Talk:New Zealand–United States relations
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the New Zealand–United States relations article.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
War in Iraq
As far as I'm aware NZ's contribution to the 2003 Iraq war was non-existant, if any contribution has been made it would have been a non combat force. Am I correct in saying that your current government is actually against the 2003 Iraq war as well? That part needs editing.MoneyForNothing 15:56, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Yes, The New Zealand Government has contibuted to the Iraq war, yes. We have sent support for the war on terror in Afghanistan and Iraq in relation to the elevation of United States and the occurance of terrorism, New Zealand belives the war in Iraq is a mistake, but we still side fully with the USA. (Murchy 06:05, 11 September 2007 (UTC))
- New Zealand - Two rotations of 61 military engineers, known as Task Force Rake, operated in Iraq from September 26, 2003 to September 25, 2004. They were deployed to undertake humanitarian and reconstruction tasks consistent with UN Security Council Resolution 1483; they were not part of the invading force. While in Iraq the unit was under British command (South East Iraq) and was based in Basra. (Murchy 04:41, 12 September 2007 (UTC))
I know that that long quote is helpful information, but the way it is in the article doesn't seem to conform to wiki standards. Contralya 22:28, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Copyright violations/ Good article nominee
Not quite sure what Contralya is referring to above, but the other day I deleted a long speech in the 1st person taken verbatim from the NZ Embassy site, which is NZ Crown Copyright, and therefore not usable on Wikipedia, at least not in the form it was inserted wholesale into the article. As well as this, there seem to be large chunks which were copied verbatim from this page on thinkingnewzealand.com (© 2005- 2006 thinkingaustralia | All rights reserved), without attribution. But it is a bit late now to disentangle these from the text of the article. The creator of this page was a new Wikipedian, and did not know, or deliberately disregarded, the need not to plagiarise, to acknowledge your sources, and so on. He also uploaded most of the images on this page, but the majority of these have been marked as copyvios and will shortly be deleted, leaving the article somewhat the worse for wear. He also nominated this article for GA status, which is hardly appropriate given the above circumstances. Any objections if I remove the nomination as a GA until such time as the copyright issues are addressed? Kahuroa 07:14, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- You got it. Contralya 15:02, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- OK will do Kahuroa 23:27, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, in all honesty, i didnt copy any text from that website, in fact, ive never even seen that site, let alone copy it, most of this is self written (hence the ametuerish style and lack of references) so you can put that thought to bet right now. Ciao (♠Murchy♠) 07:53, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
- Strange then, that in the August 16 revision of this article, which at that time only you, Murchy, had edited, there are several passages which are near-identical in wording to the wording of sections of that page on thinkingnewzealand.com. Here are some examples of this:
- 1: Your version: For its first hundred years, New Zealand followed the United Kingdom's lead on foreign policy. In declaring war on Germany on 3 September 1939, Prime Minister Michael Savage proclaimed, "Where she goes, we go; where she stands, we stand". .
- 1: Their version: For its first hundred years, New Zealand followed the United Kingdom's lead on foreign policy. "Where she goes, we go; where she stands, we stand", said Prime Minister Michael Savage, in declaring war on Germany on 3 September 1939.
- another example:
- 2: Your version: New Zealand has traditionally worked closely with Australia, whose foreign policy followed a similar historical trend. In turn, many Pacific Islands such as Western Samoa have looked to New Zealand's lead. The American influence on New Zealand was weakened by the disappointment with the Vietnam War, the sinking of the Rainbow Warrior by France, and by disagreements over environmental and agricultural trade issues and New Zealand's nuclear-free policy.
- 2: Their version: New Zealand has traditionally worked closely with Australia, whose foreign policy followed a similar historical trend. In turn, many Pacific Islands such as Western Samoa have looked to New Zealand's lead. The American influence on New Zealand was weakened by the disappointment with the Vietnam War, the sinking of the Rainbow Warrior by France, and by disagreements over environmental and agricultural trade issues and New Zealand's nuclear-free policy.
- another example:
- 3: Their version:In addition to the various wars between iwi, and between the British settlers and iwi, New Zealand has fought in the Second Boer War, World War I, World War II, the Korean War, the Malayan Emergency (and committed troops, fighters and bombers to the subsequent confrontation with Indonesia), the Vietnam War, the Gulf War and the Afghanistan War, and briefly sent a unit of army engineers to help with rebuilding Iraqi infrastructure.
- 3: Your version: In addition to the various wars between iwi, and between the British settlers and iwi, New Zealand has fought in the Second Boer War, World War I, World War II, the Korean War, the Malayan Emergency (and committed troops, fighters and bombers to the subsequent confrontation with Indonesia), the Vietnam War, the Gulf War and the Afghanistan War; it has also sent a unit of army engineers to help rebuild Iraqi infrastructure...
- The style is not 'ametuerish' at all in those passages, which remain in the current version of the article and therefore still constitute a problem for its copyright status. Kahuroa 11:12, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, I just remembered where I got that text from, i didnt go to a website to get it, i got it off the New Zealand wikipedia article, its is te lead section on the Foreign relations of New Zealand section in the article, so i didnt copy, paste from a website at all. Taifarious1 02:55, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
Article needs work
This article need some work and I think we can all pool together to improve it.
- Oh wait I'll change it when he's appointed Prime Minster by the Governor-General. --SamB135 (talk) 04:43, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
New Zealand is not an ally
US population figures don't add up
In the table the race figures for New Zealand add to 100% while those for the US add to 116%. The excess might be due to people identifying in more than one category, however the same logic appears not to be being applied to the New Zealand figures. New Zealand is racially well mixed and has a considerable number of people with multiple identifications. If the two sets of figures are to be compared, the same logic should be used to construct them. Hawthorn (talk) 23:06, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
- A source should also be cited, not just there but for each of the facts in the table. We also have an inconsistency in the religion entries: US has "Christianity" as one group, but this is broken into several denominations on the NZ side. --Avenue (talk) 00:41, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
New Zealand - Us "Wellington declaration"
This new agreement is the latest move by both parties to forming a warmer relationship
- Absolutely. Please feel free to have a go yourself.-gadfium 18:27, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
The relations between New Zealand and the United States are "patchy". It should be pointed out that New Zealand is not an ally of the United States, like most other countries such as the UK, Canada. Australia, Israel, Turkey, Germany, Japan, Poland and Albania. Wallie (talk) 03:07, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
References to the nuclear frigate issue are scattered throughout the article, but there needs to be an introduction and overview of this source of tension between the US and NZ, and it needs to be placed before the first mention of it (in the two ANZUS sections). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 08:52, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
2012 GA nomination
I see that the article has been GA nominated. Isn't the article a bit weak on early history for that? To go from the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi to WWII is a 100-year step. What happened in between that's worth writing about? Another issue is that the lead is way too short for the length of the article. Schwede66 17:51, 7 November 2012 (UTC)