# Talk:Kaiapoi Pā

This review is transcluded from Talk:Kaiapoi Pā/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Cloventt (talk · contribs) 01:07, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Zawed (talk · contribs) 10:38, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
I will review this one, comments to follow in due course. Zawed (talk) 10:38, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
Sorry, it took longer than expected to circle back to this, but some initial comments:

The lead is a bit skinny given overall length of article.
Unless I missed it, the statement in the lead The nearby town of Kaiapoi takes its name from the pā is not supported by the main body of the article
Image tags mostly OK, but the plan image needs a US tag
Dupe links: Pegasus, Kapiti Island, Te Āti Awa
The HNZ stuff in the infobox is mostly uncited since the main body doesn't mention the designation dates and reference numbers
First para of Description section uncited
Also in the Description section, At the time of the siege...: no context for "the siege" (the lead can't provide the context). Suggest rephrasing to say "By the early 1830s" or similar
In the "Early history" section, The pā was a major centre of nobility...: suggest rephasing to avoid "major centre" language since that is also how the preceding paragraph starts.
In the "Later history" section, the statement concerning the erection of the monument and the inscription is uncited (I realise that the latter is copywritten from the photo but it still needs to be cited)
Also add context for Canon Stack - who was he? I also notice that he is referred to as Reverend later in the Toponymy section
Final sentence of the first paragraph of the Toponymy section is not cited. The second paragraph also needs to be cited
Suggest adding English-language translations in brackets for words in Te Reo. e.g Pā (hillfort)
Cite 22 doesn't specific the minute:second, at least that what I assume is meant in cite 6?
I think it isn't referenced to a specific timecode because the whole thing is about that work, so it doesn't really make sense to give a specific part of it. David Palmer//cloventt (talk)
I will take a closer look at the prose once the above has been dealt with. Zawed (talk) 09:41, 15 January 2025 (UTC)

I've resolved most of these I think. David Palmer//cloventt (talk) 23:16, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
Hi @Zawed, is this review going to progress? If not, I would prefer to just close the review and wait for another one. David Palmer//cloventt (talk) 19:42, 27 January 2025 (UTC)
Still progressing. I see one thing is still uncited, have added cite tag for that. More comments:
which got its name from pā.: suggest "which derives its name from the pā." I also note the cite for this fact (cite 3) doesn't actually say that.
Y Done
was the Kaitangata gate...two main gates, Hiakarere and Huirapa: suggest making clear that these are the names of the gates. Also what is the significance of these gate names?
Y Done, I'm not sure of the signficance of the names but it is mentioned in the sources.
Just within the walls...: since the previous sentence also starts of with 'Just', suggest starting this sentence differently to  avoid the repetition
Y Done
By the early 1830s the pā had a population of around 1,000 people.[7]: thinking about it, I think this sentence would better work in the history section.
Y Done, moved it to the end
In the 'Conflict with Te Rauparaha' section, it seems to me that the 3rd para, other than mentioning Te Rauparaha's return to Kapiti Island after the initial defeat at Kaiapoi could be excised entirely without affecting the rest of the section. It isn't directly relevant to Kaiapoi pā. The very last sentence of the 6th para could be removed as well.
Y The attack near Akaroa was quite important, as it was part of his general campaign against Kai Tahu. That lasted several years, I think it would be strange to not mention it. I've condensed it down and combined it into the end of the previous paragraph.
Would the sources support a statement to the effect that the site was never repopulated? I also note that there is no mention of it being tapu, as is stated in the lead.
Y Changed the term used to 'wahi taonga', which is the term used in the Waimak District Plan and seems to be the preferred term of the local hapu. Also ref'd this to the district plan. Can't find anything specifically stating it was never repopulated. The pā was pretty completely destroyed, and the refugees mostly rebuilt at Tuahiwi, or travelled south to Moeraki in Otago.
In the Toponymy section, who is Natanahira Waruwarutu?
Y Done, clarified that he lived there
Source spot checks: issue with cite 3 as noted above; also cite 8 does not appear to support what is cited to it. Cites, 1, 2, 4 to 6, 12 and 31 OK. Cites 27 and 28 should be replaced with cites 1 and 2 (they are the same).
Y Replaced [8], and condensed those duplicate refs.
Finally, Evison 2006 doesn't seem to be used at all so should be removed from the bibliography.
Y Done
That's probably about it for me. Zawed (talk) 10:11, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
Thank you! I think I have resolved all of that. David Palmer//cloventt (talk) 00:45, 29 January 2025 (UTC)
This looks to be satisfactory, so I am passing as GA. I believe that the article meets the necessary criteria. Good work! Cheers, Zawed (talk) 09:08, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Shouldn't the monument inscription be put into sentence case? I don't think we need to preserve all upper case. Nurg (talk) 08:43, 25 January 2025 (UTC)