Talk:Culture of New Zealand/Archive 1

message: Is it just me or is this section bizarre? I'm sure there are a few ignorant souls out there who can't tell the difference between NZ and England but do we really have to take their claim so seriously?
I'd advocate re-framing it somehow, maybe as a dispute about what constitutes NZ culture, and with a link to a general page on culture as a concept.
NZ forever 02:31, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Of Course there is a NZ Culture

message: Maybe it's just a case of "Cultural Cringe" but it seems to me that every one of the points mentioned in the Attitudes section portrays New Zealanders in a negative light. Comments like "the desperate assertion that sheep shearing is a valid sport or maybe art form" are not exactly neutral.
Having said that I do agree with a lot of what is said, and never having left New Zealand, I am unaware of international opinions. 
Do others, kiwi or not, agree that this section is overly negative?
--AaronCaskey 14:16, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Article Too Negative?

message: While I tip my hat to the people who have written this article, I do question the accuracy of it. I would argue that this article cites a number of elements that may have been true in the 1950s and 60s, but are fairly rare these days as to make them erroneous to cite as indicative of contemporary Kiwi culture as shared by many. 
Now, if the article is trying to point out unique elements of Kiwi culture, then fine. But it appears to me that it is trying to describe the 'Culture of New Zealand' (the title) and in that case suffers from a lack of objectivity, research, and evidence that a Wikipedia article should aspire to have.
Some things that I would question:
* "Maori culture is increasingly being identified with New Zealand ..." - Compared to when? Maori culture has always been identified with New Zealand.
* "... there is a degree of inverse snobbery known as the 'Tall Poppy Syndrome', in which people who are seen as (over) ambitious and having ideas above their station are cut down to size" - This is an oft-quoted idea, but based on what? Based on the celebrated successes of Peter Jackson that have 4 times closed the centre of Wellington, and Adam Adamson recently? Based on the pride most New Zealanders have over our tall poppies in fashion, wine, food, and other areas of culture? I would argue the inverse, that Kiwis readily celebrate and support the people who succeed.
* "In contrast to the above, many people are apathetic about local government issues, with turnout as low as 10% for local body election in 2004. Turnout for non-compulsory Central Government elections is normally above 80%." - I'd like to see references for these statistics before I believe them.
* "For this reason many of New Zealand's best artists go overseas to further their careers, especially to Australia, but also to Europe or America." - Which field of arts? Certainly musicians often base themselves overseas, but as far as gallery-type art is concerned New Zealand's best artists still live here. This wasn't the case 30 or more years ago, though.
Where is it mentioned that you can stop in nearly any small town in New Zealand and find at least one place that will serve fantastic food and coffee? This seems significant, and fairly unique when comparing with the culture of the UK, the predominant settlers of NZ. This side of New Zealand has been ignored in favour of repeating vague cliches of rural NZ.
===Suggestions===
* I'd suggest the article begins with historical perspectives on the Culture of New Zealand, how it has changed over the decades with regard to the forces that have provoked the changes. This will bring it up to the contemporary perspectives on the Culture of New Zealand, and will help clarify the old and now rare from the new and often-unwritten.
* That some of the commonly recognised elements that are dubiously correct about New Zealanders are moved to a section called 'stereotypes'. 
* That there is greater acknowledgement of the urban cultures of New Zealand
*That the Godzone section be augmented with one for Aotearoa (no one I know under 50 calls it Godzone except as a joke, but even LiveJournal calls it Aotearoa!) or maybe that we have a section on multicultural/cross cultural influences eg hangi. It doesn't really reflect the NZ I know yet - still sounds a bit like Australia.
218.101.75.206 05:08, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Myth-making?

message: * I'd suggest the article begins with historical perspectives on the Culture of New Zealand, how it has changed over the decades with regard to the forces that have provoked the changes. This will bring it up to the contemporary perspectives on the Culture of New Zealand, and will help clarify the old and now rare from the new and often-unwritten.
* That some of the commonly recognised elements that are dubiously correct about New Zealanders are moved to a section called 'stereotypes'. 
* That there is greater acknowledgement of the urban cultures of New Zealand
*That the Godzone section be augmented with one for Aotearoa (no one I know under 50 calls it Godzone except as a joke, but even LiveJournal calls it Aotearoa!) or maybe that we have a section on multicultural/cross cultural influences eg hangi. It doesn't really reflect the NZ I know yet - still sounds a bit like Australia.
218.101.75.206 05:08, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggestions

message: Added the tag, since it seems to be that most of the information seems to be unverifiable and editoralized.  Don't get me wrong, its well written. I am just not sure how encyclopedic it is. Roodog2k 19:14, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original Research 

message: Why is Vegemite listed under Kiwiana, with a (similar to Marmite) at the end in parenthesis? Shouldnt it be the other way around? Vegemite is Australian, Marmite is Kiwi.
:I have wondered the same thing; however I was not 100% sure Brian | (Talk) 08:12, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Marmite is British, not Kiwi (although the version manufactured in NZ is made to a different recipe than the original - see the article for details). Our current text seems fine to me. -- Avenue 09:58, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I would still think Marmite is more popular than Vegemite Brian | (Talk) 10:08, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Funny, I would have thought the opposite. No doubt perceptions vary depending on what you use. Googling hasn't helped me much - the only thing I can find is this paper, saying that "... in New Zealand, where it [Vegemite] ... occupies a market share approximately equal to that of Marmite." -- Avenue 11:44, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, but isn't the point that the modified variant of Marmite is unique to New Zealand? Not to mention the fact that Marmite is a  Sanitarium product (as opposed to Vegemite, which is Kraft). --Dom 12:17, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vegemite? 

message: NOTE
-It's clearly proven that the Wright Brothers flew before that Richard Pearse guy.
-New Zealand is renown for its snobbery in claiming that they invented everything, from nuclear physics to the ballpoint pen! New Zealand has invented useless crap like crumpet machines and they claim that anything "even minutely associated with New Zealand" is a "Kiwi" idea.
-I was absolutely shocked after the launch of the A380 Superjumbo in 2005. The European scientists, engineers and manufacturers had put so much effort into making the aircraft. Then along comes the snobbish New Zealanders, who claim that (a) they invented flying and (b) that NZ should deserve credit for the A380 as it used "NZ aluminum in the wings"! 
-Marmite is not from New Zealand, it's from Great Britain. Vegemite is from Australia. 
-As an intelligent Asian student in New Zealand, I had received resentment and hatred amongst the anti-intellectuals in New Zealand. It's true; New Zealand doesn't value intelligence like the United States [where I live now for college at UCLA]. 
-The "Tall Poppy Syndrome" is also prevalent in economic circles. Wealthy people who've deserved their money for their hard work are frowned upon in New Zealand. To combat this, the government of New Zealand has an overly generous welfare system, in order to remove even small amounts of economic inequality. 
-New Zealanders have an "everything's gonna be alright attitude" and the country is useless in diplomatic circles, considering it contributes in a negligible effort in maintaining World Peace.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 222.155.229.72 (talk • contribs) 
:The foregoing comments are predominatly opinions. Wikipedia uses facts. These talk pages are used to determine the facts rather than put forward opinions.  If you have doubts about that factual basis of the content of Wikipedia please make these known or edit the article in question.  Alan Liefting 21:36, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Y'all have all got it wrong 

message: "General Bernard Freyberg, famously stated that all his troops wanted for happiness was the three Fs - Feeding, Fighting and "procreation"."
Did he actually say 'procreation'? If he said 'fucking', this should be written here. (Wikipedia is not censored). MadMaxDog 07:39, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Too PC???

message: this article is truely terrible
:Care to more specific about what what is wrong and how it could be improved. - SimonLyall 12:43, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: oh dear

message: Worth mentioning that New Zealand is just a far away from the South Pole as Spain is from the North Pole... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Joros (talk • contribs) 22:11, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Close to the Pole? 

message: Substituted at 14:36, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: Have a look at Culture of Germany for an example of a good quality culture page.
Specific issues:
* Lack of citations.
* Sprawling intro section.
* Sprawling all sections - If the sections are large enough they should simple reference the main article and give a concise summary. 
The lack of citations is a severe issue. It reads as if somebody has just written their own interpretation of New Zealand culture, without any academic research or reading.   — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.235.105.2 (talk) 01:31, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: This article is very low quality

message: "British and Irish culture in New Zealand has been significantly influenced by Māori and Polynesians."
How, exactly? This is a claim that gets made a lot and I have yet to hear of a credible example. In general this page is vague and tends to trade in stereotypes rather than facts or even examples. It's also fairly shocking that there is no section on Maori culture. I know it has its own page, but surely Maori culture is part of New Zealand culture, even if it's not part of the dominant culture? At some point I will do an overhaul of the page... possibly it will involve rewriting the whole damn thing. And kiwiana is going to get its own page so that the list doesn't clog this one up too much. Sigh... this is what comes of browsing Wikipedia when you're tired. --Helenalex 06:53, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  vagueness 

message: "Ironically it is not generally understood in New Zealand that it has a unique food culture."
Well, call me stupid, but I don't understand that New Zealand has a unique food culture. The only distinct thing the article puts forward is that we apparently use more butter than British people do and that we have a few local specialities. This does not constitute a unique food culture. British people would probably use more butter if it was cheaper (and these days health probably comes into it, but it does here too), and having unique ingredients does not mean we have a unique food culture; it's just silly to say that we're different from the Poms because they don't eat Bluff oysters - when would they get the chance? How many NZers can really afford to eat Bluff oysters anyway?
If someone can make the case for NZ actually having a distinct food culture, please do so. Otherwise, I will rewrite (and mostly delete) the section. I don't think not having a distinct food culture is anything to be ashamed of. Most national cuisines developed before cheap long distance travel, when people were forced to use local ingredients and hadn't recently come from anywhere else. Ours is a distinct variety of an Anglo food culture we share with the British, the Irish, Australians and to a lesser extent North Americans, but not a distinct food culture, at least in my opinion. Again, if you disagree, please make your case! --Helenalex 01:10, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  cuisine 

message: I'm inclined to remove this as a full list of iconic NZers would be way to long, and everyone has differing opinions as to who is and isn't iconic. I think it's much more useful to use them as examples of particular NZ traits or stereotypes. This shows why they are iconic and is thus much more informative. --Helenalex 09:05, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of iconic NZers 

message: I am intending, over the next few weeks to edit New Zealand articles to fit current official terms. I will do more than a search and replace, so as to ensure grammar is correct. 
The fact of the matter is, Pakeha is a colloquial and non-official term, unknown to persons outside of New Zealand, and taken by many New Zealand Europeans with a great deal of offence, not to mention the mere definition of the word is under constant debate and scrutiny.
For the benefit of all who read through New Zealand articles, especially those from overseas, there needs to uniformity throughout all articles when describing our (New Zealand European) race.
Therefore I put forward that New Zealand European be the uniform description of the white race living in New Zealand. --Hayden5650 09:06, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Since you are apparently proposing to edit several New Zealand articles, not just this one, I think it would be wise to seek a wider audience. I have copied this to Wikipedia:New Zealand Wikipedians' notice board, and suggest that the discussion takes place there. -- Avenue 10:10, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Zealand European over Pakeha 

message: There is little mention of that, and none at all in the lead. MadMaxDog 11:06, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would question how much influence Polynesian and Asian culture has actually had on mainstream NZ culture (apart from food). Obviously these cultures exist within New Zealand and have developed distinct local variations - and if someone who knows about this could expand the relevant section it would be good - but thats not the same as being influential. If you can think of an example of influence than great, but this is 'culture OF new zealand' rather than 'cultures IN new zealand', which is far broader. In response to Hayden, white power groups are fortunately a tiny minority and no more deserving of a mention here than paedophile groups, weird cults, and other tiny groups that no one likes. --Helenalex 21:28, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Polynesian and Asiancultural influences

message: I have deleted two paragraphs from the culture section for the above-mentioned reasons. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 211.179.213.223 (talk) 08:03, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps you missed the references for one of the paragraphs.-gadfium 08:40, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: (edit conflict) The second paragraph you deleted cited two references (one for each sentence). It is reporting the arguments of others, not our own. The writing seems okay to me; do you have some specific criticisms we can address? I don't think that simply deleting it is the best way to improve it, and I'm restoring it for now. I agree that the first paragraph is lacking sources - I'll restore it with a citation request added. (gadfium has since restored it.)-- Avenue 08:53, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Badly written, speculative, and unsourced 

message: Is it just me or does this article only seem to focus on the negative points of New Zealand society? Most of which are inaccurate and/or outdated. I thnk this article should have been left to be written by someone who lives in New Zeland or who actually know what modern New Zealand is like. 202.0.61.94 01:29, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Please expand on this a bit. I think I know what you mean, there could be more on the NZ fun attitude to life, and less of the oppress/depress/repress stuff. But how about spelling out more what you mean and giving some ideas to balance the article up? Kahuroa 06:24, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Hey, just because you disagree with something doesn't mean that the writer doesn't live in New Zealand or know 'modern New Zealand'. I'm probably the main contributor to this page, and while I'm currently overseas - and we need a section on the near-compulsory OE - I've lived in the country for two and a half decades, all of them recent. So nyeh. --Helenalex 21:23, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See Overseas experience, already linked from OE. Yes, it should be linked from this article too.-gadfium 04:05, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Anti-New Zealand 

message: It is true that many New Zealanders claim The Pavlova, Split Enz, Phar Lap, Crowded House and other such things as their own. What this section of the article omits to state is that they actually have good reason for doing this. It therefore gives the impression that New Zealanders have an unreasonable, inflated view of their own cultural exploits. I have gone through all of the examples given and found that they are all either incorrect, inconclusive, or at the very least contestable.
For example:
After decades of debate, the Pavlova recipe is now accepted by experts as being from from New Zealand (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavlova_(food)#cite_note-gnt-0).
Richard O'Brien spent all but a few months of his first 22 years of life in New Zealand. Sam Neill does have a Northern Irish background, but moved to New Zealand when he was 7, where he was both educated and began his acting career. Russel Crowe was born in New Zealand, has considerable New Zealand ancestry and also lived in New Zealand from the ages of 0-4 and 14 to 21. It would not be unreasonable to call him a New Zealander, although his Australian connection is possibly considered to be greater.
While Crowded House was largely based in Australia and have had a number of Australian/American band members, Neil Finn, the principal songwriter and band leader, is a New Zealander. Split Enz is a New Zealand band.
Phar Lap is undeniably a New Zealand born horse.
The article references Joh Bjelke-Peterson as an example of New Zealanders being quick to call someone whom they do not approve of a "non New Zealander". Bjelke-Peterson left New Zealand when he was two years old and never returned, hardly a true blue kiwi.
Regarding the second paragraph of the Attribution section ("Because the measure of New Zealand success...), this sounds believable but it would be interesting to see some actual evidence of this.
Lakos (talk) 14:58, 21 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attribution Section 

message: Hi, someone put the  template on the page. That's fine but it should be accompanied by other tags, such as  or , specifying which sentences need correction. Thoughts? ~~ Ropata (talk) 07:06, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah right, someone put a  template on the page and never justified it on the talk page. You could have surmised yourself that it was unjustified, and removed it. Instead, you added a tone tag. How do you think that helped the project? I've removed both. Incidentally, you should place any new comments at the bottom of the talk page, where I have moved this to. Kaiwhakahaere (talk) 08:24, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Ropata did correct some vandalism that went along with the earlier removal of the  tag. I don't think they deserved to be sniped at (which is how your response comes across to me). Asking other people for input before removing a tag certainly doesn't hurt the project. But I'd agree that the tone tag would have been more helpful with some indication of what their concerns were. Ropata, can you please expand on this? -- Avenue (talk) 11:30, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd like to keep an encyclopedic, generalist tone to this article. I hope it doesn't get swamped by trivia from pop culture like Music of New Zealand. There are a LOT of claims that need references. I'll tag them sometime. The section on Maori culture was terrible, but I've just fixed it up a bit now. I guess I'm a bit of a perfectionist. Overall though I like this article and think it has a lot of good info. Assuming good faith by my fellow editors, I reckon we can make this a GA. Cheers. ~~ Ropata (talk) 02:37, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Weasel tag

message: Wikipedia is not censored. All of the "stereotypes" listed are positive, and things I have never heard of (Which is surprising, as I'm Australian, and quite well versed in stereotypes). I'm sure if you asked anyone in the world about New Zealanders, the first thing they would say is the classic sheep-intercourse gag. Be it true or not, if it's deemed unfit to be included in the stereotypes section, then it should be removed altogether. I'm not going to edit it in myself as it is bound to cause controversy, and I'd like to hear what others say about it, but like it or not, it is the most known New Zealand characteristic (Especially in other Oceanic countries). Of course, this applies to all nations, but this is the most blatantly one-sided "stereotype" list I've ever seen. SellymeTalk 08:49, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not really a stereotype, it's a joke, and is covered under New Zealand humour#Sheep jokes.-gadfium 21:39, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe we should put it a "See Also" link under the main heading? It seems like it's fairly relevant. SellymeTalk 23:34, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  A stereotype is a popular belief about a group of people. No-one really *believes* those jokes, so it's not part of the stereotype and as noted is already covered on the NZ humour article. Also the stereotypes section is currently about the stereotypical New Zealander *as seen by New Zealanders*. If we tried to include every stereotype of New Zealanders from the point of view of other countries it would be excessively large, e.g. are you going to include the stereotype of a New Zealander as perceived by a Samoan or a German?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.89.82.248 (talk) 22:42, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Stereotypes list

message: "New Zealand vowels in general are softer." What does "softer" mean? Less loud? I presume not, as it would make more sense to say New Zealanders don't talk as loudly as Australians. Does it mean positioned lower in the mouth? More centralised? Either of these descriptions would need elaborating if they were used. But "softer", applied to vowels, conveys no meaning whatever. Koro Neil (talk) 14:44, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: "Soft" in the context of phonetics means unaspirated or sibilant pronounciation. It is a universal term and not applicable only to New Zealand or Australian speech. Buistr (talk) 03:34, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Soft" vowels? 

message: Hi folks. I have cleaned out the stereotypes section of this article. I am sure there is more that can be removed. I was unable to find any reliable sources to cite the section, and the few citations used do not mention stereotyping at all. The sources must discuss stereotyping (not just stating that someone wore men's trousers or really likes beer, or whatnot, that doesn't mean they are stereotypes). Wikipedia relies on reliable secondary sources, therefore, if you seek to replace this content please use this guide to help fund reliable sources: Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources. I also encourage anyone interested to discuss it on the talk page as well, explaining your edits and so forth. Stereotypes are sensitive subjects, and one's that need serious sourcing to back them up. Thank you! SarahStierch (talk) 16:59, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  No original research, please 

message: The section on "Attitudes" seems to link many areas of New Zealand culture back to the sport of rugby, for whatever reason. I have no idea why the 1981 Springbok Tour is mentioned, or why it's relevant. Sorry, but a lot of this article doesn't make much sense if you aren't from NZ. I'm not convinced it would even make that much sense to anyone who happens to be from NZ either -- more source citations, and more relevant source citations, would help a lot. OttawaAC (talk) 23:18, 26 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The "Attitudes" section doesn't make any mention of rugby as far as I can see, however it would be unsurprising if it did since the sport of rugby plays a large part in New Zealand cultural life. As noted in the article the 1981 Springbok Tour is relevant as an event that highlighted changing attitudes in New Zealand during that period and the resulting social conflict.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 219.89.82.248 (talk) 22:48, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: 1981 Springbok Tour?

message: Chinese people arrived in NZ in 1842 (Appo Hocton in Nelson), two years after the signing of the TOW, and have played a formative influence in the culture which is not acknowledged.  Read books such as the Dragon and the Taniwha, and Opium and Gold, to understand this better.  Men like Chong Ching established the export dairy business. Chinese influence was undermined by a series of racist laws and actions like the Poll Tax, curtailing what might have been a larger impact on the culture, yet nonetheless areas like Otago and Taranaki were heavily impacted by Chinese in the 1800s, with Chinese remaining the third largest nationality in NZ culture today.  From the early days NZ was not a bi-cultural nation but a multi-cultural nation.  It was just that Chinese were neither citizen nor subject in the first century of nationhood, and their role in the building of the nation and the establishment of the culture is often curtailed or expunged. This article should avoid that treatment. I'm sorry if I didn't make this contribution correctly. It is the first time I have done it don't know how.  I also don't know where the tilde key is. (Unsigned by User:222.153.87.20)
:User:222.153.87.20, inserted this contribution into the middle of a conversation further up the page, so I have shifted it to here. User:222.153.87.20, the ~ sign near the top left of your keyboard is the tilde. ) Moriori (talk) 21:31, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Chinese people

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Culture of New Zealand. 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/20090311002755/http://www.transparency.org/news_room/in_focus/2008/cpi2008/cpi_2008_table to http://www.transparency.org/news_room/in_focus/2008/cpi2008/cpi_2008_table
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:42, 3 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I was about to be bold and remove the image from the article, seen at right with a caption claiming the gents pictured are "Pakeha New Zealanders, c. 1906".  The image is named Kiwiperformersc.1906.jpg but the Kiwi part of that was given to it by the uploader. The description says  "An extraordinary set-piece, suppled by D'reen Struthers, reputedly taken at Tahuna Beach, New Zealand, in 1906". The problem is it doesn't claim them to be New Zealanders and there is no way of knowing if they indeed are. There were an awful lot of immigrants coming to the country, so some of them would/could be from anywhere. Nice image  -- note the Hokonui moonshine flag and bottle -- but can we really claim it is true to label and they are all "Pakeha New Zealanders"? Comments? Moriori (talk) 01:36, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  There doesn't seem to be enough provenance (is that the right word in this context?) on that image for it to be useful anywhere on Wikipedia, I don't think. The newspaper visible at the left of the image could be a 1906 copy of the NZ Truth (the section visible matches issues available on Papers Past - but the man would be reading the back of the paper - or just posing with the paper to show the masthead?) I can at short notice think of two places that could have been known as Tahuna Beach, and the better known one is fairly much at the other end of the island from Hokonui, so the pirate flag may just be a pirate flag prop of some sort. Daveosaurus (talk) 10:59, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm going to go ahead an remove the image for the reasons given. Unless a clear source for the image can be found. But it's not the best image anyway; a more recent, organic photograph would be more helpful than a staged set-piece which only serves as a snapshot of outdated early 20th century culture. --Hazhk (talk) 16:52, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Funnily enough, somebody's just written an article about this photograph:  Basically, it's a staged photo from the Golden Bay / Collingwood area of flax millers on their day off. Daveosaurus (talk) 19:51, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  I was about to be bold, but.... 

message: Kia ora, 
Using the word "borrowing" is not only inaccurate, its almost condescending. 
The more appropriate term is ... "cultural appropriation" and as I understand it, this was a trend, post 1940, in an effort to 
cut the apron strings from Mother England, and to create a distinct culture. Our own special "branding".  
If you're going to attempt to tackle the topic, you need to acquaint yourself more with "intellectual history", and be aware of how trends resulted from certain historical events.  
Theres also been a cultural rennaisance with cannot be credited to mainstream assistance.  It is in fact the outcome of 
the Land March of 1975, that changed the playing field.  Maori wanted to preserve their language, and were no longer content to be brown pakehas.   And thats okay.   Historically, Maori believed there were benefits in the Pakeha annexation - no doubt, but the cost was huge. Dont be afraid to broach into this, it will make your writing more authentic. 
All the best.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pare wehikore (talk • contribs) 05:12, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree and suggest the section Cultural borrowing and adaptation be deleted. Pakoire (talk) 09:00, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Borrowing or appropriation? 

message: probably more inclusive to say that in recent decades NZers (not just Pākehā as in text) have discovered 'ethnic' foodTheodore D (talk) 08:31, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  foodie culture 

message: I feel the focus of this article is confused between Māori and non-Māori people and I suggest there is too much content with everything about NZ trying to be summarised. I feel like editing the beginning section by deleting most of the the brief history of New Zealand - can this be conveyed more with links to other articles?  
Then the focus can be more on the current "ideas, customs, and social behaviour of a particular people or society" relating to the dominant culture (present in the major institutions and systems) with some references to aspects that have influenced this (I would suggest the Treaty and patterns of migration?). 
Pakoire (talk) 07:24, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Focus of article  

message: Most of the article reads terribly and lacks citations.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by GSNW8FRJ (talk • contribs) 02:38, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: agree there is work to do and editing of this article is needed - brevity and citations needed Pakoire (talk) 08:57, 8 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Article is very poorly written