| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Whakatāne article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
 | Material from Whakatāne was split to Whakatāne District on 29 December 2020. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter page exists. Please leave this template in place to link the article histories and preserve this attribution. |
Toi traditions
editJust a note that more research may be needed to make sure that the Toi tradition presented here is authentic, and not the version constructed by ethnologists of the late 19th-early 20th century, like S. Percy Smith and Best. Just from memory, I think that in the authentic traditions there are two Toi - one who never left Hawaiki, and another who was always in Aotearoa. Smith or people like him combined the Toi/Whatonga traditions with the Kupe traditions to produce a version in which Toi came to NZ, having heard of Kupe's discoveries; a sequence not attested in genuine traditions. Kahuroa 06:57, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
- This is correct. Rongowhakaata Halbert has clarified the situation considerably in his book Horouta (see article on Opotiki for citation, ISBN etc), which is much more complicated than that stated above. But even before this recent work, J. Roberton published similar research in the Journal of the Polynesian Society and Alf Lyall also. I'm afraid this is not the only case where McLintock's Encyclopaedia is erroneous, I am astonished anyone still uses it. MisterCDE 04:52, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, I think David Simmons debunked this as part of his analysis of the Kupe trads - but that would have been after McLintock was published. Unfortunately it has probably been incorporated in local myths. How shall we rewrite it? Kahuroa 06:26, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
Natural Disasters
editThe 2004 flooding and 1987 Edgecumbe earthquake could possibly be included under a geography/natural disasters heading. Does anyone have any objections? (Benjamin J Melville 03:56, 4 December 2007 (UTC))
Population data
edit@Gadfium: the population data transclusion has stopped working and I suppose that's to do with the macron that I've just added. I've added the macron to the 2018 dataset but that hasn't resolved it. If it's something else than a caching issue, could you please have a look? Schwede66 21:58, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
- @Schwede66: The broken call in this article is using the 1992 template ({{NZ population data}} redirects to {{NZ population data 1992}}). I've added a macron to that and it works. See [1]. It might pay to add a new line to the templates for each case so the old name still works; that will give us time to update articles before the next update to the population templates.-gadfium 22:14, 21 March 2020 (UTC)
- I've reconsidered adding the names with macrons to the templates, as this will complicate updating them. It's better to just pass the town name without macrons to the templates. I'll try to find all the places which call {{NZ population data 2018}} with a macron and change them.-gadfium 04:28, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
- Yeah, I’ve seen you beavering through populated places. Obviously, if all template calls are covered, there’s no point making the update process any more complicated than necessary. Schwede66 09:16, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
- I've reconsidered adding the names with macrons to the templates, as this will complicate updating them. It's better to just pass the town name without macrons to the templates. I'll try to find all the places which call {{NZ population data 2018}} with a macron and change them.-gadfium 04:28, 12 April 2020 (UTC)