Talk:Chatham Islands

message: Hi, noticed User:203.144.32.165's reordering of names in this article and Chatham Island/Rekohu.  I know this is a contentious issue amongst the inhabitants.  The original was in order of when the names were bestowed - 1500s or so for Rekohu, 1791 for Chatham Island and 1835 for Wharekauri.  Is there a better principle to apply to this? --Tirana 02:58, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd favour Rekohu -> Chatham -> Wharekauri. Moriori 03:28, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Would it not even make sense to move the article to Rēkohu? 80.71.142.166 (talk) 08:43, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Order of names 

message: The history section states,
:The name "Chatham Islands" comes from the ship HMS Chatham, whose captain William R. Broughton landed on November 29, 1791, claimed possession for Great Britain and named the islands after the political head of the Royal Navy (coincidentally also named Chatham).
If it's only a coincidence that the ship and the RN head had the same name, is it still correct to say that the name of the islands derives from both the ship and the RN head?  If Broughton intended to name it after both then the sentence should be reworded to sound less self-contradictory, if not then which is correct?  Vaughan Pratt 16:52, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've replaced that text with just "First Lord of the Admiralty". I don't think it matters much here how he was appointed. --Avenue (talk) 23:38, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: My guess is the name came from the First Sea Lord, not the ship. It was commoner to do that I think. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 18:12, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origin of name 

message: Is it possible to mention that the Maori not only enslaved the Moriori, but they ate them? This is not disputed.
08:09, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maori invasion and genocide 

message: It seems highly misleading to offhandly state the percentage of residents who are Maori, as we currently do: "The population of 609 individuals have European, Māori (64.2%) and Moriori origins." The biggest problem here is that Moriori are classed as Maori by Statistics NZ, but our article seems to suggest that the 64.2% figure does not include Moriori. The omission of a corresponding figure for Europeans (65.6%, not even counting the 9% who said "New Zealander") and the conflation of descent/origin with ethnicity are also problematic. I will try to fix this up. -- Avenue (talk) 00:24, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ethnicity statistics 

message: I changed the claim that the report entitled Rekohu . . . contained an extensive description of Maori fishing rights claims. What this report is extensive about is the Moriori people of the Chatham Islands. 
I also want to elaborate on my displeasure with casual citation. I've seen this before in Wikipedia: when a source is found on the Web, the editor omits either the title, the author, or even both. Instead, they use the name of the Web site, which may not have anything in common with the name of the source. A different kind of offense is truncated names, as with Rekohu. 
There has been a failure to use Rekohu as a source. It's a lengthy report of a permanent political settlement which contains a mass of history. It's lazy to use only Jared Diamond's bestseller on social anthropology as the source for the Maori invasion. I think it's a good idea to keep that because the book is widely available and also because it addresses a topic not addressed in Rekohu. But as for the specifics of the invasion, of course Diamond only had the same few sources as the did the commission that wrote Rekohu.  Hurmata (talk) 14:44, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  May 1 2011 edits 

message: What is "British mercenary ship" supposed to mean? Apart from being an unusual way to refer to a hired merchant vessel, it sounds very POV to me.
The doubt that the Moriori were the "primordial population".  They were not there since the beginning of time. Indigenous is the normal term.
How can Moriori be recognized to be "former Maori". They are either Maori or they are not.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.197.15.138 (talk) 21:02, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bias and inaccuracies 

message: Could someone please add a "Media and communications" section patterned on the one for Pitcairn Islands?  thanks Shannock9 (talk) 02:34, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Media and communications" Please 

message: Waitangi, the largest settlement in the islands, is marked on the map  in the wrong place! Admittedly it is only a mile away from where it should be, but as the entire settlement is only about a quarter of a mile long in that direction (NNE/SSW), this is a big enough discrepancy to matter. Now the author of this map, the guy who put it up, did a fine job generally drawing it; and I do not know the Wikipedia etiquette for anybody else (like me) to download the map, alter it and put it back again so I will not attempt to fix this. But the place marked as the township by the black circle labelled "Waitangi" is on one of the bays facing more or less WNW, at the point where the road (at a gentle bend in it) is nearest to the shore. Just north of that on the road is a group of buildings marked on the Google maps satellite photo as Chatham Islands Marine Radio. Waitangi itself is further north again along that road, on the shoreline on the eastern side of the promontory, where the shoreline curves most tightly, at the southernmost end of the main sweep of Petre Bay. That place is named Waitangi Bay and the shoreline road is named Waitangi Wharf. 
Also, on the opposite side of the island, the only other settlement of any size or with a name, Owenga, is marked on Alexander Karnstedt's map by another small black circle about 1km to the south of where it should be shown, which is (again) on the north-facing shoreline close to where the letter "O" of the name "Owenga" almost touches the shoreline on the map. Instead of that, you will see the circle is almost at the centre (in the N-S  direction) of the promontory there, which that ends to the east at Manukau Point. 
I  base these statements on looking carefully at the satellite photos of these places on Google maps. it is quite clear where the buildings making up these settlements are, and they are marked with names/captions also. There is also the local website  which has its own map whowing as a street plan the Waitangi area complete with names of the few streets/roads the island has — which are mostly in this small area.
Iph (talk) 03:24, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Waitangi marked in wrong place on the map 

message: Further ibfo on the lagoon - how shallow is it? who lives in it? and so forth. Also, how about some up to date photos, panaramas, and of the Chatham's inland bits too. "ibfo" is a miskey for "info" but gonna leave it in coz it kinda looks like an Nigerian Yoruba placename. So there you go.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.67.145.164 (talk) 00:18, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  More stuff needed anent Chatham's geography 

message: Having them there always struck me as a little obscure. Shevonsilva what are your thoughts on this and the page you made expanding them Rangitihi Survey District? C.C. Andrewgprout. (Dushan Jugum (talk) 05:54, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I am inclined to support deletion Andrewgprout and have added a "subst:proposed deletion". Shevonsilva please explain the page on its talk page, I will be very susceptible to correction.  (Dushan Jugum (talk) 06:20, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  I have to dig into this more,  I will reply when I am back.  Thanks for the interest.  Shevonsilva (talk) 14:57, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

text:  Chatham Islands Council is more like a cross over of 1st and 2nd level administrative divisions, effectively resulting survey districts to a bit more importancy with either 2nd or 3rd level administrative divisions.  I have created a category too to organise future important survey districts If someone creates those  further in future.  Thanks 18:09, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I was wondering if there was a local exception, thanks. I will spend some time building up the page. I am still leaning towards delete, but want it done right. (Dushan Jugum (talk) 18:44, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rangitihi Survey District. (Dushan Jugum (talk) 19:40, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text:  You people spent much time on building parent article.  No problem, I will leave it up to you to decide.  Thanks for improving the article too.  Administrative divisions of overseas territories are very flaky sometimes and are not defined well too sometimes.  :)
Shevonsilva (talk) 20:56, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Just to note the Chatham Islands are not an overseas territory as indicated in the above discussion. Andrewgprout (talk) 22:22, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Survey districts 

message: I request that Te Rauparaha be named as the leader of the Ngāti Mutunga and Ngāti Tama iwi massacre of Moriori in 1832. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Te_Rauparaha  — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndrewHart500 (talk • contribs) 09:02, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Present properly-sourced, reliable evidence that he was, and it'll happen. —VeryRarelyStable 09:29, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  I repeat: present properly-sourced, reliable evidence. —VeryRarelyStable 11:12, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Te Rauparaha was Ngati Toa chief - not Ngāti Mutunga nor Ngāti Tama.  Andrewgprout (talk) 00:57, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Te Rauparaha?