Talk:Tino rangatiratanga

message: Is it one word or two? In the title it appears as one word, but in the article, it appears as two words: tino raratiratanga. Danny
It should be two but the link I built off spelled it as one and I don't know how to fix it - it'd be good if you could do so! Lisiate
:I just did it, but for the record "Move this Page" is on the link bar to the left.  Click on that when you're on the main article page, and it will ask where you want to move it to and if you want to move the talk page too.  Type in the new title and leave the box checked (almost always) so the talk page goes with it, and the page is moved. Tokerboy
Cheers for that, I'll be able to do it now!! Lisiate
TinorangaTiratanga is one word because we never wrote anything down (except maps maybe ,lol) but if you break it down it's 4 words -tino,ranga,tira,tanga, and can thoeretically be 8 -ti-ro,ra-nga,ti-ra,ta-nga NewB4Life 06:35, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: One word or two? 

message: Somebody speedy deleted an article, Toa Warriors, containing this:
: The Toa Warriors are an Iwi based New Zealand gang, formed by the Tino Rangatiratanga movement who started off as a small group of rallying individuals and have since grown into a large united national Maori and/or Polynesian 'Union' or 'Alliance'. The Toa Warriors as a gang or mob like the Blackpower or Mongrel Mob is not recognised by any Warriors(Members)or any Associates or people associated with them, and that to be a Toa Warrior was considered a Great Honour and to be a leader or more or rather a Rangatira was the main goal, Māori youth of all kinds of backrounds aspired to be.
I can't find a way to verify it, but I got permission to undelete it and so I've brought the material here for discussion.  Is this is verifiable, does it pertain to a movement among New Zealanders of Maori or more broadly Polynesian descent?  Currently I've got the article Toa Warriors pointing at this article with a view to merging the information here, but don't want to insert inaccurate or unsourced material. --Tony SidawayTalk 16:10, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Toa Warriors?

message: "Kawana was also used prior to 1840 of the Governor of New South Wales." Doesn't make sense?
:Amended to now read  "Kawana was also used prior to 1840 to describe the Governor of New South Wales." Lisiate 21:26, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Kawana" - Bad grammar 

message: I came here looking for an explanation of what the colours and design of the flag signify. Since Flag of tino rangatiratanga is at the time of writing a redlink, any chance someone could add an explanation here? Loganberry (Talk) 01:57, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Significance of the flag's design? 

message: As a central tenet of Treaty discourse, tino Rangatiratanga provides opportunity for engagement across the political spectrum. There is a large amount of literature available to inform this page (without even including the Waitangi Tribunal reports).  I look forward to reading (and probably making) further updates.
For user information, I have moved the flag discussion from the etymology section to the flag section. I have added further references to the idea of tino Rangatiratanga as chieftainship.  However, as this is not the most frequently used interpretation of the concept, I see opportunity for further discussion around whether the many varied interpretations should be included here. Though it is not my personal interpretation, an example would include tino Rangatiratanga as sovereignty:
:The Waitangi Tribunal has found that 'on the colonisation of inhabited countries, sovereignty, in the sense of absolute power, cannot be vested in only one of the parties'.Waitangi Tribunal. (1996). The Taranaki report: Kaupapa tuatahi. Wellington, New Zealand: Author.   Indeed, 'from the day [the Treaty of Waitangi] was proclaimed, sovereignty was constrained in New Zealand by the need to respect Maori authority (or 'tino rangatiratanga', to use the Treaty's term)'. ibid.
Katarina_"Ψ" 06:47, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Expansion 

message: The head of the article should give the reader, in a couple of sentences at most, the clearest possible idea of what the article is about.  This does not seem to be the case here. The topic is certainly not the literal translation of the title.  One has to read the entire article to get a vague idea of what the expression "tino rangatiratanga" means in the context of the Maori advocacy movement.  All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 00:01, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarify meaning 

message: Not sure which part of "Māori independence" is a peacock term, anyway, the problematic are 4 lines after the first paragraph in the Origins and etymology chapter. I don't know what's going on there. If anyone does, do fix it please. Especially "Herbert Williams Williams(the brother and uncle respectively of Henry and Edward Williams, who where the interpreters of the treaty)." is not a sentence. 93.103.64.215 (talk) 08:17, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I've excised the worst of the POV material - mostly added by an editor now community banned for being disruptive - and tried to keep any actual improvements made since the last good version. If you can see any further improvements that can be made, please go ahead and make them. Daveosaurus (talk) 05:53, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origins and etymology 

message: Just a note that as a speaker of Te reo Māori, I think translating ‘tino rangatiratanga’ as “self, reality” + “evidence of breeding or greatness” is pretty nonsensical.  Tino here is an intensifier, something like ‘very/veritable/true’ and rangatiratanga is ‘the state of being a ‘rangitira’ or chief. That is in control of, in charge of your own affairs etc. So together it’s more like ‘autonomy’ or ‘true autonomy’. Just saying. Piwaiwaka (talk) 02:41, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Meaning of tino rangatiratanga 

message: In this article, it is asserted that Tino Rangatira means, among other things, sovereignty. 
Sovereignty means to rule from above (over - reign) and in Common Law, it stems from 1066 when William the Conqueror won at the Battle of Hastings and claimed all land for himself. He then granted land to his lords and disposed Englishmen for fealty and promises of military and other services. Granting land is not the same as granting absolute ownership. 
The concept of sovereignty is that the Crown retains absolute ownership and issues title to a bundle of rights called real estate. A whole legal system is based on sovereignty where the Crown retains the right to make laws based on it. When the English came to New Zealand and began to colonise it, they wished to extend the same legal system under which England was ruled (note that the Maori version of the treaty refers to "Wikitoria te Kuini o Ingarani" (Victoria the Queen of England) even while the English version refers to Her Majesty Victoria Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland). 
At the same time, having introduced firearms to Maori, warring tribes were killing each other in far greater numbers then when battles were with stone axes and spears. Thus, the chiefs and their tribes were interested English law to reduce the killings. Also, the English introduced farming, which meant making more effective use of land, thus tribal territories that were essential to hunter-gatherers whose farming was limited (kumura, for example) were willing to take money or barter for land because farming needs less land than hunting/gathering. The process of colonisers buying land direct from Maori brought its own problems because of the clash of sovereignty with "mana whenua". Thus the treaty set out a procedure where land that Maori wished to sell could only be sold to the Crown, who would then issue real estate title to buyers.
The concept of power and authority in pre-colonial New Zealand (Aotearoa) is very different. In Maori tradition, there are no titles to land and no one person has absolute ownership over land. The word for land in Te Tiriti is whenua which also means placenta. If there is ownership at all, it is in the reverse... the land owns the people because the land remains while the people are born and die, arrive and depart - that long before humans populated the planet, the land was here and most likely will be here long after humans no longer exist. This is why concepts like kaitiakitanga (guardianship and protection) are so integral to Maori world-view.
As of late, the term cultural appropriation has been used to criticise the majority for using language (or other creations) of a minority, however, in this case, it may be argued that to call tino rangatiratanga as Maori sovereignty is a form of reverse cultural appropriation, and a very loaded one because sovereignty means a lot more than the common person appreciates. It is embedded in ancient law, encrusted with thousands of years of practice and litigation quite alien to Maori tikanga
I will leave it in the article, but cite it in Talk to footnote that it is a political use of language that is inappropriate for an encyclopedia
Akonga (talk) 02:19, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Controversy over the meaning of sovereignty 

message: Kia ora User:Federalwafer and others. The page move was done without consultation nor consensus, and I think that adding (phrase) isn't an accurate reflection of what Tino Rangatiratanga is - calling it  a phrase certainly doesn't encapsulate a te ao Māori view of it, in my opinion. It is a concept, political movement, philosophy, as well as a phrase. Perhaps the page can be moved again to a more appropriate name, perhaps Tino rangatiratanga (concept), or something similar. Nauseous Man (talk) 09:30, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I recommend moving the page back to Tino rangatiratanga as the core concept from which the flag springs. With articles only for the concept and for the flag it is not really necessary to have a disambiguation page. Daveosaurus (talk) 12:08, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with . Move it back and have a hatnote. Schwede66 02:03, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree wholeheartedly with the assessment that it should be moved back, with a hatnote to direct users to the flag page. Paora (talk) 04:58, 23 September 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree - this is the primary topic and a hatnote will do, per WP:ONEOTHER. Nurg (talk) 05:05, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

text: Deleted. Quarl (talk) 03:14, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

text: It should have happened automatically. Don't know why it didn't. Done now anyway. Nurg (talk) 03:34, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  The page move