Talk:New Zealand nuclear-free zone

message: Due to its large size this article was cut and paste from "Nuclear-free zone" and moved to it's own page. For the history pertaining to the main body of this article please refer to history at Nuclear-free zone.Mombas 21:32, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The article is very POV and not at all neutral.  Many comments are politically biased, and without references. For instance the sweeping statement that "it is often speculated that the sinking of the Rainbow Warrior was an unnecessary act of revenge against Greenpeace and New Zealanders themselves for their successful campaigns to enforce a nuclear weapons test ban at Mururoa".  The only source for that claim is Greenpeace itself.  As a New Zealander I have never heard speculation that this was the reason for the bombing.  Incidentally, why is there even any reference to this in an article on the nuclear free zone?124.197.15.138 (talk) 02:22, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: The article New Zealand's nuclear free-zone

message: I am removing, "The ban on nuclear power remains enforced on the basis that it is the party policy of New Zealand's two dominant political parties." Please provide a citation if you wish to reinstate it. Nurg (talk) 09:36, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your contribution. I have reworded the text and added supporting references. Mombas (talk) 23:56, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

text: Tweek it if you wish? However Nuclear power remains off New Zealand's agenda as long as there is opposition to it 
from the populous and the controlling Government of the day have no intent?Mombas (talk) 08:30, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ban on nuclear power 

message: I have removed the following material from the lead, as it is detailed info which doesn't belong there, and there is a cn tag in the first sentence which needs attending to: Johnfos (talk) 23:16, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Added this latest anti nuclear survey to Recent Developments chapter. Mombas (talk) 02:17, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There is actually quite a lot of support for nuclear power, and even more for the removal of the antinuclear legislation. This entire article is far too political, and too obviously written by supporters of the ban. The suggestion that "The legislation was a milestone in New Zealand's development as a nation and seen as an important act of sovereignty, self-determination and cultural identity" is simply false, and a pretentious and unjustified claim.Royalcourtier (talk) 07:22, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Removed material

message: An image used in this article, File:Nambassa 1978 Workshop, Nuclear Free Pacific Information. Photographer unknown.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status 
;What should I do?
Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.
* If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale
* If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used.
* If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:35, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: File:Nambassa 1978 Workshop, Nuclear Free Pacific Information. Photographer unknown.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

message: The statement that the labour party's anti-nuclear stand is a "sacrosanct touchstone of New Zealand foreign policy" is very much over the top, POV and inaccurate.  Opinion polls do not show overwhelming support for the policy.  It was never voted on by the public.  And polls at the time it was introduced showed if the public had to choose between an anti-nuclear policy and Anzus, they would choose Anzus!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.197.15.138 (talk) 03:51, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree that the legislation was a "milestone in New Zealand's development as a nation and seen as an important act of sovereignty, self-determination and cultural identity".  Those are very POV statements, and not at all supported by any verifiable facts or reports.124.197.15.138 (talk) 02:13, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: The statement that "New Zealand's three decade anti-nuclear campaign is the only successful movement of its type in the world which resulted in the nation's nuclear-free zone status being enshrined in legislation" is incorrect and POV. There was no three decade anti-nuclear campaign, status cannot be "enshrined in legislation" - it is created by legislation. The legislation is not strictly speaking a nuclear-free zone at all. Nuclear power and research is permitted. And there are other nuclear-free zones elsewhere created after campaigns. The sentence is so incorrect it cannot be redrafted and ought to be deleted.Royalcourtier (talk) 23:06, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 10 external links on New Zealand nuclear-free zone. 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/20060630032138/http://greens.org.nz/searchdocs/speech5334.html to http://www.greens.org.nz/searchdocs/speech5334.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110723050155/http://www.mururoavet.com/ to http://www.mururoavet.com/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120209094841/http://library.bullerdc.govt.nz/cgi-bin/library/liinquiry?acc=00000711 to http://library.bullerdc.govt.nz/cgi-bin/library/liinquiry?acc=00000711
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080119173717/http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/article1212778.ece to http://news.independent.co.uk/europe/article1212778.ece
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140416120337/http://www.national.org.nz/About/history.aspx to http://www.national.org.nz/About/history.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110220134021/http://apsa2000.anu.edu.au/confpapers/fridriksson.rtf to http://apsa2000.anu.edu.au/confpapers/fridriksson.rtf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100415060447/http://www.newsweekly.com.au/articles/2002nov02_nz1.html to http://www.newsweekly.com.au/articles/2002nov02_nz1.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120205181051/http://archive.greenpeace.org/comms/rw/pkspy.html to http://archive.greenpeace.org/comms/rw/pkspy.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070608021211/http://www.nuclearfreenz.org.nz/index.htm to http://www.nuclearfreenz.org.nz/index.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110723050155/http://www.mururoavet.com/ to http://www.mururoavet.com/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:30, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (February 2018) 

message: This is an account of the events leading to the Labour Government rejection of the USS Buchanan coming to New Zealand in 1985.-gadfium 02:03, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Source for expansion