Talk:Stewart Island

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Point Pegasus or Port Pegasus?

I see mention in this article of Point Pegasus. Is this the same place as Port Pegasus, or are the two separate?Grutness 09:22, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Deleted text

"The people of these islands are also exempt from requirements to pay taxes, yet still receive government welfare and other services. This reflects the long-running tension between the desire of the government to retain the islands (which have major strategic importance), and the growing awareness amongst the islanders of their unique respective cultures and languages. Whether this conflict can be resolved peacefully remains to be seen." Is any of this true?

"A third, more controversial suggestion, has been made by

1421: the Year China Discovered the New World. His contention, that many of the southern place-names in New Zealand show collateral evidence for the impact of cometary debris in the 1420s, has not gained widespread scientific acceptance." Is there a single serious linguist who accepts this? I doubt it. Nurg
06:11, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Requested move 31 May 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved to Stewart Island. To save space, I have collapsed my full closure in the box below:

Full closure

In this requested move discussion, the community debates whether the article about New Zealand's third-largest island should be moved from the title "Stewart Island / Rakiura" to "Stewart Island". From a purely numerical perspective, the !vote tally is 11 supports to 8 opposes. Requested move discussions, however, are "

most recent prior stable title
" since the 2021 RM had too little participation to establish stability. Arguably, the distinction between "consensus" and "no consensus" here is a distinction without a difference.)

If usage changes in the future, a subsequent RM may yield a different outcome. Thanks to all for a productive discussion. (closed by non-admin page mover) Best regards, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:42, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:SLASH
.

  1. Google News shows 255 results for Stewart Island in the past year, compared to compared to 214 for Stewart Island / Rakiura.[a]
  2. Google Scholar shows 325 results for Stewart Island since 2021, compared to 167 for Stewart Island / Rakiura
  3. Ngrams shows Stewart Island is used fifteen times as much as Stewart Island / Rakiura
Note that these Google News and Google Scholar results are heavily biased towards the dual name; any article that includes both "Stewart Island" and "Rakiura" is counted as a use of the dual name. For example, the following 32 news articles are counted as uses of the dual name, even though they refer to the island as Stewart Island and only use Rakiura in reference to the national park, the trail, or the museum: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32

Notes

  1. ^ There were a large number of results for Waateanews that didn't include mention of either Rakiura or Stewart Island. The two articles that did include a mention are included in the totals, though not the search results.

– BilledMammal (talk) 04:15, 31 May 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 03:53, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Casliber, Rreagan007, JIP, Rsfinlayson, Jay D. Easy, George Ho, Cody Cooper, SMcCandlish, Mattlore, Timrollpickering, Roman Spinner, Darren Zhang, Red Slash, and Vanjagenije: Pinging participants from previous discussions on the same question. — HTGS (talk) 00:18, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I remember the onerous debate about trying to stop the dual name becoming the title. Thanks for the research. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 06:12, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose per the arguments made in the many move requests above – I see no reason why we need to be relitigating this again. The current title meets all the requirements of
WP:WIAN, even my National Geographic world map which predates South Sudan uses the dual name. As does Encyclopaedia Britannica, Google Maps, the US Government and so on. The dual name is far and away the best choice for the name. Turnagra (talk) 09:26, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
Of those many move requests, only one found in favour of the dual name, and that move request had just one !vote. In addition, the current name doesn't meet the requirements of WIAN, as those requirements include English-language news media, Google Scholar, and Google Ngram Viewer.
Can you link the US government source? Google Maps is also not a useful reference, as we cannot tell which place names are copied from government sources and which are chosen independently. Apple Maps and Bing Maps both use "Stewart Island", and though Apple Maps is unusable for the same reason Google Maps is, Bing Maps is sourced to TomTom which is independent. BilledMammal (talk) 09:58, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for the same reasons as the last time this was brought up. Poketama (talk) 13:08, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose move. Island has been Rakiura for many centuries longer than it has been Stewart Island. Stewart Island / Rakiura is its official name. Daveosaurus (talk) 02:19, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Daveosaurus, I agree. So what? Roger 8 Roger (talk) 20:54, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support. I think this case is quite close to being a page where the dual name should be used as the page title, and without the ngrams and other data I would have opposed this move. However, the data provided does seem to indicate that the dual name isn't the common name. I also dug out an old Heinemann Atlas and Encylopedia Britannica maps, both over 20 years old, and they only use the single name for the island. --
Spekkios (talk) 08:31, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
How much over 20 years? Given the island's name was only changed in 1998 it may be that they predate the change altogether, noting that more recent Britannica sources use the dual name. Turnagra (talk) 09:29, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That question is how I think the whole dual name discussion should be handled. Whether a modernised name is used by sources because they legally have to use it, making the source's reliability questionable, there will come a time when, due to its frequent officially imposed use, the new name does start to become embedded into common usage. It has already started in some areas which is the intent of course. At what point the new name takes over in common usage will be a judgement call. I think we still have a long way to go before reaching that point for most place names and everyday words, but some places are getting close, such as Aoraki-Mt Cook. I can see no justification in making sweeping automatic change to every place name in NZ which some editors take such pleasure doing. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 10:16, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
2001 and 2003. --
Spekkios (talk) 10:38, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
Strong Support We got too many articles with Maori names floating around the web, it is getting quite annoying. I suspect that there is a political movement going on at the moment. If we tolerate this any further, they will want to change New Zealand, North Island, and South Island too. In Australia, the government will never allow this kind of thing to happen.
Let's just move all of them to their English names please:
Stewart Island / Rakiura → Stewart Island
Manawatāwhi / Three Kings Islands → Three Kings Islands
Snares Islands / Tini Heke → Snares Islands
Aoraki / Mount Cook → Mount Cook
Clutha River / Mata-Au → Clutha River
Codfish Island / Whenua Hou → Codfish Island
Milford Sound / Piopiotahi → Milford Sound
Whakaari / White Island → White Island, New Zealand
Thank you. 2001:8003:9008:1301:DD39:BB04:EBAD:D9F3 (talk) 07:54, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yikes - this is exactly the sort of racism which shouldn't have any place in these discussions. Nobody is proposing to change the name of New Zealand, nor is this some sort of slippery slope. I'd also note that all the names you mentioned are already at the English title. Turnagra (talk) 09:57, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I guess everything is now related to racism, isn't it? Those Maori names should stay where they belong: Maori Wikipedia. Why are you people trying to make all those Maori names part of the English title? I haven't seen
WP:COMMONNAME big time. They are NOT good for our eyes. 2001:8003:9008:1301:DD39:BB04:EBAD:D9F3 (talk) 15:56, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
They are articles where the actual name of the place has both English and Māori aspects - see, for example, Aoraki / Mount Cook. If you look at any reference to Aoraki / Mount Cook for instance, chances are it'll use the dual name in that or a similar form (ie. the dual name is the common name). The reason some have the Māori name first and others have it second is because we follow the order generally used elsewhere. Some places just have the Māori first. I'd also note that there are already hundreds of places in NZ which exclusively use their Māori name. Turnagra (talk) 18:41, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To Aussie 2001:8003:9008:1301:DD39:BB04:EBAD:D9F3, There is more to this in NZ than you say. Ultimately it goes back to the Treaty of Waitangi. However, you are basically correct. Mention any opposition to this pro-Maori name approach and you will be labelled a racist. I notice a comment above where it took all but seven words before the word 'racism' was used. All official documents and maps, which is virtually all the references we have, must use the new official name, commonly used or not. All govt controlled bodies must promote Maori, irrespective of its common usage. Wikipedia is independent of the NZ govt but a group of editors have tried to follow the same pro-Maori approach. They claim the Maori or dual names are commonly used, hence they meet wiki rules; they claim that NZ English uses all these names as English names, including with diacritics, rather than as Maori foreign names. As quoted above: "the dual name is the common name". No, it isn't! It is the name used by most recent documents because they have to use that name, commonly used or not. A consequence is as you have outlined, the NZ English articles are smothered with these mixed names which is not only unnatural and annoying, it breaches 'common usage'. There is a good case for incorporating the dual names into NZ articles, more so IMO than Australia's use of indigenous names, although I'm no expert on that. The level to which that is done in NZ articles is the real question, one that cannot be answered properly if the actual situation is not properly accepted by everyone. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 20:09, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This argument feels to me like it's trying to
right great wrongs. Even if the dual names were originally made official by a political movement, like is claimed, Wikipedia should still reflect the usage of those names when they become widespread. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 21:13, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
I disagree this is about righting a great wrong - the result of not getting this done properly is significant - it affects hundreds of articles. I agree that the point is we use the name commonly used, but as backed by RSSs. If we remove the usual RSSs because they are not reliable in this situation, then we are left with a new name that is being questioned and cannot then be confirmed by RSSs. The logical consequence is that the old name stays. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 23:27, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose To be honest, the original move request with the Google Scholar/ngrams read like it was in support of the usage of dual names. The statistics show that there is wide acceptance of the dual name, rather than just being used as an official name as per
WP:WIAN. The other arguments in support of the move seem to also be debated and far from consensus. EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 13:34, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
@
common name for a place. — HTGS (talk) 03:20, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
Almost like
WP:WIAN is part of the article title policy for geographic places EmeraldRange (talk/contribs) 16:08, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
@
WP:NCGN is a convention, and not policy. Also—less fussy this time—WIAN begins by pointing out that we are looking for “the name most often used for this entity”. — HTGS (talk) 03:03, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Oppose, principally per
    WP:WIAN. Though the nomination statement indicates that the single name "Stewart Island" is frequently used, it ignores the fact that the dual name is also a commonly used name for the island. Sources such as [1], [2], [3], [4] and [5] show usage of the dual name; there are also occasional sources such as [6] and [7] that use both "Stewart Island" and "Rakiura" interchangeably. Because the single name and the dual name both have frequent use, the dual name is more useful for helping prospective readers find the article. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 21:13, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]
ModernDayTrilobite, WIAN says: A name can be considered as widely accepted if a neutral and reliable source states: "X is the name most often used for this entity". Without such an assertion, the following sources may be helpful in establishing a widely accepted name. That is quite specific and thus excludes just using the name. It also says in relation to otherwise good news sources: English-language news media can also be very reliable sources. Due caution must be given to the possibility of bias in some, such as for nationalistic, religious or political reasons. This includes most if not all news sources controlled from NZ, where the bias is having to use the new names by law. WIAN does otherwise support the use of a name change that is widely used. But, WIAN also says such things as ...even a widely recognized name change will take time to be reflected in such searches, as they may still include references to the place name before the change which at first sight supports the use of dual names. On second sight, the phrase "widely accepted sticks out, which leads us back to the wiki contradictions of how to define "widely accepted", where a usually RSS is biased, if the definition of common usage is defined as what RSSs use (not the man in the street). I think we would all benefit in opening up this debate to a global audience. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 23:25, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
sigh... Roger, nobody is forcing the media to use the dual names. Turnagra (talk) 06:19, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment having stopped off at a bookstore today, I can confirm that the latest print editions of both the Times and Collins atlases use the dual name of Stewart Island / Rakiura (as well as several other dual names). Happy to provide images as evidence if needed. Turnagra (talk) 06:21, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You're correct that news organizations are not required to use the official name, but maps published or prepared in New Zealand are - see
WP:NZNGS. BilledMammal (talk) 06:29, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
It's a good thing that both Times and Collins are major international and reputable sources then, eh? They're the textbook definition of reliable sources. Turnagra (talk) 06:40, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
They're reliable, but that doesn't mean they are independent in this regard - they still need to follow the law. BilledMammal (talk) 06:43, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Turnagra, government controlled media have to use dual names and promote them. That covers a large amount of NZ media. Maps are used courtesy of the surveyor-general who gets her pay-packet from the Crown. Rather than languishing in denial, you might want to consider taking (legal) advice or just ask the relevant board or chairperson. I spoke to someone today who said the arbitrary smothering of all NZ en-wiki articles with unknown Maori or dual names amounts to disruptive editing. That person has a point. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 06:54, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The media in New Zealand is not government controlled, and if you did even a cursory search you would find plenty of examples of them not consistently using dual place names - not something they would do if they were legally required to use them.
As to your thinly-veiled threats, if you have something to say please come out and say it rather than using
WP:WEASELWORDS. Turnagra (talk) 09:01, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
"Official maps use official names" isn't exactly the grand conspiracy you seem to think it is. Daveosaurus (talk) 06:04, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I still refute the core of your argument and disagree with your essay, but even taking it for the sake of this argument, we're talking about two major international atlases. They're about as independent as you can get, and you can't just dismiss them as not independent on a whim. I'd also note that neither atlas is universal in their use of dual names (neither uses Tasman Bay / Te Tai-o-Aorere, for instance), which they would presumably do if what you said was true. Turnagra (talk) 08:56, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
When there is a law that requires them to use the dual name, and a government agency that says they enforce the law, we must dismiss them as not independent. I note that Tasman Bay doesn't disprove this, for two reasons. First, the NZGB only requires the name to be changed when the map is being updated. If it hasn't been updated since 2014, then they would not have been required to change it. Second, the NZGB is not omnipotent; it only "liaises with offenders to remedy non-compliance" when the failure to use the official place names comes to their attention. For example, it took twenty years for them to address NZTA's failure to use the official names on some signs in the South Island.
The issue isn't that there is no independent usage, it is that we don't know which usage is independent and which isn't, meaning that to comply with policy we should avoid all sources covered by the NZGB Act 2008, particularly when there are plenty of independent sources that we can use. BilledMammal (talk) 02:59, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Per
    WP:NCNZ. We could waste a great deal of time on these. The consensus has been, when in doubt use the dual name with blanks before and after the slash, exactly as the current title of this article. This is not perfect but it works. Let us not re-debate this. Andrewa (talk) 09:28, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    @
    Spekkios (talk) 11:07, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    @
    WP:COMMONNAME. — HTGS (talk) 03:10, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]
@Turnagra.
Radio NZ and TVNZ. Overwhelmingly two of the largest media sources in NZ. One subject to a board appointed by a govt minister and the other a crown entity. The dual names are used in different ways subject to their act so there is not necessarily an issue with interchangeable name usage. The crown is obliged to promote Maori issues, such as place name usage but what that promotion is is often discretionary, hence apparent contradictory usage. This has all been discussed ad infinitum which is why I am bewildered that you seem not to 'get it'. There is some common ground between us, such as the consequences of the use of some place names in major world atlases, but we appear to be reaching that common ground from following different paths. That then creates a problem whenever a specific case has to be analyzed in detail. I do not see any threat, presumably because none was made. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 11:54, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
I note the participation of what appear to be non-NZ based editors in this discussion, something I think is needed. This entire topic of Maori words and the Maori renaissance has become over analylised IMO and has been stale for a long time. We are simply going round in circles. There is a lot of excellent work and research being done but it always seems to lead nowhere. Fresh outside eyes are needed. If we are going to resolve this endless dispute we must come up with a solution that is dead simple, and that does not take sides. Compare this with Londonderry=county, Derry=city. There is no admission that either is correct, meaning nobody gets offended, but there is a workable compromise. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 09:53, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly Oppose - The New Zealand Geographic Board gives the official place name as Stewart Island/Rakiura. This is the name now shown on New Zealand maps. This name is the result of the Ngai Tahu Treaty Settlement under Section 269 and Schedule 96 Ngai Tahu Claims Settlement Act 1998 and was effective from 1 October 1998. Both
    TITLE for these places has been to adopt a dual naming convention that uses the official dual names of places. Changing the name of this article goes against the dual name convention. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 01:34, 26 June 2022 (UTC) :(Edited to correct spelling of [[Rakiura (island)|] - Cameron Dewe (talk) 05:37, 26 June 2022 (UTC))[reply
    ]
    @
    WP:NZNC did previously support dual names, but that support was removed following an RfC last year. BilledMammal (talk) 02:57, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    @
    WP:PRECISE place names and avoid having two articles being created, one under each name. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 03:14, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    I believe you have misread the current guidelines. They only require that when there is a consensus to place an article at a dual name we use the spaced slash format, regardless of the format used by the official name or the common name.
    WP:PRECISE prefers the proposed title, which unambiguously defines the topical scope of the article but is no more precise than that - the current title is too precise. BilledMammal (talk) 03:22, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    @BilledMammal: If I have misread what was intended by the guideline then I think the guideline needs to be reworded to explain how to handle a New Zealand place name article that has a dual place name but is not placed on the dual place name as its title. The dual place name section, itself, needs to explain, or point to, the decision making process that needs to be gone through, as well as the considerations needed for using, or not using, the dual place name when an official LINZ dual name exists. I would consider the place name given by the New Zealand Geographic Board to be the most reliable source of a New Zealand place name, so any process that requires not using that (official) name needs to clear, obvious and repeatable, so it is not open to being misinterpreted or producing ambiguous results. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 05:43, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The dual name guideline is about format, and the process is covered already by
    Spekkios (talk) 07:25, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Cameron Dewe, you misspelled Rakiura. And not only did you not notice this spelling error twice, but you were so certain of this spelling that you decided to create a redirect page. This does not give me great hope that "Rakiura" or "Stewart Island / Rakiura" are well-known or well-used names by the New Zealand public. — HTGS (talk) 04:45, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @
    Rakiura (island) and there is a disambiguation page for Rakiura. I have edited my earlier comment to correct the mis-spelling. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 05:37, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    People misspell names all the time – we're not proposing different names for Rio de Janeiro or Hanmer Springs as a result of that. Turnagra (talk) 09:00, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    You’re missing the point, Turnagra. It’s not someone writing Stuart instead of Stewart, it’s instead like someone saying Stewark… repeatedly. The fact that an ardent proponent of the dual name doesn’t know the word well only proves the problem with it: the dual name is very unfamiliar to the majority of New Zealanders.
    For the record, I don’t mean to deride you at all, Cameron. It was an honest mistake and no apology is necessary. It’s just that it’s also a mistake that belies a problem in your argument. — HTGS (talk) 10:34, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - as this is the english-language Wikipedia. GoodDay (talk) 06:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    And the current title is the English-language name - glad we've got that sorted. Turnagra (talk) 08:59, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Turnagra, I am politely asking you to please stop saying that "Stewart Island / Rakiura" is the English name without any form of qualification. It will be the English name once it becomes the most commonly used name in English, not until then. As of now, it is an artificial construction made up of the English language name and the Maori language name, and that is how it is described. The two distinct languages are noted, for example, by Cameron Dewe above. The issue is how to determine the most commonly used name. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 10:26, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"Stewart Island" will do. "Rakiura"? nope GoodDay (talk) 18:31, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Stewart_Island&oldid=1194420759"