Talk:Auckland Domain

Untitled

Auckland domain is now extinct.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 202.154.159.222 (talk • contribs) 05:33, 31 August 2006 (UTC).

The Auckland Volcanic Field is still active, although any future eruption will most likely be at a new site, not though one of the existing cones.-gadfium 06:42, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Big day out?

The Big Day Out isn't usually held here, not sure if it has ever been but paragraph should probably be updated. Anyone have more detailed information? - SimonLyall 05:03, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

I believe I added that and have been mistaken. Sorry. Feel free to take out.MadMaxDog 11:20, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Auckland Domain. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060711115404/http://www.aucklandcity.govt.nz:80/whatson/places/parks/domain.asp to http://www.aucklandcity.govt.nz/whatson/places/parks/domain.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:48, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 6 February 2022

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

No consensus to move. There is a clear absence of consensus for a move at this time. BD2412 T 07:36, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

---

Auckland Domain → Pukekawa / Auckland Domain – This reflects the official name for the park changing from 'The Domain' to its original Māori name of 'Pukekawa' in 2014, as gazetted in the New Zealand Place Names register, and follows the precedent of using a slash for the names of New Zealand places, such as Maungakiekie / One Tree Hill and Maungawhau / Mount Eden which are both Auckland volcanoes and parks. A list of about 400 official and 200 unofficial dual place names in NZ, mostly using a slash, can be found here. Most have Wikipedia articles using the slash in the title. Pukekawa is registered as the approved name on BGN. As specified in the NZ Gazetteer link above, Auckland Domain on its own is not an official name, but using a dual name is helpful in identifying which Pukekawa is being referred to, and recognises the park's recent history and New Zealand's biculturalism.

The dual name is used in official communication by Auckland Council (which operates the park) Auckland War Memorial Museum (which is sited on the park), including their Curator Lucy Mackintosh, author of Shifting Grounds book, and commonly by media and publishers such as The Spinoff, Stuff, The New Zealand Herald, Radio New Zealand, Bridget Williams Books, Rough Guides, Massey University Press and Auckland University Press.

Note, the 'Ngā Mana Whenua o Tāmaki Makaurau Collective Redress Deed' and the NZ Gazetteer describe 'The Domain' as a 'hill' as it does the 15 other volcanic cone public reserves/parks covered by the Deed. The volcanoes/hills/maunga are the reserves/parks. Pukekawa is The Domain. This is also explained in this Herald article and the Council website page cited. The Council website page explains the governing framework for the park includes the Auckland Domain Act 1987 which states 'Domain' means the 75 hectares of land also referred to as Auckland Domain. This pre-2014 New Zealand Geographic article confirms the Domain was called Pukekawa by Māori. In 2014, the 75 hectares of land called "The Domain" was officially changed back to "Pukekawa" in a Treaty of Waitangi Settlement. E James Bowman (talk) 06:02, 6 February 2022 (UTC) — Relisting.  — Amakuru (talk) 08:44, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose. The proposed name is neither the WP:COMMONNAME (Auckland Domain) nor the WP:OFFICIALNAME (Pukekawa) and so violates MOS:SLASH. I would also oppose any move, as the article is already at the common name, with 170 news results in the past year for Auckland Domain, compared to 51 for Pukekawa, and 7 for Pukekawa / Auckland Domain. BilledMammal (talk) 15:54, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

Oppose. The common name of the park/reserve is Auckland Domain, as evidenced by recent articles in Stuff ([1] & [2]), the Herald ([3]), RNZ ([4]) and even the ODT ([5]).

A couple of your sources are referencing the Shifting Grounds book, which uses this dual name. Clearly the book review articles are using the name because that's what the book uses. This isn't ideal as evidence of a common name. (It's also not evidence that the book's publisher, Bridget Williams Books uses the name in a general sense, so I find that label a tad misrepresentative.)

Further: The Gazetteer lists Pukekawa as the name of the hill (volcano), not the park. Obviously if we were to split part of this article off to an article about the volcano, it should be named Pukekawa. — HTGS (talk) 03:18, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

• Support move increasingly this is the name used. There are a but load of old hits in google though. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:34, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Oppose. As far as I can tell, the most commonly-used name for the park remains, for now, "Auckland Domain". LINZ lists "Pukekawa"[6] as an "official name" for the hill (geographical feature) on which the park resides; one could probably argue that this then is also the official name for the park, in which case in the future the article could reasonably be moved to something like "Pukekawa (park in Auckland)" (to distinguish from the Waikato settlement of the same name) should the name "Pukekawa" become more commonly used. But I don't see any need to move this article to the slashed name, as that's not official, nor commonly used. PatricKiwi (talk) 22:43, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Comment Is it reasonable to split the article - 'Pukekawa' for the volcano and 'Auckland Domain' for the park? This is what I did for a similar issue with Albert Park (although this one was easier, as the volcano wasn't actually inside the park itself). --Prosperosity (talk) 23:11, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

At the moment, the article is rather short and the section on the volcano is only a single paragraph, so I don't believe so. BilledMammal (talk) 05:34, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

@Prosperosity: Totally reasonable, but I'm really not sure it would be worth it for the content as it is. (I was myself weighing up whether the Domain Wintergardens should be merged into the domain—I did decide better not.) But maybe expansion would be encouraged by more clearly delineated articles… I guess the simple question is whether the volcano is notable on its own? — HTGS (talk) 06:20, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

I've been thinking about doing this for a while - it seems as though Pukekawa is the only volcano in the Auckland volcanic field not to have its own article from what I can tell. Turnagra (talk) 07:42, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Comment: @E James Bowman: To make it clear what people wrote their response to, it is generally recommended to not make significant changes to comments after they have been responded to. BilledMammal (talk) 05:44, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

You're right. I've added to the request outline when people's comments have made wrong assumptions, or possibly misunderstood what I originally wrote. And when I've found new relevant sources while continuing to edit the article. I've not knowingly removed anything that people have responded to. E James Bowman (talk) 00:02, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose. Dual article titles such as the one proposed are generally discouraged on Wikipedia, and the current title is the most common name. Rreagan007 (talk) 02:16, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

References

The Domain is Pukekawa

BilledMammal keeps deleting sourced information in this article about the Māori name and the official name for the site, and keeps making an incorrect, unsourced edit, currently stating: "In 2014, "The Domain", a hill within the Auckland Domain, was officially changed back to "Pukekawa"" in the article and "the hill was renamed, not the entire site" in the edit notes.

The 2013 NZ Geographic article 'Auckland's Green Heart' cited says: "In 1845 Governor George Grey set aside 80 hectares of central Auckland for a park. On the crest of an ancient volcano..." and "It was also once an inferno. For much of my life I was unaware that the Domain—or Pukekawa by its original Maori name—is largely the remains of an ancient volcanic eruption."

In 2009, the New Zealand Journal of Botany article 'Discontinuous late Pleistocene-Holocene pollen records from Auckland Domain, northern New Zealand.' says "Two sediment sequences from Pukekawa crater, Auckland Domain, contain silty clay underlain by fibrous peat." and "sediment sequences from Pukekawa crater, Auckland Domain"

The 2014 Heritage NZ article 'The Citizen's Domain' says "Pukekawa is the Māori title given to the Domain".

The Auckland Domain Act 1987 which states 'Domain' is the 75 hectares of land also referred to as 'Auckland Domain'.

At the start of the Naming section of the article, I wrote "The Domain was called Pukekawa by Māori". This was was cited and deleted with no explaination. In the intro, I wrote The Auckland Domain [...] is also called the Domain". This too was cited and deleted with no explaination.

As shown in the above pre-2014 sources, the volcano and crater were already called Pukekawa. There was no call to change the name of the volcano or crater. The Domain isn't "a hill within the Auckland Domain". The Domain was a name of The Auckland Domain (by act of parliament) before it was officially changed to Pukekawa in 2014. The 'Mana Whenua o Tāmaki Makaurau Collective Deed' Treaty settlement and the NZ Gazetteer states the "Geographic feature type" of 'The Domain', changed to 'Pukekawa', as a 'hill'. It uses the same type for the 15 other volcanic public reserves/parks covered by the Deed. It does not say 'The Domain' is "a hill within the Auckland Domain".

The 2021 Stuff article "Auckland: Three of the best volcanoes to climb" says "Pukekawa/Auckland Domain. You want old? You’ve got it at Pukekawa, which erupted more than 100,000 years ago, making it one of Auckland’s oldest volcanoes. It’s also the city’s oldest park and home to the Auckland War Memorial Museum which sits on the crater rim." It doesn't say Pukekawa is a hill in Auckland Domain. It says Pukekawa is Auckland Domain.

The 2020 Auckland Council article 'Matariki Dawn Karakia captivates crowd' says "Pukekaaroa Hill is part of Pukekawa, the name given to Auckland Domain, stretching as far as Stanley Street."

The 2019 NZ Herald article 'Auckland: Where unknown volcanoes lie beneath the surface' says "Pukekawa, the Auckland Domain, is one of the city's oldest volcanoes and erupted over 100,000 years ago. The volcano is the city's oldest park and is the home of the Auckland Museum."

The 2014 NZ Herald article 'Volcanic cones regain Maori names' says "The Auckland Domain will revert to its original name of Pukekawa."

E James Bowman (talk) 22:09, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

• The issue is that you are relying on WP:OR and WP:SYNTH. No source states that the entire park has been renamed with the exception of the 2014 NZ Herald article, which is contradicted by the Gazette which both clarifies that the renaming is limited to the hill, and renames "The Domain", the official name of the hill, rather than the "Auckland Domain", which is the official name of the park. Evidence that the park has not been renamed can be seen in the fact that the Auckland Council does not use the name "Pukekawa", as if it was the official, gazetted name they would be legally required to use it under the NZGB Act 2008. BilledMammal (talk) 00:19, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
  • What are your sources for "The Domain", a hill within the Auckland Domain, was officially changed back to "Pukekawa"" in the article and "the hill was renamed, not the entire site"? E James Bowman (talk) 01:09, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
    • Your sources; which state that the recognized name for the location is "Auckland Domain", not "The Domain", though the latter is sometimes used, which state that the renamed location is a hill, and the fact that the Auckland Council does not use "Pukekawa" to refer to the Auckland Domain, which they would be legally required to do if the gazetted name referred to the domain, rather than just the hill. BilledMammal (talk) 01:31, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
      • My sources, including the Auckland Domain Act 1987, use the names Auckland Domain and the Domain interchangeably. My sources state that The Domain was officially changed to Pukekawa, and classify its geographic feature type a hill (as apposed to a mountain, island, lake etc). None of my sources state the Domain is a hill within the Auckland Domain. None of my sources state a hill within the Domain, rather than the whole site, was renamed. The Auckland Domain is a hill. It rises up from its surrounds. That's why the Museum is so visible and is used by shipping. There is a hill within Pukekawa / Auckland Domain. Its a small volcanic cone called Pukekaroa Hill. There is no small, seperate hill within Pukekawa / Auckland Domain called The Domain. If you believe there is, please quote the source directly. The Council does use the gazetted name. It uses it in the dual name Pukekawa / Auckland Domain. And its signs say both Auckland Domain and Pukekawa (as you can see in my photo in the article). E James Bowman (talk) 02:18, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
        • The gazetted name is "Pukekawa", not "Pukekawa / Auckland Domain". And the Auckland Domain Act 1987 uses "Domain" as a shorter reference for the "Auckland Domain". It doesn't use "The Domain" as a shorter reference for it, and it doesn't indicate that "The Domain" is an official name for the Auckland Domain. BilledMammal (talk) 02:44, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
          • I agree the gazetted name is "Pukekawa", not "Pukekawa / Auckland Domain". What's your source that says the Council legally must only use the exact gazetted name? The Act says "Domain means the land first described in Schedule 1", which is all of the land of Auckland Domain. Which is my point. Do you agree none of my sources say there is a small, seperate hill within Auckland Domain called The Domain? E James Bowman (talk) 05:29, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
            • The NZGB Act 2008 says that. And that is not your point; your point relies on "The Domain" meaning the land first described in Schedule 1, as "The Domain", not "Domain" or "Auckland Domain" is the hill that the Gazette states has been renamed. BilledMammal (talk) 05:34, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
              • The NZGB Act 2008 doesn't say that. It says the official geographic name must be used. "Pukekawa / Auckland Domain" uses the name "Pukekawa". Auckland Council often refers to Auckland as Tāmaki Makaurau / Auckland, but the official geographic name is Auckland. Do you agree none of my sources say there is a small, seperate hill within Auckland Domain called The Domain? E James Bowman (talk) 06:00, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
                • The underlying issue is that you relying on your interpretation that "The Domain" is another name for "Domain" which is another name for the official name, "Auckland Domain", and that the government decided not to use the unambiguous official name in the name change. This violates WP:OR, and cannot be used in an article. BilledMammal (talk) 06:07, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
                  • Page 18 of the Deed says 'The Domain' is an "Existing geographic name (official, recorded or local usage)". The Gazetteer says Pukekawa "Was locally known as The Domain." 'The Domain' wasn't the official name. It's what we locals called it. As stated in many of my other cited sources. Where is your source stating there's a seperate hill within Auckland Domain called The Domain? E James Bowman (talk) 06:49, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

                    Honestly I wouldn’t put so much faith in the public servants who drafted the deed, bill, etc. I’ve been in essentially that job myself, and it’s a lot of just getting the thing done. They aren’t lawyers or historians. My guess for what happened is that the hill had no real name in English, so locals just referred to it as “the domain”, intending the park. So when the agreement was made and the hill was given the official name of “Pukekawa” they just filled in the “before” side of the table with something recognisable. Realistically the hill never lost the Māori name, because (in my opinion) it never had a true English name. (Obviously the other take is that people did refer to the hill as “the Domain”, but at this point it’s semantics, because the hill’s English name is now Pukekawa.)

                    That the park sits on much the same site as the hill is a small confusion here, but the two are not the same. Depending on how you look at the essence of a hill, the domain is either sitting on a part of the hill, or the hill is within the grounds of the domain. (Where does a hill start or end, right?) — HTGS (talk) 01:22, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

                    • You've provided guesses and opinions. Where is your source that a hill called The Domain (in a deed that was negotiated for three years) was inside, or seperate to, a park called the Domain? (Again, the NZ Herald reported the name change in 2014 saying "The Auckland Domain will revert to its original name of Pukekawa"). E James Bowman (talk) 02:54, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

                      Can you clarify for me what your point is? Because as far as I can tell, you’re saying that the geographic feature (a hill/volcano) and the municipal feature (a domain/park/reserve) are one and the same. (NB: The two can theoretically occupy the same footprint, while not being the same thing.) This makes little sense to me for multiple reasons. My guess is that prior to designation as a domain, Māori were not using Pukekawa to refer to a reserve. And when drafting the Deed, it is my opinion that the designation of “hill” is not typically used to refer to a park. I hope I don’t have to show that the park exists? My guess is that you’ll find it in Auckland’s reserve management plan. — HTGS (talk) 12:18, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

                      • The Auckland Domain Masterplan (2016) says "Auckland Domain is Auckland’s oldest park and at 75 hectares is one of the largest in the city. It is the extinct cone of Pukekawa volcano and has an extensive history of Maori and European use." "It is". That's what I'm saying. The Domain is Pukekawa. Many of Auckland's major parks and reserves are volcanos and classified as hills by LINZ. No parks are classified as parks. E James Bowman (talk) 01:58, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

                        I'm not going to reiterate that a domain is a thing in a different way to how a hill is a thing, because at this point I almost feel like you're trolling, but I will throw out a couple of useful links for other readers of this discussion:

                        • Auckland Domain Reserve Management Plan, and
                        • Archives to find other domains/reserves/parks that are similarly covered by the 1977 reserves act.

                        Note that in the domain's RMP they actually mention a "Pukekawa" as a "site" important to Māori culture, so presumably they didn't—in 1993—see the two as equivalent. — HTGS (talk) 02:44, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

                        • Please watch your WP:CIV. You've linked to the Auckland Domain Management Plan 1993. Here's the Auckland Domain Masterplan 2016 (that I quoted from):

                          • Auckland Domain Masterplan Part 1
                          • Auckland Domain Masterplan Part 2

                          I've edited the Article to reflect the source info better, retaining WP:NPOV on this issue. E James Bowman (talk) 06:06, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

                          I apoligise if that was rude, but I do feel that we are failing to agree on what I see as the simplest of concepts. I'm sure you've been around here long enough to have had frustrating conversations with other users. Maybe this is even one of them lol.

                          Perhaps to illustrate by hypothetical, I invite you to imagine the idea of the hill growing larger in some way (tectonic activity, giant drilling equipment, supernatural forces etc); if the hill were to expand and fill all of the neighbouring suburbs, the reserve would not automatically shift or grow with it. Maybe the council would decide that because of a shifting landmass, they would acquire and convert private land, but I hope you find that possibility as unlikely as I do.

                          Further, per page 48 of the masterplan you linked (appendix A1.6 or the eighth page of the second pdf file), Pukekawa does not occupy the entire reserve. — HTGS (talk) 22:32, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

@HTGS: @E James Bowman: I've noticed the slight edit war over the wording in the lede - would a potential solution be to split off the content about Pukekawa (being the volcano) into its own article? At the moment, it seems to be one of the few volcanoes in the Auckland field not to have one, so it would make sense. Turnagra (talk) 18:28, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

I’m 100% fine with that idea. No objection. I know it’s been raised before, but it’s not something I’ve assessed myself, just because these tupuna maunga as volcanoes aren’t my area of expertise. — HTGS (talk) 19:14, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Ngā mihi Turnagra. Auckland Council's Manager Community Parks and Places, Martin Van Jaarsveld, has told me the official name of the park is Pukekawa / Auckland Domain. The evidence of that name exists in the sources I shared here from council, museum, media and publishers. Those 14 sources are more than enough evidence for the dual name to be in the article intro, as it has been until two days ago, and as a formal name in the introbox. Googling the name shows more recent reliable sources.

Conversations I've had with council, mana whenua and the museum confirm Auckland Domain and Pukekawa are the same place, in the same way the various Tūpuna Maunga reserves are inseparable from their respective volcanic cones. It sounds like this will become more and more obvious in future, so I wouldn't bother separating into two articles myself. Name changes can take time to fully bed in. For example the park signage, which has 'Auckland Domain' and 'Pukekawa' on seperate lines, won't be replaced with slashed dual name signs until the current ones get old. Auckland Museum will change their website address when Google Maps updates the name of the park, as they're linked (Google are reviewing the change).

Obviously my conversations aren't usable as sources on Wikipedia, but I plan to introduce new secondary sources to the article as they're published. E James Bowman (talk) 03:29, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Once again I think you’re missing the point that the geographic hill, the volcano, the fort, and the reserve can be different things occupying similar space. But there’s no accounting for local governments apparently. If they want to use the name of the hill for the name of the reserve that’s one thing, but it doesn’t make the hill into the same thing as the reserve. Are they planning to use Pukekawa as a single name in the long term? — HTGS (talk) 06:13, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

I think it's important to note that nothing precludes further changes down the line if a case can be made for them. The way I currently see it, the maunga is unambiguously Pukekawa and is probably notable enough to justify an article in its own right. Splitting it out would mean that we're getting proper recognition for the maunga, regardless of what name the domain eventually settles on. Turnagra (talk) 19:32, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Mana whenua don’t call Pukekawa a ‘maunga’ meaning mountain, they call it a ‘puke’ meaning hill. They told me they relate to Pukekawa as they relate to people, in the same way Wanganui (river) and Te Urewera (hill country) are recognised, now with their own legal identities. Like a person, Pukekawa has a name. When Pukekawa was reserved, Pākehā called it ‘Auckland Park’, then 'Auckland Domain’ and ‘The Domain’. Mana whenua continued to call it Pukekawa. When geologists worked out the geographic hill was the remains of an ancient volcano, they named the volcano Pukekawa. The geographic hill was officially named and gazetted ‘Pukekawa’ at the same time 11 of the 14 Tūpuna Maunga were given official (gazetted) names. Auckland Council and others now use the dual official (not gazetted) name Pukekawa / Auckland Domain for the reserved hill. In answer to your question HTGS, I haven’t been told if council plan to shorten that to Pukekawa. E James Bowman (talk) 21:25, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

'The site was named "Pukekawa" by Māori before being gifted to the new town of Auckland in 1840.'

This claim is not supported by the references given.

NZ Herald: The cone on which Auckland War Memorial Museum stands has reverted to its pre-European name of Pukekawa (no mention of land being gifted)

1news: No mention of Pukekawa or the Domain

NZGEO: Does not appear to verify the claim either.

Furthermore the appropriate place to discuss the history of the land would be in the history section, not the name section. Traumnovelle (talk) 23:20, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

The NZ Geographic article 'Auckland's Green Heart' cited says: "For much of my life I was unaware that the Domain—or Pukekawa by its original Maori name—is largely the remains of an ancient volcanic eruption." So I've edited the first sentence to "The site originally named "Pukekawa" by Māori." using this source.

The renaming reported in the Herald is covered in the third para of the article. E James Bowman (talk) 00:16, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

@Traumnovelle You've edited "Soon after signing the Treaty of Waitangi, Ngāti Whātua Paramount Chief Apihai Te Kawau gifted 3000 acres of land on the Waitematā Harbour for the new capital of Auckland, including Pukekawa." removing "including Pukekawa", stating "I checked all 4 references and they do not support the content, please stop adding OR." Para 76 on page 14 and the map on page 15 of the "Cultural Values Assessment in Support of the Notices of Requirement for the Proposed City Rail Link Project" shows the area gifted which includes the Pukekawa / Auckland Domain land. E James Bowman (talk) 00:56, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

That isn't referring to Auckland Domain, it is referring to the hill. As in the body of the article: 'In 2014, the geographic hill between Parnell and Grafton, locally known as "The Domain", was officially named "Pukekawa" as set out in a Treaty of Waitangi Settlement. The place name was changed to reflect the historical association of local Māori with this site.' Traumnovelle (talk) 01:23, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

The 2014 NZ Herald article 'Volcanic cones regain Maori names' says "The Auckland Domain will revert to its original name of Pukekawa." under the photo of the Auckland Domain. I've added that back as a source. E James Bowman (talk) 02:48, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

That is an image caption, the actual body states: 'Many of Auckland's volcanic cones, including those at the Domain'. Traumnovelle (talk) 03:13, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. That part of the Herald article is sourced in the third para of 'Naming'. E James Bowman (talk) 03:34, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

What? The Herald article simply does not support the claim it is referenced to in the first paragraph, which would just be better off being removed as the information is explained later anyhow. It is an unnecessary duplication. Traumnovelle (talk) 03:42, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Auckland Domain, also known as The / the Domain, is a park named Pukekawa / Auckland Domain by Auckland Council, and is a geographic hill officially named Pukekawa. They are all the same place/site as explained in the article. The first name for the place/site was given by Māori. So that's the logical place to start the section on Naming, which now reads "The site was originally named "Pukekawa" by Māori."

This is directly supported by two source articles. The NZ Geographic article about Auckland Domain / the Domain (both names are used in the article) says "For much of my life I was unaware that the Domain—or Pukekawa by its original Maori name—is largely the remains of an ancient volcanic eruption. The NZ Herald article about Auckland volcanic cones regaining their Māori names leads with a photo of Auckland Domain / the Domain (both names are used in the article) with the caption "The Auckland Domain will revert to its original name of Pukekawa."

Two more sources that show Auckland Domain is the place originally, and now, named Pukekawa by Māori are here where Te Ao says "He lived as the protector of Auckland at Pukekawa, a site of significance to Māori that is now known as the Auckland Domain" and "Pukekawa or the Auckland Domain is a sacred place to Māori", and here where 1 News says "It comes as a special commemoration event is set to be held atop Pukekawa, also known as the Auckland Domain".

(Note, 1 News also says "The domain was part of a 3,000-acre block of land gifted by Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei ancestor Apihai Te Kawau to the Crown to establish Auckland City in 1840."). E James Bowman (talk) 03:39, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

But this is an article on a park, and the park was not 'originally named Pukekawa' and the source does not support that claim. Traumnovelle (talk) 03:41, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

"The site was originally named "Pukekawa" by Māori." says site not park. This gives historical context for the recent naming of the park. E James Bowman (talk) 03:58, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Perhaps it would just be easier to say that the hill was and is named Pukekawa? ‘Site’ just introduces confusion. (It’s also possible I was the one who introduced the word ‘site’.) — HTGS (talk) 06:02, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

This, I'd prefer more clearly identifying it as such. Traumnovelle (talk) 06:16, 27 October 2024 (UTC)