Talk:Tauranga

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Cities (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject New Zealand (Rated Start-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Education[edit]

At present, this section lists only three religious schools. Could someone please list the more prominent secondary schools and technical institutes to give the section some balance.

Thanks Kappa.-gadfium 20:59, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Also, it would be nice to have a photo in the article - the bridge perhaps, or a view of the town from a high place.-gadfium 18:56, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

RE: Education: Hi there I'll start working on it-I live in Tauranga and can get this information/take some photos. Bennyboyz3000 02:51, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Image[edit]

The page needs an image. I've found one already on Wikipedia: Image:MountMaunganui_Panorama.jpg I will leave it upto someone else to include it, if its appropriate for this page.--Konstable 11:37, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't think Mount Maunganui is really appropriate as an image for Tauranga. It's a separate place. We have more photos at Mount Mauao by the way.-gadfium 05:16, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree that this image is not appropriate as it does not show a photo of Tauranga itself and is therefore misleading. 118.93.195.221 (talk) 05:26, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Ninth largest city[edit]

Come on people, Tauranga is the ninth largest city in New Zealand. If we are talking urban area, then let's say urban area, but we are saying city and are referring to the City of Tauranga, and as such it is 9th largest. There is no question of that. Hastings and Napier are classified as an urban conglomeration but are two separate cities. Enzedbrit 02:53, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

There seems to be continued confusion about the size of Tauranga. Tauranga is New Zealand's ninth largest city. This is indisputable. The populated comes ninth. It is, however, the centre of the sixth largest urban area, if one does not consider Napier and Hastings to be a single urban area. Auckland is the largest urban area, and this is a conglomerate of several cities. Auckland City is the largest city. Tauranga City is not the sixth largest city, rather Wellington City is. Enzedbrit 03:07, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Tauranga is the fifth largest urban area in NZ. Its really just playing with words whether you call the population a city or urban area. NZ 'cities' merely represent artificial local government populations and don't really conform to the boundaries of the actual urban area at all. A particular case in point is Auckland, where the separate local government populations are soon to be irrelevant due to the Super City review. I suggest we rely on the population of urban areas rather than local government areas, which are static and don't represent the outward growth of urban areas.
As for the question about the port, I think Tauranga is NZ's largest port for exports, and Auckland is the largest for imports. Somebody else might be able to confirm this though. Amdtelrunya (talk) 22:18, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
According to the reference, Tauranga is the sixth largest urban area, not the fifth. Moriori (talk) 23:03, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Tauranga is the fifth most populous urban area (slightly bigger than Dunedin) according to Statistics NZ 2009 estimates. Crazy how some people still believe it is a tiny town, just like how some people think Dunedin is bigger than Hamilton. Populations (2009):

  1. Auckland 1,333,300
  2. Christchurch 386,100
  3. Wellington 386,000
  4. Hamilton 168,800
  5. Tauranga 118,200
  6. Dunedin 115,700

Amdtelrunya (talk) 21:22, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Not so. You missed out the Napier-Hastings Urban Area. This is how your list should look:
  1. Auckland 1,333,300
  2. Christchurch 386,100
  3. Wellington 386,000
  4. Hamilton 168,800
  5. Napier-Hastings Urban Area 122,600 plus
  6. Tauranga 118,200
  7. Dunedin 115,700
Moriori (talk) 22:31, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Uh, this whole argument is getting ridiculous. Statistics NZ may lump them into one wider urban area, but anybody who has spent any amount of time in the Hawke's Bay will know they are distinctly separate. Statistics NZ splits Napier and Hastings into separate urban zones as well, which are the figures we should use, being (for 2009) 58 100 for Napier and 65 100 for Hastings. Its the same argument for Hamilton as well, where the total population is 200 200, but Hamilton itself makes up 168 800 of this, with the rest from Cambridge and Te Awamutu. Everybody knows that Cambridge and Te Awamutu are not part of Hamilton, and to be honest some of their residents would be offended to be included as such.

Rather than using artifical statistical categories we should be using actual urban agglomorations, where Auckland includes all zones, Hamilton is only the Hamilton zone, Wellington is all zones, and Napier and Hastings are split into their own zones. Amdtelrunya (talk) 21:30, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

See also http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/govt-eyes-auckland-tauranga-hamilton-nexus-121797


"...Auckland, Hamilton and Tauranga. They are, respectively, New Zealand's first, fourth and fifth largest urban areas (by population)..." Amdtelrunya (talk) 21:36, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

I think Statistics New Zealand is a more authoritative source than the National Business Review.-gadfium 05:20, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Agree, which is why I have written a detailed paragraph beforehand outlining why Statistics NZ has Tauranga at no. 5. The NBR article is just an illustration of how Tauranga is perceived in reality, rather than the latest statistical construct. There really is no convincing some people who don't want to be convinced. Yet another illustration of why wikipedia is a laughing stock when it comes to accuracy. Amdtelrunya (talk) 23:11, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
The Statistics New Zealand data has two columns in Table 3, the main urban area in column A and zones in B. Napier-Hastings is listed in column A, along with Auckland, Wellington, Tauranga etc. It is wrong to arbitrarily look to the zones just for Napier-Hastings. If we look at the ranking based on column B then Tauranga would gain one ranking from Napier-Hastings, but lose three because of the four Auckland zones. I think today Tauranga should be listed as sixth largest urban area, not eighth largest urban zone. The idea of fifth is based on an inconsistent method. XLerate (talk) 00:43, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Modern age[edit]

This section contains references to the Gold Coast, assertions regarding retail earnings, demographics for population growth and colloquial references to wages that are all biased and appear inaccurate. Most of this section should be deleted. I would encourage anyone with credible information on this city to please create a suitable replacement. I have not lived in Tauranga for many years, but do not believe that the article (as it stands) reflects well upon this fine city. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.74.208.32 (talk) 03:53, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Really???[edit]

Quote: Tauranga is one of New Zealand's main centers for business, international trade, culture, fashion, horticultural science, education and entertainment. It is home to renowned institutions covering a broad range of professional and cultural fields, and is one of the most substantial economic places, with the largest port in New Zealand, the Port of Tauranga.

All of this comes as a surprise to me. I am a Wellingtonian and I don't live in Tauranga, but it tends to be perceived as something of a backwater (and a bit red-necked) and i've certainly never heard it described as a main centre for culture or education or entertainment, etc, however it is associated strongly with the New Zealand First political party in the perception of other parts of NZ. Is it really NZ's largest port? - Wow, i'm not sure other people in NZ realise this. It is larger by what measure? Surely the port of Auckland is busier. Please also give us some indication of which renowned institutions it is home to.

I may simply be suffering from big city narcissism, so could the author of that paragraph cite these claims to remove doubt. I do wonder whether this article may be a spin-job by someone attempting to promote rather than report on Tauranga. 121.73.7.84 (talk) 09:38, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I have to agree with the Wellingtonian, I live in Tauranga and all of the above come as a surprise to me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.54.5.194 (talk) 22:43, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Tauranga was New Zealand's largest port in 2009 in terms of gross weight of exports, exporting 6 594 267 tonnes, more than double the nearest on the list, which is New Plymouth, with just over 3 million tonnes. Auckland Port handled more in terms of value, with its exports totalling 9.83 million, and Tauranga totalling 9.33 million. [1] Bozzio (talk) 02:38, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Potatoes in Tauranga[edit]

The section on History, Missionaries says that in 1820 missionaries went to Tauranga for potatoes. Potatoes were introduced to the rest of the world from South America. My problem is that there is no mention whatsoever in the article of any European settlement on the island, prior to the mention of the missionary goinging there for potatoes. That makes no sense, as new crops accompanied new settlemnts - no-one was merely going around distributing new crops to new lands for the sake of it. So, do we have any information on earlier Europen settlement ou Tauranga? Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 21:35, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

I have amended the Musket Wars article which this article was linked to, showing that potatoes were in NZ 50 something years before the 1820s. Moriori (talk) 06:34, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi Moriori. My apologies! I confused you with someone else. So sorry! Best regards, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 10:39, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

(Copied from User talk:Gadfium)

Hi Gadfium. My problem is that there is no mention whatsoever in the article of any European settlement on the island, prior to the mention of the missionary goinging there for potatoes. That makes no sense, as new crops accompanied new settlemnts - no-one was merely going around distributing new crops to new lands for the sake of it. So, do you have any information on earlier Europen settlement ou Tauranga? Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 21:30, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

According to our article on Musket Wars, potatoes were in use by Maori from 1794. There's no online reference, but it appears to be covered by Bellich and Ballara. The 1966 Encyclopaedia of New Zealand says "In 1793 Lieutenant-Governor King had two Maoris brought to Norfolk Island to instruct convicts in flax-dressing, and sent presents of pigs, potatoes, and seeds to the Bay of Island tribes"ref, so it is clear that potatoes were available in New Zealand before 1800. See page 159 of Maori Wars of the Nineteenth Century for a reference to the growing of potatoes in the Tauranga area in 1820.
I am not sure what you refer to by "the island". Do you mean the North Island, or one of the small islands off the coast of Tauranga? You say that new crops accompanied new settlements, but in New Zealand the potato was enthusiastically adopted by Maori as it was substantially easier to grow and more productive than the kumara - the Musket Wars article explains that the potato enabled the wars as much as the musket did.-gadfium 21:56, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
Fair enough. Though I still find it odd that a crop would have taken hold so quickly, especially as Europeans were initially not very keen on adopting it, therefore would not have propagated it until it became widely used. Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 14:51, 14 September 2011 (UTC)