Jump to content

Talk:New Zealand

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleNew Zealand has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
On this day... Article milestones
January 8, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
September 22, 2007Good article nomineeNot listed
May 1, 2010Good article nomineeListed
March 4, 2011Peer reviewReviewed
On this day... Facts from this article were featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on September 26, 2004, September 26, 2005, September 26, 2006, September 26, 2007, December 13, 2007, September 26, 2008, September 26, 2009, and September 26, 2010.
Current status: Good article

Parliament and House of Representatives[edit]

I don't really understand the point of having two links for the "Parliament" and the "House of Representatives" on the right side of the page. No other country with a unicameral parliament has that on their wikipedia page because it's redundant. It only makes sense to have an overall "Parliament" or "Congress" link if it's a bicameral parliament. Not for single chamber legislatures. I feel we should delete one of them and just have a single link for the parliament on the page, but I figured I'd put it up here to see if there's a valid reason for keeping two links there. EnglishPackets (talk) 19:58, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Parliament and the House of Representatives are distinct, so there is no "redundancy". A comparative approach is flawed because no other unicameral parliament has a separate chamber as a subdivision. The New Zealand Parliament is comprised of the House of Representatives and the monarch. So long as Wikipedia has separate articles for New Zealand Parliament and New Zealand House of Representatives then both should be linked. --Hazhk (talk) 22:38, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It appears that this was again removed surreptitiously. I've restored the link. --Hazhk (talk) 19:02, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, they are distinctly separate and importantly so. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 19:57, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 16 February 2024[edit]

Under the section on Economy the following is stated

"Unemployment peaked just above 10% in 1991 and 1992,[253] following the 1987 share market crash, but eventually fell to a record low (since 1986) of 3.7% in 2007 (ranking third from twenty-seven comparable OECD nations).[253]"

The statement about unemployment is incorrect. The record low since 1986 is not 3.7% recorded in 2007. According to statistics New Zealand it is 3.2% recorded in December 2021 [1] Ljcavers (talk) 12:36, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Done though placed the new low later in the paragraph as the mention of the old one was in the context of its time period. ― novov (t c) 08:52, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Sport section outdated.[edit]

Article reads:

"The All Blacks, the national rugby union team, are the most successful in the history of international rugby and have won the World Cup three times."

This has changed at the end of 2023 with the Springbok team from South Africa winning the 2023 Rugby World Cup giving them a total of 4 titles vs New Zealand's 3. Waffensohn (talk) 11:33, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No. The 1st part refers to their test match record (i.e. international match record). Only the last part refers to their World Cup record, which, as you indicate, has not changed from 3 wins. Nurg (talk) 03:44, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To make this clearer, I have now split these into two separate sentences. PatricKiwi (talk) 08:57, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Zealand Discoverment[edit]

New Zealand was discovered by spanish people during the 16th century. Needs to be changed. (talk) 22:16, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Have you got reliable sources to back this claim up? Turnagra (talk) 22:24, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ross Dependency[edit]

The dependency is not part of New Zealand or the Realm of New Zealand so the infobox self-made map should be removed. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 11:13, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What has changed since you raised this matter in 2020? See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:New_Zealand/Archive_7#Infobox_map Daveosaurus (talk) 11:19, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have raised the issue here. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 20:32, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That feels a lot like WP:FORUMSHOPPING. From what I can see, every country with an Antarctic claim has it on at least one of their infobox maps and I don't know why we should be different from that. I'd be happy for it to be a lighter green (as other claims are) but it shouldn't be removed altogether by any stretch. Turnagra (talk) 22:20, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not forum shopping. The issue relates to the time when NZ was a dominion before full independence of government, meaning the issue is just as much British empire related. I have commented on the BE article. We should not group all seven claims together as if they are all the same, they are not at all. And using other WP articles as a guide of what is factually correct is of course wrong. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 22:28, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, the issue relates to this page. It doesn't matter when it happened, because it's talking about which map to use here, and so this page is the right place to discuss it. Turnagra (talk) 05:23, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the first step is to get it clear what the constitutional connection is between New Zealand and the dependency. The various sources and wiki articles be used do not make that clear. Even the NZ govt page that is used as a RSS only says, in total isolation 'The Ross Dependency is constitutionally part of New Zealand'. The Ross Dependency article isn't clear either in its reference to the 1923 Order. As I give this more thought, the answer to the question 'Is the Ross Dependency part of New Zealand' begins to get longer and longer. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 09:02, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New Zealand Sign language video request[edit]

See Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Deaf#Video_request_(NZSL_and_SASL) for more info on request. ―Howard🌽33 15:51, 7 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not a video, but I've added a graphic to the infobox demonstrating how to sign the name. --Hazhk (talk) 18:53, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The picture is great, but I've had to remove it because the uploaded image on commons violates the copyright policy there. See c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Aotearoa New Zealand.png and c:Commons:WKL. ―Howard🌽33 21:39, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just FYI for anyone looking to recreate it, that sign is for ‘Aotearoa’, not ‘New Zealand’, although it does appear to be quite popular, in the same way that “Aotearoa” is in English. There are two signs for New Zealand, as linked by Howard on the project page: [1] and [2]
Also, just for completeness, there appear to be are two signs for ‘Aotearoa’ ([3] and [4]) — HTGS (talk) 06:35, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A reality check might be useful here. The purpose of the infobox is "...to summarize—and not supplant—key facts that appear in the article." It is not the place to promote an issue of minor notability. It is debatable whether that detail is justified even in the 'Languages' subsection where it should be placed. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 10:47, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I forgot to add: As far as I was able to tell with a little bit of googling, New Zealand has no official name in NZSL (as always, correct me if I missed something). If it had an official name, I would be much more ardent in pushing to include it in the infobox (somehow; ideally as a link or tooltip). As is, I think it’s better something to think about with a mind towards the future, but better not included there at this point. Whether to include it lower in the body is a different question though. — HTGS (talk) 05:45, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]