Talk:New Zealand

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: It appears that this was again removed surreptitiously. I've restored the link. --Hazhk (talk) 19:02, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, they are distinctly separate and importantly so. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 19:57, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Parliament and House of Representatives 

message: 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 https://www.stats.govt.nz/news/unemployment-rate-remains-3-4-percent/ Ljcavers (talk) 12:36, 16 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 16 February 2024 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: To make this clearer, I have now split these into two separate sentences. PatricKiwi (talk) 08:57, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sport section outdated. 

message: New Zealand was discovered by spanish people during the 16th century. Needs to be changed. 93.156.202.253 (talk) 22:16, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Have you got reliable sources to back this claim up? Turnagra (talk) 22:24, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  New Zealand Discoverment 

message: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: I have raised the issue here. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 20:32, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
replies: text: 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)
thread_title:  Ross Dependency