Talk:Taito Phillip Field

Title

Perhaps this article should be renamed Phillip Field - the Taito is a title, and we dont have a Sir Edmund Hillary... As far as I know the naming convention is to leave honorifics out of the title. Any discussion would be appreciated -- Mostlyharmless 06:04, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

support. move to Phillip Field. Helen Clark's article isn't The Right Honourable Helen Clark, rather Helen Clark

I've moved it.-gadfium 01:53, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I think that is wrong. It is a matai name or matai title. It is not an honorific like Sir or Rt Hon. Every matai name is a different name. Every other article I have seen about a matai has the matai name in the title of the article. To be consistent you would have to remove "Prince of Wales" from the article title Charles, Prince of Wales, because "Prince of Wales" is the same sort of title. Nurg 13:08, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm happy for someone who knows more about it to move it back. I note that there has been no objection to the move until now, although I made it almost a month ago, so this is not a pressing problem, and it might be worth canvassing opinion at the Village pump. I see we have the articles Taito Waqavakatoga and Taito Waradi. It might also be worth posting at Talk:Taito in case anyone is watching that page.-gadfium 20:49, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Hes referred to as "Taito Phillip Fields" in both Parliament and Labour party records. [1] & [2] Mattlore 22:21, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

But Helen Clark is referred to in Parliament as "The Right Honourable the Prime Minister", Lockwood Smith as "Doctor the Honourable Lockwood Smith", Michael Cullen as "the Honourable Doctor Michael Cullen". Parliamentary precedent means squat, as they use formal title for everything. --Midnighttonight Remind me to do my uni work rather than procrastinate on the internet 05:47, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

The style guide says that "Do not use [titles] as part of a title of an article...the article itself should clarify details such as the full title, etc." Brian | (Talk) 10:19, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Brian, re your quotations, please quote the first sentence in full and provide the context for the second sentence you've quoted. thanks Nurg 11:48, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I've changed the name because the convention for matais is well established in wikipedia. Eg, Su'a William Sio, Tuala Falani Chan Tung, Fiame Naomi Mata'afa, Laulu Fetauimalemau Mata'afa, Le Mamea Matatumua Ata, Matatumua Maimoaga etc etc. Nurg 02:09, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I would suggest that this should have gone through RM Brian | (Talk) 05:39, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree, you can always propose a RM back though? Mattlore 05:56, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I assumed this Talk page was the appropriate place to discuss it. Nurg 08:09, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I would agree that this talk page is the appropriate place, since we would probably not find people with the required expertise to decide the proper title at WP:RM. I did suggest posting to the talk pages of articles where we might find suitable expertise, but as far as I am aware, that didn't happen. However, I am sufficiently convinced by Nurg's arguments that the article has been correctly moved back to the original name.-gadfium 08:44, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Samoan chiefly names are not titles as the English language uses and understands the word /meaning of title. Nor is it an honorific. A Samoan matai name(commonly called a title by New Zealand media etc)is a real, actual name which comes at the beginning of ones names after one recieves it at a proper investiture. That name must not be edited the way print media does in New Zealand. It reflects a big & serious misunderstanding or ignorance on their part. Thus to debate whether Taito should 'have' his matai name or not written in at the 'pleasure' of people from another culture is absolutely wrong and rude & is none of the media's business! `Fatugalelei 01:07, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

It's an honorific by the plain English definition of the word and it's therefore not appropriate here per MOS:BIO. If one can make the argument that "Taito" is a proper name in Samoa, fine, you can use it on the Samoan WP, but not here. This page needs to be moved to remove the honorific ASAP.

Samoan Community comments

I have removed the following text:

Samoan Community Looking beyond Labour Party While Labour Party politicians may feel that they can continue to count on the vote and support of the Samoan community, there is a growing feeling of anger which many chiefs and orators feel against Labour leader Helen Clark and the way she has dealt with Taito. Samoan leaders are also questioning seriously the taking for granted of their vote by the Labour Party. The gesture of good will and support given to Taito by the Maori Party was not dismissed as some in the media might like to think. Should Maori feel that they can and would like to conduct solid and meaningful relations with the Samoan leaders, the cultivation of their Polynesian bond and connection could prove to be a powerful potential to develop for answering some of the common challenges that Pakeha society throws out to Maori and Pacific people often.'

As it is, this is unsourced opinion and inappropriate because essentially it is editorial-type comment. But perhaps this should be discussed here and some compromise achieved, with, say, some quotes on both sides of the issue. Not all Samoan leaders support Philip Field and this should probably be reflected in the entry, if indeed any of it is appropriate. I have reproduced the comments in full here so there can be a proper discussion. Kiwimw 18:18, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree this should not be in the article. Appropriate and sourced quotes could be used instead.-gadfium 18:54, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

The angle taken in editing out the text I wrote suggests that just because some Samoan leaders do not support Taito, that therefore the article is not a credible piece of writing or opinion that is worth displaying. Like your discussion on whether the matai name Taito should be used or not, there will not be uniform agreement on issues such as these. The importance of displaying this article / text is to show that public opinion will always be based on peoples perception and their analyses of a situation. And factual material while useful and contributes to knowledge would be of limited use especially in what would be an important change in the thinking of, in this particular case, the Samoan community. The fact that Maori have shown interest politically in Taito to join them is not just a passing phase. It will develop. I say put the text back please. Fatugalelei 01:34, 23 February 2007 (UTC)01:32, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

The material is not suitable for Wikipedia because it is an opinion. We try not to include opinions in our articles unless we are quoting someone, with a reference, and then we also look to provide a balancing quote.-gadfium 02:25, 23 February 2007 (UTC)