger)
Seems like we desperately need a comprehensive article on Waka (canoe). Busby's craft was whatever the media decided to call it on any given day. It had a motor too, which the media made fun of, but so too did Peter Blake's round-the-world yacht. Hope you had a great night last night too. <g> - Moriori 20:30, Oct 23, 2004 (UTC)
So should it be "Waka (watercraft)" or "Waka (vessel)" or similar? Not sure I'd lose too much sleep over "Waka (canoe)" though. Nurg 02:57, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Over a month with no further comments, so, considering what appeared to be a consensus of sorts, the links now point to the (currently non-existent) page Waka (canoe). I was getting fed up with articles pointing to Japanese poetry! [[User:Grutness|Grutnesstalk]] 20:22, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Cleanups and overlap with Project:New Zealand
First, well done Nurg for the idea of this noticeboard! It's good to have a place to call home!
And now, the bad news... I've found three NZ articles that I know little about that need a cleanup (I've marked them as such):
List of hospitals in New Zealand. This list has five hospitals on it. I know there have been cut-backs in health spending, but that's ridiculous.
Longer list now, but still plenty missing, and in no logical order [[User:Grutness|Grutnesstalk]]
Opotiki. Interesting one this. A reasonable article with a list of reminiscences from a local at the end of it. It seems a shame to dump 'em, but should they be here?
Reminiscences now gone [[User:Grutness|Grutnesstalk]]
Anyone willing to help? Grutness 10:25, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I'm afraid that might be a bit over my head, but what about drawing up a list of work that needs to be done? The Australian, UK and Canadian noticeboards have all done this, and it creates a good basis to work from and find holes in Wikipedia's coverage of that country. And plus, it might just give some of us outsiders who'd be willing to help something to work on! Ambi 11:53, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
We have some of this already at Wikipedia:WikiProject:New Zealand , perhaps we need to work out what the difference is between the areas. SimonLyall 13:36, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Oh dear. And this was pre-existing? The two formats (notice boards and WikiProjects) really duplicate each others, and in my experience, this way has been more effective. I've managed to stop the Australians and the Canadians from forking, but it's a bit more complicated if the WikiProject already exists - because then there's two places doing exactly the same thing. Ambi 22:34, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Bother. Indeed the project is doing a lot of what I envisaged the notice board doing, and what other regional notice boards do. Sorry I've inadvertently forked, Simon. Maybe there is a place for both but we need to decide clearly what the role of each should be, so that the right things go in the right place. I note that WikiProject:New Zealand is the only project on a present-day country per se, although a number deal with subnational subdivisions. Maybe the Wikipedia:Regional_notice_boards article gives us food for though as we discuss what to do now we've forked. Nurg 01:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Sorry if it was partly my fault for saying "Good idea, go for it" as far as this board was concerned :( Grutness
Maori Wars? New Zealand Wars? Land Wars?
I've been slowly discovering a heap of uncategorised articles on the NZ wars of the 19th century (e.g., Invasion of the Waikato). Whenever I find one, I've been giving it the categories of Category: Maori and Category: History of New Zealand, but I'm beginning to think there are enough of them that they deserve their own category. Anyone have any opinions as to whether they do, and if they do, what it should be called?
BTW, I suspect they're all by the same Wikipedian, because they all misspell James Belich as "James Bellich" in their list of source materials. Grutness 09:17, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
I'd suggest you create a Category:New Zealand land wars or similar as a subcategory of Category:History of New Zealand. Please don't call it "Maori wars".-gadfium 18:19, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Sounds good to me. The only reason why I wondered about "Maori Wars" is that it is the title of the main article about the land wars. Grutness 23:16, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
There is now a Category:New Zealand land wars containing 14 articles, which is a subcategory of both Category: Maori and Category: History of New Zealand. Interesting articles. Not 100% NPOV (difficult with this subject), and heavily leaning towards Belich's research, but very interesting. Grutness 23:44, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
See also further discussion about the name of the main article at Talk:Maori_Wars. Nurg 08:50, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
US skilled Migrants, help me build an argument for moving to NZ
Hi,
At least half (if you believe the e-vote fraud accusations it's more than half) of Americans revile GW Bush, and many of us are seriously considering moving overseas. I put a great deal of effort into anti-war and anti-Bush activities, and am ready to give up in the face of the mass stupidity and unjust policies that a large proportion of my fellow Americans seem to support lustily. I am currently looking into positions in Ireland, France, Holland, Canada and NZ.
My reasons for ranking NZ at the top of my list are your free press (9th most free in the world, I've read), the natural beauty (I grew up in a now despoiled and utterly corrupted Florida coastal beach town), and the fact that while the U.S. government seems to be taking our country backwards to pre-enlightenment ages (where knowledge and science are trumped by religious litmus tests) NZ at least gives lip service to building a knowledge based economy where education and scientific knowledge are not widely reviled. Finally, it seems that NZ social policies are at least moving in a progressive direction. I respected greatly the NZ policy of refusing nuclear armed vessels into her waters. I'm less well educated on the history of western/Maori conflicts and would appreciate any references or links that would provide more information.
The downsides I see include the ozone hole, the distance and isolation (though with the internet that seems to be less a problem), and the paucity of opportunities in the pharmaceutical/biotech fields. Nonetheless, I think that if this a time of growth and movement toward more progressive and technologically advanced society, I'd like to be there to contribute to the turn of events.
I'm open to re-education and will look into any criticisms of my perceptions without prejudice or anger. I just want a more accurate argument for or against moving down there. Any responses would be appreciated, and I ask that you also email them to [email protected]
With warm regards,
Dr. Peter O'Brien
Midwestern US (the mean red middle)
Actually, as far as the ozone hole is concerned, IIRC the US is as likely to be threatened by it soon as NZ. NZ's in a fairly thick ozone band, due to its location in an ocean. Places connected with arctic or antarctic regions by land bridges (and you could vaguely descibe Canada in that way) could end up being more affected by the thinning ozone layer. That's not to say that NZ doesn't have a problem with it - just that very few places outside the tropics aren't going to have problems soon.
Hmm, I'm often seeing articles about how New Zealand's biotech research and manufacturing sector is thriving, despite limitations and controversy over GE. Or as someone in the industry would you put that down to a parochial/optimistic business press? dramatic 22:55, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Aotearoa and Iwi
I was surprised that there was not a separate article on the term Aotearoa. There is now, but it's pretty rudimentary (mainly on possible translations). I'd appreciate it if someone who knows more could have a look at it. Grutness|hello? 07:04, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I've also added a new article List of Maori iwi, which is basically a copy and paste from the Maori language Wikipedia. I'd be grateful if someone who knows more about such things than this ignorant pakeha could have a look and check i haven't done anything too stupid. There are far too many red links, for one thing, but whether they all need to have articles written which ones can be subtly de-linked is beyond my knowledge of Maoritanga. I also don't know how to transfer an image in Maori Wikipedia across into English Wikipedia. Grutness|hello? 01:45, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I think you link to other Maori wikipedia like [[mi:image:blah.jpg]]. The other option would be to just put the image in the Commons.Evil Monkey → Talk 02:58, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)
Okay, that didn't work, so I just uploaded the image to the Commons, as the image in the Maori wikipedia was GNU FDL. Evil Monkey → Talk 05:39, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)
Indeed there are "far too many red links" - but this pakeha (who created the table) can't write much of an article about a tribe that has no website. I'm working on it. The solution is not to delink them but to find someone who can write about them. Robin Patterson 01:12, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I for one have no desire to delink them. I tend to regard red links as red flags to editors saying "Here's something to write about!" Sadly, I don't have enough knowledge of the iwi to do the job, though. Grutness|hello? 00:27, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Kiwi stub
There is now a new template for New Zealand related stub articles. Just add {{kiwi-stub}} to the end of the articles and they'll go in their own separate folder. [[User:Grutness|Grutnesshello?]] 06:46, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Locations Maps of New Zealand towns
I noticed that someone has created a blank map of New Zealand (Image:Position of Gisborne Region.png is one based on it). For US towns (i.e. Maplesville, Alabama) someone has gone through and made a map showing locations. Is there any interest in doing the same thing for NZ?Evil Monkey → Talk 08:31, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)
I started work on an SVG map a while back, but the free svg editor I found is less than wonderful. I haven't output a trial map yet. dramatic 08:35, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Help identifying some rivers
I was on an Air NZ flight from Christchurch to Invercargill and decided to take some photos out of the window of the plane with my digital camera. The problem now is that I have all these images of two rivers and no idea what rivers they are. They are stored at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. At first I thought the large river was the Rakaia but that doesn't seem right as there is no branching before the coast like there should be and it doesn't seem to be the Ashburton which has another river joining it inland that doesn't appear on the images. If you know what rivers they are either leave a message here or on my talk page, so that I can give them proper image titles, and upload the full resolution images to add to the specific article.Evil Monkey → Talk 08:23, Dec 19, 2004 (UTC)
I think you've fallen for the oldest trick in Canterbury geography's bag of tricks. The "two rivers" may be the two halves of the Rangitata River making their way around Rangitata Island. I offer the following as possible evidence:
The northern branch veers south just before reaching the ocean.
The same branch has a large shingle bank on its north shore about five kilometres upstream
The settlement of Coldstream is on the coast just to the north of its mouth.
Against, though, is the fact that the two rivers - although they're getting closer at the top of the image - don't appear to connect up before the mountains. And what's the white "Town" north of the smaller river? Can't think what else it would be, though. [[User:Grutness|Grutnesshello?]] 12:30, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Thanks. It occurred to me that I had taken a couple more photos of Temuka as we flew over and when I looked at these you can place the narrower of the two rivers as being just north of the Opihi River which means the large one in the Rangitata River, though doesn't explain the lack on an island (?). Now just have to find out the name of the river in between the Opihi and the Rangitata.
It is always amazing to me just how hard it is to identify things from the air. I've lived in Invercargill all my life but everytime I fly into it I can never identify anything and always get utterly lost. Doesn't help of course that your only a couple of hundred metres up at that stage and moving rather fast. Evil Monkey → Talk 20:54, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)
The other river would be the Orari River, which means the white "town" is probably Clandeboye (Clandeboyes?). Still not 100% convinced though... Either the south branch of the river is missing, or the "Orari" is the south branch and the island's too big. I know what you mean about spotting things from the air, too - it can be very frustrating trying to work out what you're looking at. [[User:Grutness|Grutnesshello?]]
And another river!
Another mystery river, uploaded by me to 1. I'm 99% sure it's the Rangitikei just below Bulls, but I'd like to make that 100% - it's on the same roll of film as photos of the volcanicplateau and Palmerston North, so it's in that part of the country. If you can help out, please let me know, and I'll addf the image to the rlevant pages. (oh, and PS - happy Christmas!) Grutness|hello? 00:09, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Sigh... I find out for certain it is the Rangitikei - one day after it's removed from Wikipedia for not being linked to anything (I'm about to reload it as "Rangitikei.jpg"). Grutness|hello? 03:59, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Does anyone know who many Air NZ sightseeing flights to the Antartic preceded flight 901?Evil Monkey → Talk 04:39, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
It was mentioned in the book White Out which I read a couple of years ago. I'll see if I still have my copy since moving. dramatic 19:45, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Thanks. The answer is actually for a quiz but also after not being able to find the info anywhere on the internet it should be added to Wikipedia.Evil Monkey → Talk 20:18, Jan 1, 2005 (UTC)
Went and found a copy of the November 28, 2004 Press (think it was that date) which included as part of their 25th anniversary stuff a copy of the front page of the 1979 Press which included the fact it was the 14th such flight. Added to this the article and also sent off my Quiz answers to the Southland Times. First prize for the most correct is $200 Whitcoulles vouchers. Out of the 105 questions, I'm certain that I've got 100 are right so I'll keep you posted to how well I do. If I win and they ask me where I got my answers from I'll try to plug Wikipedia. Evil Monkey → Talk 08:52, Jan 5, 2005 (UTC)
New Zealand humour
Who else thinks that New Zealand humour should be about humour/jokes by New Zealanders, not the sort of jokes about us heard across the Tasman? Any volunteers for a rewrite? dramatic 02:42, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
What's there now should probably remain as a very small subsection of the main article (called something like "New Zealand as the object of humour") - with perhaps a note that these are actually jokes about Australia that have simply had the country name changed by Aussies! :) It also needs, once rewritten, to have a "NZ Culture" category tag. Grutness|hello? 03:42, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
List of countries by coverage on Wikipedia
I stumbled across List of countries by coverage on Wikipedia at New Pages on a Vandalism patrol. Australia has 0.9 pages per capita and New Zealand has 2.4 pages per capita. We are beating the Aussies! Keep up the good work. Alan Liefting 22:53, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Having a cursory glance at that page, I suspect that on a per capita basis NZ is second only to Ireland in the whole world. Nothing new - NZ usually punches well above its weight. Nurg 07:19, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Te Ara Encyclopedia of New Zealand
This online encyclopedia was launched today [2], and might be worth bookmarking for cross-checking New Zealand information against.
On a related note, exactly what does (NZ) Crown Copyright mean? There's an explanation at [3] but I'm not going to try to interpret that in the context of using stuff on Wikipedia by myself.-gadfium 07:48, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Crown copyright information on this website may be used for personal and non-commercial purposes. According to Wikipedia:Copyright_FAQ#Non-commercial_licenses, information under a non commercial license is not allowed. It can still be used as Fair Use if it qualifies. Evil Monkey∴Hello 08:21, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)
I'll be WEBless for 4 days
So would someone please have a look at our Maori kid brother organisation now and again?
It doesn't get much vandalism, actually. It does get the occasional "contribution" (in one language or two) that adds little apparent value, in which case I usually send a friendly greeting to the contributor (registered or anonymous), fix anything seriously bad, and add a bit of wikifying in the hope that someone else will do a proper improvement job one day.
Fortunately, an overwhelming majority of the contributions have been worthwhile, if a trifle skimpy for the most part. And all but a couple of the criticisms of my contributions have been from anonymous people.
Not a very good one, but iit's better than nothing. Hopefully someone can replace it with something better later. Grutness|hello? 06:00, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Appealing for photos of works (or anything related) to the architect Frank/Francis/FW Petre, I want to try and have this featured,(after a lot more work and expamning) but it needs some colour photos. I'm currently trying to have Benjamin Mountfort featured here [4] but again without the photos its a bit dodgy, although in this case, personally, I think the Victorian photos show off the work better than modern, but Petre's work is lighter and brighter so modern photos are really needed. Thanks Giano 10:06, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I went round and took some photos today, but since I still use a film camera, you'll have to wait until the film's finished and developed (probably within the week). Grutness|hello? 05:40, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
That's really great, thanks a lot - No worries - or hurry! My day job is interfering with my editing at the moment! Can you leave a message on my talk page when they are uploaded? Giano 16:19, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Hello I live in Senlis (France). Please can someone of New Zealand take some photos of the Ongaonga ( Urtica ferox) for Wikipedia? It grows in the South island and in east of the North island. Thanks.
I've added one to the Commons. -- Avenue 14:15, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC) Ongaonga leaves and hairs
Thank you, Avenue for your contribution on wiki. Don't hesitate if you have of other photograph of the wonderful forest of New Zealand (tree ferns, araucaria, nothofagus ...) :). Pixeltoo 00:30, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Koha
Discovered a very messy, uncategorised article on Koha (custom) - I've had a go at tidying it up, but I'd be grateful if someone who knows more about Maori customs could have a look at it and see if it needs anything done to it. Grutness|hello? 01:17, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Wellington
Is there a possibility someone may have (a non copyright) or be able to take a photograph (or several) of the Cathedral of the Sacred Heart, Wellington [9] for the Francis Petre article which I am trying to write to featured article status. Grutness has taken some brilliant shots of Petre's work in Dunedin. I really want to get some New Zealand architecture on the main page, and this example of F W Petre's palladian work is essential to that aim. Giano 18:49, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
It's not much, but it's something. Silenceisfoo 05:42, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
That's a great foto - thanks. I'm really pressed for time at the moment but I hope to have time towards the end of next week, and the week after to add it, finish Francis Petre, and then have time to watch and nurture it through the featured article process, in the meantime if any of you New Zealanders can expand anything further that would be great, I've never been within a thousand miles of NZ and it could be full of geographical or obvious mistakes! (my English grammar's not too hot either) All (printable) suggestions welcome! Giano | Talk 21:27, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hei matau
Hello! Could some NZers please have a look at hei matau? I did an edit of it the other day but I'm not sure about some of the facts. First, it mentions Maori art collectives as being the carvers, but hei matau are obviously also carved by lots of people who are not Maori or members of art collectives, right? Also, does some of the whale bone come from legally-caught whales? I thought whaling was illegal altogether. Or does some of it come from whales taken by Norwegians, Japanese, etc.? Any other facts to correct or add? Article was written by a non-NZer (I think). Thanks, Mona-Lynn 09:53, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
There is no legal whaling in NZ. From what I gather (others here may know more) Maori have first claim on the skeletons (maybe just the jawbones?) of any beached whales that die before they can be refloated. I'll add that to the article - if I'm wrong please correct me!I notice the information about the Maori legend if the discovery of New Zealand is a little off as well, so I'm correcting that, too. Grutness|hello? 10:58, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I've just added a couple of lines to "2005_in_New_Zealand". Where are all the NZ WP sports fans and culture vultures? Newspaper readers? Have a go, folks, before the papers get thrown away.
More good news relating to WP: last month the weekly newsletter that goes to all interested Xtra subscribers mentioned WP in two successive issues, and yesterday (Sunday) it listed a link to mi:Wikipedia:Community Portal as I had requested.
Robin Patterson 11:25, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Plus there's an article in the April Netguide magazine. dramatic 21:42, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Current events in Australia and New Zealand
This is a new specialisation of Current events. Please help to keep it populated with news events from New Zealand.-gadfium 23:20, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Ongoing problems with the 111 service
I've written a list of incidents causing concern about the 1-1-1 service at New Zealand Police. Is this the most appropriate place for it? The 1-1-1 article is providing practical advice for people who might want to ring the number; adding details of past bungles seems out of place there, but it isn't really in keeping with the Police article either. Each incident is insufficiently important by itself to go into 2005 in New Zealand but they add up to a significant issue which has been embarrassing to the police, and the police Minister. I'm wondering whether we should have a section on election year controversies in New Zealand general election 2005 which this would fit into.-gadfium 23:20, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hi, does anyone travel through or live by Porters pass in the South Island, it is one of the few good locations for Montigena, a rare(ish) native legume. I would like a photo for an article. I have GPS co-ordinates for some known locations. [10] - scroll down on this page. Onco p53 02:45, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
My night panorama of Wellington has been nominated as a featured picture candidate. It's looking good, as it already has more than twice the required four votes (with over a week of voting to go). Add your support if you like. Also, check out my gallery of images, the two panoramas taken from the end of the Remarkables are my favourites. (Donovan|Geocachernemesis|Interact) 02:47, 5 May 2005 (UTC)
List of main streets of New Zealand cities
Hi all - I've just created the above-named article, and I'm missing a couple. I';m also wondering whether it's worth expanding it to include larger towns as well (I've already added the two or three towns known colloquially as cities). Could someone check that I haven't made any glaring mistakes and fill in the gaps? (One of them's Porirua, which IIRC is Robin P's stamping ground) Thanks. Grutness|hello? 09:41, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
Papakura
What is the status of Papakura? The current article calls it a city but I've a strong suspicion that that is incorrect. dramatic 10:47, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
Administratively, Papakura is a district rather than a city — see the official website. I believe its population is around 40,000 people, less than is required for city status. (I suppose it's possible that it was a city before they raised the limit, though. There are places like that.). -- Vardion 18:24, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
Vardion's right on his fact (district) and his supposition (it was city, like a number of short-lived Auckland cities that got swallowed in 1989, but it's far enough out to have remained separate) - and his belief about the population is within a bull's roar of mine; but surely Grutness has it written in the infobox? My son has just gained his commercial pilot licence at Ardmore Flying School in Papakura and continues with aviation studies there, but he resides in Manukau. Papakura remains a "city" in the popular sense, same as those other "cities" that are "district seats" such as Whangarei, Rotorua, Hastings, New Plymouth, Timaru, and Wanganui. Robin Patterson 12:21, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
I can find references to Papakura City Council from approximately 1980 - 1989 (ignoring the erroneous ones which still call it a city) and to a Borough council before that. Robin, I'd make the distinction that all the former cities you list are the major urban area in their district, while Papakura has always been soemthing of a satellite, moreso as the gap between the town and auckland shrank. I've tried to recast the article and remove a little redundancy. It might be worth checking the "town meets country" para as a possible copyvio - it reads more like a tourist brochure than an encyclopedia article. dramatic 09:23, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket is launching a collaboration of the fortnight. All cricket-loving Wikipedians are invited to come along and help choose our first collaboration and, of course, to help in the collaboration itself.
Also, if you are interested in helping improve and expand WP's cricket coverage, please feel free to sign up to the Cricket WikiProject. Kind regards, jguk 18:43, 15 May 2005 (UTC)
Wikiportal New Zealand
I have begun construction of a New Zealand Wikiportal that I request and invite New Zealand Wikipedians to contribute to. The portal is to the benefit of New Zealand editors and readers of New Zealand topics. I have left the featured article and picture sections vacant in the hope that those more active within the Kiwi community might fill them. The category section is arranged as best I could, the Kiwi categories being complex as they are. See The Australia Wikiportal and Canada Wikiportal for ideas on format and additions.--Cyberjunkie 13:51, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
Between Cyberjunkie and myself the page has been filled with items that are at least temporary fillers until we work out how to make this thing work properly! (It was either that or have a blank page!) Grutness...wha? 13:12, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
I've put a proposal for updating the Wikiportal featured article (or Article of the Week) on Wikipedia talk:Wikiportal/New Zealand.-gadfium 03:59, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
NZ Crown Copyright images
I've created a new template (Template:NZCrownCopyright) for images that are under New Zealand Crown copyright. Please note though that only some government departments' images can be used. I've made a list of government departments we can use at Template talk:NZCrownCopyright based on my interpretation of the copyright notices at each department's site. Basically anything that states the material can be only used personal or educational use is excluded. This is based on the model used for template:CrownCopyright which covers British crown copyright images. Of course I am not a lawyer so I could be completely wrong. Evil Monkey∴Hello 02:03, May 28, 2005 (UTC)
bio-stub
New Zealand now has a separate stub category for articles about individual people. To use it, add {{NZ-bio-stub}} to an article. The stubs will be put into Category:New Zealand people stubs, a subcategory of Category:New Zealand-related stubs (which is itself in Category:New Zealand).
Oh, and well done Giano, et al.! A second NZ front-page feature article in two months! Grutness...wha? 12:50, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Robert Lawson
I'm currently working on a large article about the well known New Zealand architect Robert Lawson (R L Lawson) who designed many building in and around Dunedin. I'd really appreciate any photographs for the page which anyone may have. A list of his work is here [11]. In particular "The Forrester Gallery" Oamaru pictured here? [12]. Thanks
Thanks Giano | talk 28 June 2005 10:05 (UTC)
Location maps
(Updated - I've now done the entire country as far as towns are concerned)
Hi all - I've been trying to make uniform location maps for places in New Zealand, starting with the towns, so if you see these cropping up on articles, you'll know what's going on. I've now done all the towns I think are worth doing. I also plan to do the same with other features like mountains, lakes, rivers and islands.
I haven't done the really small towns, but everything with a couple of thousand people or more is probably worth doing. As I said, I think I've done all the towns that need doing, but if anyone spots one I've missed that should have a map, please let me know on my User talk page! Grutness...Grutness...wha? 2 July 2005 13:11 (UTC)
Should Articles Be Using Macrons
Hi people, I notice a few pages are correctly using macrons ('Māori'), but most don't ('Maori'). Is there a policy on this? The Māori Language Commission recommends it. Cheers
After Wikipedia went to version 1.5 we can now use Macrons in article titles. Articles like Māori language had already been using macrons in the article text and I merely moved some to make them consistent. However as you say there are a lot of articles out there that aren't using them. To be consistent we need to use one or the other. What are others feelings? Evil Monkey∴Hello July 3, 2005 23:51 (UTC)
While I believe that using macrons is essential in Maori, I don't believe it should be done in the English Wikipedia. Policy is to use the most common form in English, and for better or worse, that's to omit macrons. Just my thoughts. -- Vardion 3 July 2005 23:57 (UTC)
My feeling is to go with macrons in Māori-origin words where possible. It's a tough one. The word tūī, for example, has two macrons in it in the Māori language, but it's a really commonly-used word in New Zealand, a part of NZ English, and no-one ever writes it with macrons (or pronounces it with macrons, for that matter). Is it unreasonable to use them in that case? What about place names? Whangaparāoa, Whangamatā, Matatā, Whāngārei? I personally always put them in if I know them. What are other conscientious Wikipedians doing? Mona-Lynn 4 July 2005 22:43 (UTC)
As I said before Māori language was already using macrons throughout. But with placenames that opens a whole new can of worms. The current policy on Wikipedia is to "only use the native spelling as an article title if it is more commonly used in English than the anglicized form." So by that we would probably use the un-macroned version, as I have hardly ever seen those placenames spelt with macrons. But of course, I think that is a stupid policy in cases like this. The spelling difference is not major and if we remembered to create redirects from the un-macroned version there would be no problems about people finding them. On the other hand there is the fact that most people (myself included) have no real idea what the macron actually means, so why should we use it? Evil Monkey∴Hello July 5, 2005 00:35 (UTC)
I'm in two minds about it... on one hand, I'm far more comfortable not using macrons, but on the other hand I use accents when words have been imported to English from French. My suggestion would be largely in line with the WP policy mentioned above, which doesn't seem at all stupid to me. When we are referring to words which are used primarily in the Maori language, use macrons. When they are loan words which have gained everyday usage in English, don't use macrons. From that point of view, place names and the common names of animals and birds (where there is no English equivalent) wouldn't have macrons, but animal names where an English name is also used, and names of items directly from Maori culture would. Thus a tui is a tui, but a fantail is also a pīwakawaka. I'd certainly never use them on place names, as it's very uncommon usage in English - except in cases like the fantail case - Whangarei is Whangarei, but Dunedin is also Ōtepoti. Grutness...wha? 5 July 2005 01:25 (UTC)
I think we should have a policy that specifies using macrons (all the time):
The Māori Language Commission recommends it
They say 'it is especially important that the distinction - between long and short vowel length be marked - in the same way, all of the time.'
They state 'reinforce the simple message that the macron holds for learners of the language, namely: "all macronised vowels are pronounced LONG"'
There are in increasing number of publications using macrons. I remember reading road signs were coming (one day)
I think their usage would make for a more professional and modern encylopedia
It shows our (personal and group) support for the Māori language
I disagree with copying the most popular usage in the language—I see Wikipedia as being more of a reference work than a newspaper, so people come here for the 'correct' way of writing/spelling. A large number of NZers don't know the difference between a dash, en-dash, and em-dash, but that doesn't mean we should follow convention and use a dash all the time.
I'm not sure if the argument about native spelling / anglicised form makes a difference? It's not like the words are unrecognisable or spelt any differently.
The only disadvantage I can see is writers being unsure when to use macrons, but there are online dictionaries and other Wikipedians (like me) who can help/proofread.
I'm relatively new at Wikipedia—what's the next move on this? I'm happy (and would like to) start macronising articles
Some of the points being raised are really questions about the whole "use English" policy, and would be better debated at the appropriate policy page. I think it would be unwise to simply ignore that policy — for one thing, more people would be aware of the "use English" policy than would be aware of whatever consensus is reached here. Not everyone editing NZ-related pages would even know that this discussion is going on. If changes are to be made, I believe it should be done by changing the central policy — and if central policy isn't changed, I don't think we should go against it.
Personally, I would not support the universal use of macrons. While macrons may be correct in Maori, they're not correct in English, and that's what we're meant to be using. When I say, for example, "katipo", I do not actually see myself as speaking Maori — I'm just using an English word derived from a Maori one (katipō). Of course, using macrons for quotes of real Maori is fine — macrons are quite essential for correct Maori pronunciation, even if they're not needed for correct pronunciation of Maori-derived words in English. One could argue that English should adopt its correct pronunciation based on the Maori pronunciation, but it doesn't, and it isn't Wikipedia's place to campaign for change. Wikipedia is meant to be neutral, and that means not trying to push any particular viewpoint on what correct usage should be. We simply take things as they are. -- Vardion 8 July 2005 00:13 (UTC)
I'm with Vardion on most of that.
This is the English WP (however much I may wish that all readers of this page were spending equal time contributing to mi:), and it should therefore use the terms that are most common in written English prose. French words in English such as precis, resume, and naive often do have the accents (etc) retained, but it's not happening with Māori yet. Even tribal websites don't always use macrons where they "should" - eg the biggest: http://www.ngapuhi.iwi.nz/. The NZ Government has not fixed on macrons consistently yet. One piece of legislation (dealing with Māori matters) contained the word "Kōti" (English-derived word meaning "Court") then was formally amended so it read "Kooti".
However, "moving" pages to the macronned versions is now very easy with WP software and could be a harmless step in the right ultimate direction. I wouldn't bother doing it myself right now, but I certainly would not criticise any keen contributor who did. It might even encourage the Govt to be a bit more consistent and proactive.
Can you please supply a link to the "use English" policy, I've been unable to find an editing page appropriate to this discussion.—Barefootguru 8 July 2005 06:17 (UTC)
There's only a small number of people involved in this discussion, and we seem to cover the whole range of opinions. Nobody's answered my question about the English-use policy, and I'm not sure the policy would be relevant: from the comments it seems it would dictate calling a fantail a fantail rather than a pīwakawaka, while I'm only requesting tui be written tūī. I'd suggest a major reason websites and Government reports don't use macrons is the relatively new (and sometimes spotty or non-existant) support of them from the various computer systems involved. I'd like to come to some resolution on this. Where is the appropriate "English usage" page to discuss it Vardion?
I Don't know if it's too late for me to add my penny's worth, but it's my opinion each artle needs to have a macronless Maori so that each artcle will have a chance of appearing in a search. I just did a search and there are 1463 responses to Maori but a paultry 46 to Māori. To make matters worse, the all important Māoripage does not appear in a search under Maori. This is quite serious because although you can easily reach the page by pressing the 'Go', if you start from a search page, or use an outside search engine which uses the Wiki DB, then you would have at the least some difficulty finding the page. In principle, I agree that macrons should be used for correctness, but I think there needs to be compromise so that the articles are reachable by the other 99.009% of the world. L-Bit 20:49, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
Huh? What did you do your search with? I just put Maori (without the macron) into google and got "about 7,590,000" hits. The fifth one down the list was "Māori - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia" (with the macron)! Then I searched for Māori with the macron and got "about 9,000,000" hits, the second one down the list being "Māori television", with the macron. Our "Māori - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia" was 23rd on the list. Then I typed in "Maori" (no macron) in the search box on our main page, and it went to "Māori" (with macron). Worked perfectly OK for me. Moriori 22:41, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
Sorry, didn't make it all that clear did I. I meant using the "search" button within Wiki, as opposed to the "Go" button. I am invisaging someone searching through Wiki for bits and peices or looking for a wide range of Māori related articles. Does that help? L-Bit 23:44, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
OK, I see it now. What you have highlighted is a need to move pages with Maori in their title to new pages with Māori in the titles, and to change Maori to Māori throughout those articles that don't use the macron already ):- Cheers Moriori 00:43, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
LOL, a mission I wouldn't put upon anyone. The 'search' function goes through all the text in an article, so as I said before, a 'search' under "Maori" won't return any results where the article is wholly Māori. Would it be appropriate to include perhaps the statement "Māori (Maori)" in each of the 46 wholly macronned articles? I wouldn't bang on about this so much except that the generic Māori page is affected. L-Bit 01:19, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
I don't think "Māori (Maori)" looks very professional. Hey, if you search for Maori language, the top of the results list is Maori language. Click on that and you go to -voilà - our Māori (language) article, so the situation isn't all bad. I think the macronned articles should stay as is and the rest should be amended accordingly with find and change. I'd be prepared to do a few articles a day. Moriori 01:37, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
Kia ora, Nurg here. I'm with Vardion. Sentimentally and politically, I would quite like to see macrons throughout but I don't think that is appropriate. This is the English WP and should follow common English usage. At the present point in history, the common English usage (including NZ English) is to write loan words from Maori without macrons. I think there are other, pragmatic reasons for not using macrons throughout, but the principle of following English usage is the most important reason.
The WP policy on article titles (Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English)) is to use the spelling most commonly used in English. It notes that the issue of diacritics is currently disputed and that a poll (Proposal and straw poll regarding place names with diacritical marks) is being taken on this. We are not likely to have a good enough case to go against what is decided by the poll, so everyone with a view on macrons on borrowings from Maori should look at the poll and consider voting to ensure NZ views are represented. However, voting in the poll is somewhat stalemated so we may be free to decide NZ policy independently.
To both conform to common English usage and to support the Maori language, I propose:
English words borrowed from Maori should not have macrons (in article titles or the main text of articles).
Maori words that have not been adopted into English, and phrases of Maori, should have macrons and should be in italics (as per the Manual of Style).
Where the article title or synonyms for it have been borrowed from Maori and where the original Maori has long vowels, the Maori form of the word should be given with macrons and in italics as part of the body of the article, usually near the top. For example, see kaka, kakapo, kereru, kohanga reo, tui (bird).
I have in fact been bold and moved kereru to Kererū - I think it's a different case from some of the others because the names New Zealand Pigeon and Wood Pigeon are more commonly used. dramatic 20:02, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
Barefootguru has made some fair points which should be addressed.
"The Māori Language Commission recommends it."
Indeed it does, but the English WP follows and reflects current common English usage. It does not lead cultural or political change as the MLC does. (The MLC page cited reveals one of the practical problems with using macrons, i.e. getting it right consistently. They missed the macron off wananga. If the MLC can't get it right, what hope for WP editors!)
"There are in increasing number of publications using macrons."
But still a small minority.
"I remember reading road signs were coming (one day)."
WP should follow current common usage, rather than anticipate future usage.
"I think their usage would make for a more professional and modern encylopedia"
It would make it more politically and culturally progressive, one might even say politically and culturally modern, but whether it would be more professional would be a matter of opinion.
"It shows our (personal and group) support for the Māori language"
I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiment. And there are appropriate ways of doing that in the English WP, but I don't think this is one. The third point of my proposal is an appropriate way.
"I see Wikipedia as being more of a reference work than a newspaper, so people come here for the 'correct' way of writing/spelling."
WP is indeed a reference work, but it is specifically an encyclopedia. To find the 'correct' way of writing/spelling, readers should go to a dictionary like Wiktionary or a textbook as at Wikibooks. Having said that, WP should not be 'incorrect', either in content or style (and there is a difference between the two). It is fine to have content such as, "The name Tui is from the Maori language name tūī", in the Tui (bird) article, but it's quite another matter to use a style in which an article is titled "Tūī" and the orthography of "Tūī" is used throughout WP. In many aspects of English, there is more than one way which is 'correct' or has a degree of acceptability. Neither using macrons nor leaving them off is 'incorrect', IMO, but leaving them off is the predominant usage at present. Nurg 23:02, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
New Zealand to FAC standard?
Hi, I recently worked Australia up to featured status, and I'm thinking about doing the same for New Zealand, and then other Oceanic Countries. It will involve putting the article in a format more consistent with the WikiProject:Countries guidelines, expanding some sections and pruning others, adding references for relevant statistics and so on. Just thought I'd alert you all so you didn't get worried about edits to the article- we can discus plans and edit on Talk:New Zealand if anyones keen. --nixie 08:12, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
Watch out, it's school holidays!
Extra alertness is needed on NZ pages. With the onset of the holidays, vandalising Wikipedia seems to be a pastime for bored kids, and they favour articles on their own country. Looks as though they sometimes operate in pairs, taking turns, e.g. Gisborne.
Remember when reverting to check the contribution history for the user or IP (usually the latter) as that can lead to other pages they've had a go at.
Do we have a kiwi admin who we can call on to block IP's if they don't give up?
dramatic 05:37, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
Yes, there are a number of New Zealand admins, including myself, but listing them vandals on WP:VIP will be sufficient, as admins from all over the world watch that. Before you list them there, you should warn them with either {{test}}, {{test2}} or {{test2a}} (the latter for deleting material), and then if they continue warn again with {{test3}}, or the equivalent of these in your own words. List them if they continue after getting at least two warnings.-gadfium 06:26, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
Just thought you'd like to know that User:Moriori is now up for RFA - some of you might like to add some kiwi support... :) Grutness...wha? 02:11, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
One one hand, A) is easier to remember and clearer, but on the other B) seems more formal and encyclopedic. There doesn't seem to be any clear convention on naming air crashes. Help? -- FP<talk><edits> 12:43, July 13, 2005 (UTC)
Just my opinion but I'd have no idea what the flight number was so Mount Erebus disaster seems more convenient to me. Lisiate 22:20, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
I think that most air disasters here seem to be named by flight number - but there would be nothing wrong with having a redirect from one to the other, whichever name is used. Grutness...wha? 01:05, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
Christchurch entertainment
Some keen soul on an IP number has been busy adding details of every pub and bar which has live music to Christchurch. To me it just doesn't fit and has no consistency with other articles about cities on Wikipedia. It might work moved to another article (or to Wikitravel), but I can't think of a suitable title for it.dramatic 09:12, 15 July 2005 (UTC)
Why not create List of live entertainment venues in Christchurch, New Zealand or something similar? It will be somewhere to put them, and if it's not encyclopaedic enough someone will end up sending it to vfd. Either way they'll be somewhere other than the main article. Grutness...wha? 00:58, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
It ended up as Live_music_venues_of_Christchurch,_New_Zealand. No complaints from the person who entered them all. dramatic 20:10, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
I created a new stub, Mount Cavendish, I thought someone might have something to add, also it would be nice to get both photos of, and from, to add. WikiDon 06:31, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
Giano strikes again!
User:Giano has proposed a third article on a New Zealand archiutect for featured article status - this time Robert Lawson (architect). Have a look, show support, etc. etc. Grutness...wha? 00:58, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
Call for featured picture nominations
The New Zealand Wikiportal needs a few more nominations for pictures to feature in future weeks. The standards are not as high as for Wikipedia:featured pictures; it has to be a good shot of something interesting, and related to New Zealand, but it doesn't have to be perfect. Self nominations are fine. I prefer not to use panoramic shots as they don't look good at the maximum 300px width that we're constrained to using on the portal page. Please add nominations to this page.-gadfium 04:23, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
Deletion list
Hello,
I just wanted to let you know about a list of New Zealand-related items on Votes for Deletion. It's part of WikiProject Deletion sorting, and you can find it here. I hope you can use it to track and contribute to New Zealand-related deletion debates. If you find the list useful, please also help keep it up to date.
By the way, new deletion sorters are welcome and needed. Join us!
We are documenting telecom's anticompetive and unethical practices. The research and writing skills of kiwi Wikipedians would be highly valued. Can you please help?
How should we cover events on election night? I'm asking people at the equivalent notice boards for Australia and Britain to comment on how they organised for their general elections. Should we aim to provide coverage of results as they are reported, or do we just update the provisional result the next morning? In reality, anons and others who don't read this discussion are going to try to update events as they happen anyway, so we should set up a structure for that reporting.-gadfium 02:53, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
Personally, I would recommend not trying to provide live reporting. Two main reasons:
The official results site will provide exactly the same information, but more quickly and more with a greater probability of accuracy. There's no point in us rushing around copying it out when we could just link to it.
Unlike many other countries, it's hard to give results "as they arrive". We can do individual electorates, yes, but the seat count (which is what most people would be interested in) won't be known until everything's finished — it depends on a party's share of the overall vote, and so isn't known until the overall vote has been completely processed.
If you are going to provide live updates, however, I'd recommend doing it at Wikinews rather than here. (That's what it's for, after all). There's already an story in preparation. And the problem of anons not knowing about this discussion could probably be circumvented simply by putting "For up-to-date results, see..." in a prominent place, couldn't it? -- Vardion 05:05, 10 September 2005 (UTC)
We made some effort to provide live reporting for the UK general election, but it didn't work well. People got behind, went to bed, and made some mistakes. Far more successful were the constituency articles which we set up and later incorporated the results into. These now provide in depth information such as historic results, discussion of trends, boundary changes and former MPs. While there is much work still to do on them, an article like Sheffield Heeley (UK Parliament constituency) is much of the way there. The general election was the spur for this work, which should be of more use than an election reporting service. Warofdreamstalk 10:51, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
Hi, I had categorised the above article into New Zealand people but am not sure if there is any other relevant category such as New Zealand women. Hence, I'm posting this query here. Also, you may want to edit the article based on stories about Richmal Oates-Whitehead appearing in the New Zealand media for which I had no access. ---Gurubrahma 10:14, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
I found the online Dictionary of New Zealand Biography, and though they don't list all the names anywhere, I still compiled a complete list from their contents, and wikified it. As you can see, New Zealanders aren't represented very well on Wikipedia (I've never been to NZ). We should probably keep the list under my user space, so that Wikipedia's mirror sites don't start copying it around. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-10-20 05:16
More missing biographies
Prime Television New Zealand is showing a program called New Zealand's Top 100 History Makers on Thursday nights. The program has an associated website, www.historymakers.co.nz. I think everyone on this program deserves an article on Wikipedia, and I created the article bolded above as a resource for anyone wanting to fill out the red links. Some of the articles which do exist are pretty stubby, too.-gadfium 07:54, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
I don't know if the same has been happening to you guys or not, but a large number of Canadian government-related images (portraits of political figures, etc.) have been deleted under an apparent conflict between the provisions of Crown copyright and the provisions of GFDL. I have requested clarification on the extent to which fair use can be applied. (Wikipedia is governed solely by American copyright law, because that's where the servers are located, so fair dealing isn't applicable.)
Hey, i just started the radio stations of New Zealand category, which is now a subcategory of new zealand radio. I also added Radio stations in Auckland. This is a starting move to improve and extend on articles about radio in New Zealand because right now most of the articles are stubs. So anyone who is interested in developing this articles is most welcome. cheers.ps. have a look at the radio stations project. --Mexaguil 08:43, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
New NZ Wikipedian template
Hi all, I've just created {{User NZ res}}, which automatically adds any user who puts it on their user page to Category:Wikipedians in New Zealand and adds a nice little box to their user page looking like this. Use it at will! :) Grutness...wha? 07:42, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
This user lives in New Zealand
Love it. However there are not many people in this category. In order to see just how many active kiwis there are on wikipedia, I have pasted the text below on the talk pages of New Zealanders. I could do with some help. Click on this link [14] which will find all users who have "zealand" on their user page. I have done the first two pages, but there are many more to do. Obviously don't just add it to everybody, read their user page.
== Category:Wikipedians in New Zealand ==
Hi, You might want to consider adding {{tl|User NZ res}} to the top of your user page, which will add you to this category automatically and also add a nice graphic. ~~~~
Onco_p53 07:31, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia Maori now has 100 registered members
Any NZ residents who have not looked at it recently are urged to do so. Good contributions have come from all around the world (e.g. Spain and Germany) from people who know little or no Maori. Try the mostly-English-language easy-introduction page.
Shudder. I guess the quality will be as good as an English encyclopedia written by people who know little or no English!
Auckland Urban districts
A while bunch of these have been created automatically. However there are some comflicts with existing ones. The new ones tend to have better formating and outgoing links. I think in most cases extra data can be merged from the non-automatic articles and then they get turned into redirects. I've been working on Otahuhu, New Zealand but there are a dozen or so more to do if people have time. I've asked User:A1kmm to remove a couple that are all capital letters. See Category:Auckland urban districts for a good overview. SimonLyall 01:15, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
not all of them. a lot of the new ones have almost no information and the tables are stuffed up. also theyve been automaticly adding the "new zealand" to the end when its not always necessary. BLkiss the lizard 00:40, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
Born in Christchurch
I am strongly tempted to remove the "Born in Christchurch" subsection from Christchurch. At the very least it needs to move further down the article.
If you included everyone born in Christhurch with a similar level of notability as the two Hockey players listed, you'd have well over a thousand names to manage.
Should it possibly move to List of persons born in Christchurch, or is that the sort of list we can do without? I'd suggest that if weare going to include the most notable Chch natives in the main article, eligibility sould be inclusion in the recent 100 most famous New Zealanders series. dramatic 11:27, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
With only two names, it isn't worth making a separate article at present unless you want to search through all articles linking to Christchurch to expand the list. I wouldn't delete such an article, but I wouldn't go out of my way to add to it either.
I think either move that section here to the talk page, so it's still readily available if anyone wants to expand it, or just delete it.
It's not important to Christchurch that some famous people were born there; what's important is who are currently major figures in Christchurch, e.g. the Mayor, local MPs - some of who were not born there.-gadfium 23:11, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
This article is getting a bit of vandalism from a couple of anons. Could a few people add it to their watchlists so it can be reverted more rapidly and so the anons see that it isn't just me who removes their rubbish.-gadfium 05:12, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Wikicities
There is now a wikicity set up for New Zealand, check it out Brian | (Talk) 22:57, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
But the question is: WHY??!? ~ ~ Oh well, good luck, I guess. ~ ~ Papeschr 11:27, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
This article is under discussion in today's Articles for Deletion. It would be good if a person with a reasonable knowledge of Wellington can have a look at it to see if it is fairly complete. The nub of the debate as I see it is whether the topic is covered by the Category:Wellington Urban Districts. Capitalistroadster 20:15, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
It would be good to keep that map somewhere. Other than that, It's just a link farm at the moment. Perhaps keeping a list of the redlinks for further article creation would be useful, too. Grutness...wha? 01:59, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
Hi all, the link to Auckland City Libraries from Special:Booksources is broken. I think it's since they changed the catalogue to [15] - if someone knows how to change it, and they wouldn't mind? Cheers, Neonumbers 06:29, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
You can edit the Booksources page at [16], but I don't know the appropriate URL to enter. Perhaps you could email the library and ask?-gadfium 08:12, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
Actually, it was the URL I got stuck on. I'll try and figure it out; I'm just a bit short on time so it might be a while before I get round to it. Neonumbers 09:49, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
Gareth Farr
This New Zealand composer has been nominated for deletion in today's Articles for deletion. He seems notable for mine see [17]. Capitalistroadster 06:24, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
Somebody has move Robert Muldoon to Robert David Muldoon and put a disambig to a minor Jurassic Park charater. I've changed the Main Muldoon page to put a link to the JP character but can one of the NZ admins please move the page back? - SimonLyall 04:45, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
Done. ISTR that Robert Muldoon was also the name of the transgendered gridiron player in the World According to Garp, so it may need a further disambiguation sometime... Grutness...wha? 05:20, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
Thanks. I guess we can put up a disambig page if the times comes. - SimonLyall 06:35, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
05:26, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
]]
01:45, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
