Talk:Aotearoa

Pronunciation help

For those out of earshot, a pronunciation guide to "Aotearoa" would really help. Cheers, -Willmcw 21:44, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)

I'll leave that to people who can handle the phonetic code characters better than I can, but if you use the vowel sounds and stresses from "Now say a law", you won't be very far from it. Mind you, that doesn't stop a lot of NZers from mangling it as "Ay-oh-tay-a-rower"! Grutness|^hello? 02:43, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I've added an IPA guide and as per your request. -- FP 09:26, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

Awesome- wikithanks! -Willmcw 10:02, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

whoever that is saying it, they're pronouncing it wrong. Kripto 04:49, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, the pronunciation in the audio file isn't great, not to mention the American accent! (although thanks to the attempter!) Perhaps we could have a native Te Reo speaker upload a file? 121.98.130.90 (talk) 05:20, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

The IPA is almost certainly wrong too :-( or at least, it's not what's being pronounced in the audio file. Leon 11:38, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

I've left a note at WP:NZNB. Grutness...wha? 22:08, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

I've suggested the file be deleted because it is misleading (similar, surely, to removing unsourced content). Hopefully someone comes along and replaces it, or the Māori Language Commission (or similar) releases freely reusable audio files that can be imported into WP/Commons. — Hugh (talk) 03:37, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
Follow-up: I've removed the file from the Aotearoa and New Zealand articles, and from the Wiktionary entry, and added the Factual accuracy template to the file's description. — Hugh (talk) 04:36, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

@Hl: The pronunciation is correct, it's just that the speaker has a New Zealand accent. See New Zealand English phonology for confirmation. Mr KEBAB (talk) 00:21, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

@Mr KEBAB: Are you from New Zealand? The pronounciation of this Māori word in this file is not correct. If the presence of this audio file on this page and at New Zealand is merely to indicate how "English speakers" habitually mispronounce the word "Aotearoa", then it should exist in both cases only as a footnote to an explanation of the correct pronounciation (ideally given by a native speaker).

In any case, En-nz-aotearoa.ogg should absolutely not be used on Wiktionary to indicate pronunciation. By keeping the file up and prominently visible, Wikipedia is wilfully contributing to the erosion of te reo Māori, and should be properly held to account for its actions. I am flabbergasted it's been up for 12 years. — Hugh (talk) 20:31, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

@Hl: I don't actually have to be from New Zealand to discuss this. The article New Zealand English phonology is clear: the vowel in words such as square is generally not distinct from the vowel in words such as near and such pronunciations are the current New Zealand norm. The distinction between /ˌaʊtɛəˈroʊə/ and /ˌaʊtɪəˈroʊə/ is meaningless for an average NZE speaker (as is the distinction between the vowel in bit and the second vowel in bottom) and even Help:IPA/English says that the phonetic outcome of both is typically something like [ˌæotiəˈɹɐʉ.ɘ] or something similar, much like the pronunciation you consider to be errorenous.

Are you perhaps a non-native speaker of NZE? Because I find this situation a bit confusing. People generally find it striking that New Zealanders call bears beers and Air New Zealand Ear New Zealand. Mr KEBAB (talk) 21:06, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

@Mr KEBAB: For your information, I'm a native speaker of New Zealand English who hears te reo Māori spoken every day. Please listen to the pronounciation at maoridictionary.co.nz and then tell me the pronounciation given on this article is still correct. — Hugh (talk) 21:32, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

@Hl: But that's different. We're not talking about Maori pronunciation but an English approximation thereof. As I said, many if not most speakers of New Zealand English are unable to distinguish /ɛər/ from /ɪər/. The only other way they could approximate the Maori pronunciation is by saying /ˌaʊtæˈroʊ.ə/, with pre-stress /æ/ as in tattoo, which is open-mid [ɛ] in New Zealand English. It looks strange to me and I think that /ˌaʊtəˈroʊ.ə/ is more natural as far as phonotactics are concerned. Does anyone say /ˌaʊtæˈroʊ.ə/ or /ˌaʊtəˈroʊ.ə/? Longman Pronunciation Dictionary recommends the pronunciation with /iː.ər/ (so not even /ɪər/ but /iː.ər/, disyllabic!) by the way, and I'm aware of the massive amount of research Wells and his colleagues have done to write it.

Perhaps Maori English differs from General New Zealand English in that it does not merge /ɛər/ with /ɪər/, but Maori English isn't the local standard (General White New Zealand English is). Currently, Wikipedia doesn't cover that variant of NZE at all and that should change, but I'm not sure whether we should have a separate audio file recorded by a Maori English speaker. Wiktionary is probably a better place for that. Mr KEBAB (talk) 21:50, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

"We're not talking about Maori pronunciation but an English approximation thereof." Which is precisely why it should be only in a footnote. — Hugh (talk) 21:55, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

@Hl: But why? The English pronunciation of Aotearoa is perfectly relevant to the topic. Mr KEBAB (talk) 06:24, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

The "English pronunciation" of Paris doesn't appear to be relevant to that topic. "Aotearoa" is a Māori word. — Hugh (talk) 20:42, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

@Hl: Paris isn't the capital of a predominantly English-speaking country though. Mr KEBAB (talk) 21:39, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

"Aotearoa" isn't a loan word. It's a Māori word. Te reo Māori is one of the official languages of Aotearoa. — Hugh (talk) 22:44, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

@Hl: It's absolutely a loan word when it's used in English. Even the Wiktionary entry you linked to says that and it cites three sources to support the claim. Mr KEBAB (talk) 23:02, 7 May 2018 (UTC)

Nobody says "White New Zealand English". Nobody. In fact, most European New Zealanders completely reject the label 'white'. Are you even a Kiwi?Twistedpiper (talk) 12:31, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

We can definitely tell the difference between /ɛər/ and /ɪər/, even if foreigners can't.  Nixinova  T  C  04:52, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

@Nixinova: New Zealand English phonology says otherwise and I trust it more (as I should - see WP:OR). Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 00:47, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Frankly, there is nothing wrong with the English pronunciation. The article would benefit from a spoken Māori pronunciation.--Hazhk (talk) 21:14, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Fully agreed. Mr KEBAB (talk) 21:50, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Tthere is lots wrong with it.  Nixinova  T  C  04:52, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

@Nixinova: Prove it with reputable sources. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 00:48, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

What? Prove what? That this is the wrong pronunciation? Because that's really obvious.  Nixinova  T  C  02:43, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

@Nixinova: It really isn't - look above. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 02:47, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

This is not the correct Māori pronunciation, it's an attempted pronunciation, which is what many people use. That doesn't make it correct though.  Nixinova  T  C  02:50, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

@Nixinova: I've explained that it's an English approximation, not the Maori pronunciation. As an English approximation it's probably as close as an average New Zealander can get to the Maori pronunciation without using non-NZ-English vowels. Contrary to what you said, nowadays an average New Zealander does not distinguish between /ɛər/ and /ɪər/, like the author of the recording we're talking about. I have probably a dozen of reputable sources to prove it. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 02:55, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

The file is actually terrible and is not how the word is pronounced properly. It should not at all be used in an encyclopoedia as Wikipedia should use the actual pronunciation, not an English butchering. Any New Zealander would know this.  Nixinova  T  C  04:55, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. There are other deliberate mispronunciations at Oamaru and Taieri; the problem stems from this request of FirstPrinciples. Thankfully his butchering of "Wanganui" and "te Aro" have been removed from those articles in the intervening 13 years. — Hugh (talk) 04:10, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

I have reverted an edit that added ‘incorrectly’ to the audio pronunciation of the title. Reading the talk pages, the consensus was that this audio file does not reflect how it would sound spoken by a Maori-speaking person. However, the page already notes this is ‘commonly’ spoken by ‘English-speaking’ people. I have asked that they continue any discussion on the talk pages. AussieWikiDan (talk) 13:08, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Translation

I just wanted to point out that the first two theories of the derivation of the word involve the mountains of the southern island, but then the article goes on to say that the word was orignally used ony for the north island. That seems to invalidate those two theories then, doesnt it? Also, the third theory doesnt give any indication of how twilight relates to the word at all. Can anyone clarify?

--Someones life 17:16, September 7, 2005 (UTC)

It's interesting that James Cowan, working for the Depaprtment of Tourism and Health resorts, wrote New Zealand, or, Ao-teä-roa (the long bright world): its wealth and resources, scenery, travel routes, spas, and sport in 1908. His use of the phrase 'The long bright world' as a translation seems to inicate that at least some had this concept in mind at the time.Kiwi pedant (talk) 23:29, 19 May 2009 (UTC)kiwi pedant

The first two explanations, while they referred specifically to the South Island, could equally well have referred to mountains in thw North Island.I've expanded the explanations a little, in an attempt to clarify things. As to twilight, due to the spin of the earth and the tilt of its axis there is very little twilight in the tropics. Visitors to equatorial latitudes from temperate regions are often surprised by just how uickly the sky goes from light to dark. The opposite is true with travellers from tropical zones visiting higher latitudes - twilight seems very long, and in summer the length of daylight seems abnormal (the extreme case, of course, is the "midnight sun" of Scandinavia, northern Canada and the Antarctic). "Aotearoa" in this case, would translate directly as "long white cloud", but indirectly as "long light sky". Grutness...wha? 06:56, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

I seem to remember hearing recently that the whole Aotearoa "oral tradition" thing was invented in the 19th century and that Maori never had a particular name for the whole country before then. I think I heard it on National Radio, in which case it's probably from Michael King's History of NZ - I have a copy somewhere so I'll check sometime in the next few days.

Confirmed - I have made a small edit but I think the whole article needs a bit of a tidy-up. I'll do some work on it when time permits. Reference for the changes I have just made is Michael King, chapter 3, I don't have time to figure out how to do footnotes right now. --LesleyW 02:22, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Western cultures tend to have a fascination with analysing the meaning of words and names that genuinely oral cultures don't share. Along comes The Reverend Taylor or Sir George Grey or Elsdon Best or whoever and quizzes a poor chief as to the meaning of some obscure name. The chief doesn't know the answer - who should care about such stuff - but doesn't want to admit ignorance to the stranger. He invents some likely story and the pesky researcher goes away satisfied. The researcher writes up his story and publishes a book, and years later the chief's grandchildren read it. 'Well', they say, 'fancy that, so that's what that word means - it all makes sense - its so deep and meaningful'. Then it's fact AND tradition. That's what you call tradition feedback, and probably explains most of the explanations given in the article Kahuroa 09:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Re these popular explanations - mostly they are highly dubious, and based on the post-20th century meaning of Aotearoa as referring to the whole country. The twilight thing is South Island based, and Aotearoa referred to the North Island. Māori did not come from equatorial latitudes but probably from latitudes around 20 deg South ie, Rarotonga or the Society Islands. They did not go to the South Island first, where twilight is particularly long, but most probably to Northland around latitude 34/35, technically subtropical latitudes. Twilight in the northern North Island is nothing like that of the South Island. And they did not step out of a jet, but out of a waka that took weeks to arrive, and so the twilight increase would have been gradual over the course of the journey, ie, they would not have been suddenly surprised at the change. (Even presuming they arrived in summer when twilight is long). The snowy mountains thing is patently a South Island explanation too. Hard to imagine the N.I. mountains leading to the name, as they are often/usually bare of snow or difficult to see from the north. Kahuroa 19:38, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

The twilight difference even in the North Island is quite noticeable between say Rarotonga and Auckland, and the day length also noticeably longer in summer and shorter in Winter. e.g. in late December the day length sunrise to sunset is 1 hour 20 minutes longer in Auckland than Rarotonga..that is certainly very obvious. I think the "long lightness" or "long brightening" is a very possible meaningful translation even for the North Island. Postulating Aotearoa to translate as "land of the long white cloud" is drawing quite a long bow by comparison, and smacks of a colonial interpretation. Kiwi pedant (talk) 11:57, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Proposed merger with New Zealand

Following other examples where an alternative name exists for a geo-political entity (such as Kanaky, Timor Lorosae, Kampuchea and Hellenic Republic), I propose that this article also be integrated into the state it refers to. Some country pages have a separate section about the usage and origin of their name(s), whether official or informal. --Big Adamsky 09:57, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

I've commented in more depth elsewhere, but, as a glance at this page will tell you, the concepts are not identical. This page was deliberately separated from the New Zealand one for just that reason. I strongly oppose the idea of any merger. Grutness...wha? 14:06, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

And so do I. This article clearly stands on its own merits. Stongly oppose a merger. Moriori 19:59, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Oppose - it may be appropriate in those other cases to do the merge/redirect thing, but that does not automatically mean it is a good reason to do it here. --LesleyW 10:40, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Pronunciation

The IPA notation is correct, but the audio file at the top of the page sounds a bit like 'ow-tee-a-row-uh' to me, especially the last 'o' which should rhyme with 'paw'. It would be nice to have the Māori pronunciation. Kahuroa 21:50, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Federation of Tribal Chiefs'

A group claiming sovereignty of Aotearoa would dispute the claim that Aotearoa is a synonym for New Zealand —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.255.62.134 (talk) 09:49, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

As official name of the country?

Is Aoteoroa also an official alternate name for the country? It is not clear in the description. The first page of a NZ passport gives the country's name as NEW ZEALAND . AOTEOROA with both given equal weight and prominence. --62.234.176.6 (talk) 08:43, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Aotearoa is the Maori name for New Zealand, and Maori is an official language of New Zealand, so in that sense it is official. Government agencies typically have a Maori name as well as an English one, and both are usually displayed on official stationery etc. The passport situation seems similar. I'm not convinced that this needs to be covered in this article, however. --Avenue (talk) 19:50, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

It's not yet an offical name. —Hugh (talk) 01:03, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Maybe, but I don't think we can take the word of a blog published back on 30 May 2013. Moriori (talk) 01:11, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Could anyone translate "Oceanian Republic of Aotearoa" and "Republic of Aotearoa" into Māori?--Coatbridge Town FC (talk) 10:22, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Reference missing

Re the Māori newspaper illustrating the use of Aotearoa for the North Island, here's the proper reference [1]. Present reference doesn't cover it. Piwaiwaka (talk) 17:27, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Incorrect pronunciation

[I'll start a new section here so novice users can contribute more easily.]

Recent edits would suggest that a number of users, myself included, would evidently like for the statement in the first paragraph regarding common pronunciation to be qualified by a word such as "incorrectly", or to modify "pronounced" to read "mispronounced". Since it is a fact that the audio of the pronunciation in question represents common mispronunciation, why is there objection to modifying this sentence? Saying that the audio represents "common pronunciation" isn't the whole truth. — Hugh (talk) 20:22, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

@Hugh: It's a pity to see that you're ignoring our last discussion in which I explained that not only is the pronunciation correct, it's also pretty much the only way New Zealanders can anglicize it. I suggest that you re-read our previous discussion and read New Zealand English phonology. Kbb2 (ex. Mr KEBAB) (talk) 00:44, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Describing the way that a word is pronounced in English as "incorrect" or a "mispronunciation" would be an inappropriate value judgment, and sounds like a non-neutral POV. English has no 'central language authority'. Remember also that although this page describes a Maori word, it is a page in the English-language Wikipedia. So including a common English-language pronunciation (and noting it as such) seems appropriate - just don't add the value judgment. Of course, we should also include an approved Maori-language pronunciation as well, given the word's origin. Ross Finlayson (talk) 03:12, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

The intro sucked. It is not true that that is how it is "pronounced by English speakers". Some yes, and by some Maori too. But not all as it suggested.. I've amended it to make the point. Moriori (talk) 03:23, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

If it were in fact a mispronunciation then there would be little value in including it, or linking to the file. Changing "pronounced" to "misprounced" is disruptive behaviour (WP:POINT); it seems that if you can't have your way (i.e. removing the pronunciation) then you want to subvert the text! I think that the audio file records a standard English pronunciation. I am sure all editors would welcome a recording of the ("correct") Te Reo pronunciation.--Hazhk (talk) 03:20, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

I notice just now that we do have a Maori-language pronunciation; it's included - as an external link - in the "Etymology" section. Why not, for consistency, move this pronunciation audio file earlier, and mention it first, ahead of the 'common English-language' pronunciation? Ross Finlayson (talk) 03:26, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I added the external link. It wouldn't be proper to move it inline though.--Hazhk (talk) 03:49, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

I'm currently communicating with Te Taura Whiri i te Reo Māori to help them with adding a free culture license to those audio files so they can be used on Wikipedia, but I'm a few continents away. They're definitely open to it, but the process is pretty convoluted. If anyone in NZ wants to give them more hands on help to get the files uploaded/licensed, let me/let them know! Also if any native Māori speakers want to do an upload, please do! Mayawagon (talk) 20:11, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

@Mayawagon: I'd love to help out if I can. Please email me. —Hugh (talk) 23:30, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 24 April 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Consensus against any move. (closed by non-admin page mover) feminist|wear a mask 14:32, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

---

Aotearoa → Aotearoa (name) – most searches for "Aotearoa" refer to "New Zealand", so we should move this page to "Aotearoa (name) and redirect from alternative language to New Zealand
Aotearoa → Aotearoa (place name) and move Aotearoa (disambiguation) to Aotearoa instead CityOfSails2 (talk) 03:42, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose - by WP:REFERS "Aotearoa" is a country not a name. Tayste (edits) 03:47, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment - I mean that most people who search "Aotearoa" want to go to New Zealand rather than this page.CityOfSails2 (talk) 03:56, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
  • "Aotearoa" is a name, Aotearoa is a country. This article is an etymological article, compare Britain (place name). Paradoctor (talk)
• I want to redirect "Aotearoa" to "New Zealand".CityOfSails2 (talk) 03:56, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
  • What is your evidence that people usually come to this article when they mean to come to the country article? I'm sure it happens occasionally, but the link to New Zealand is in the first sentence, so they learn something and are not much inconvenienced. If the article was moved, then those who want the article on Aotearoa would be redirected to New Zealand, and would need to find a link to the new title from there. A hatnote would help, but New Zealand is a long article with very many links, and I suspect some people would not immediately find the link. In short, Oppose.-gadfium 05:22, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
  • @CityOfSails2: Does that mean you are changing your move request from "Aotearoa → Aotearoa (name)" to "Aotearoa → New Zealand"? Paradoctor (talk) 10:48, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

• @Gadfium: What are your feelings now that the proposal has changed? On the dab page, the etymological article would be in the Top 2. Paradoctor (talk) 08:29, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

• Changing to a disambiguation page just means no one gets the page they wanted. The existing disambiguation page is pretty clear that the current page is the primary meaning. I still can't see that people who want to find out about New Zealand are likely to end up on this page as their starting point, so none of the proposals that the nominator has put forward for this page make sense to me.-gadfium 09:02, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

"no one gets the page they wanted" That's hyperbole. The point is to reduce the number of steps a reader has to perform to get to where they want, on average. With ambiguous terms, there is always a trade-off involved.

"the current page is the primary" As I argued below, we don't know that.

"people who want to find out about New Zealand" We are not talking about them. We are talking about people who want to find out about "Aotearoa". For which New Zealand is only one meaning. Paradoctor (talk) 09:49, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

• Yeah nah. That argument leaves me unconvinced. Schwede66 09:40, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Why? Does that still apply after the change of objective? Paradoctor (talk) 02:24, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes, it does. I'm still opposed. There's nothing wrong with the current setup. Schwede66 00:14, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Ok. Then this applies here, too. Paradoctor (talk) 08:00, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

• Support Retarget to Aotearoa (place name). The disambiguator "(name)" is ambiguous, it could also mean a surname, as in France (name).

As regards WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, the numbers would normally indicate leaving things as is. The problem with that is that the anthem article has comparable pageviews. We can't tell how many views of Aotearoa were actually intended for the song, or any of the other topics with the same name. The Māori anthem has been in wide use for a generation now, so we can't dismiss offhand the possibility that, with proper disambiguation, the etymological page will no longer be "much more likely than any other single topic" what people want to see. When in doubt: disambiguate, therefore: retarget. We can revisit the topic in a year or so, when traffic has reached its new equilibrium. Paradoctor (talk) 10:34, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

• Done. Move target changed CityOfSails2 (talk) 15:01, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

• Comment - I mean the current "Aotearoa" article will be located at "Aotearoa (place name)", a redirect to "New Zealand" will be located at "Aotearoa", a hatnote pointing to "Aotearoa (place name)" will be located at the top of "New Zealand"CityOfSails2 (talk) 14:59, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

• As I said above, we have no clear evidence that "New Zealand" is much more likely than any other single topic to be what readers are looking for. With the data we have, it could be that a sizable part of the anthem's pageviews should be credited to Aotearoa (anthem). In that case, there is no clear primary topic, and the dab page should be at Arotearoa. Paradoctor (talk) 15:49, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Therefore "Aotearoa" should be a disambiguation page. CityOfSails2 (talk) 02:07, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose. I agree with gadfium's comments and am unconvinced of the merits of the proposal. A downside of the proposal is the adding of an additional hatnote to New Zealand (hatnotes, when needed, are a necessary evil, in my opinion). I'm now also confused about whether CityOfSails2 wants "Aotearoa" to be a redirect to "New Zealand" or a disambiguation page. Nurg (talk) 03:34, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
  • Comment "Aotearoa" will be a disambig page. CityOfSails2 (talk) 06:02, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

A rationale offered earlier was that most people who search "Aotearoa" want to go to New Zealand and so "Aotearoa" should redirect to "New Zealand". I wasn't convinced about the merits of that proposal and didn't support it, but at least I understood the proposal and rationale. Now the proposal includes making "Aotearoa" a disambig page. I don't understand how that would reduce the number of steps or make it any easier for people to get to New Zealand. Nurg (talk) 10:24, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

So, no reply to my last sentence - no explanation of how a dab page would reduce the number of steps or make it any easier for people to get to New Zealand. Nurg (talk) 04:19, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

I was kinda hoping you'd notice that I answered your request ~34 minutes before you made it: special:diff/953029882 Paradoctor (talk) 05:40, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Anyone going to Aotearoa now, who really wants New Zealand, finds out what Aotearoa is and gets a link to New Zealand in the first sentence. Putting the disambig page at "Aotearoa" would not reduce the number of steps or make it any easier. Nurg (talk) 10:21, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Actually, it will.

Before: "Aotearoa (Māori: [aɔˈtɛaɾɔa]; commonly pronounced by English speakers as /ˌaʊtɛəˈroʊ.ə/ ) is the Māori name for New Zealand."

After: "Aotearoa is the Māori name for New Zealand."

Less text to skip.

You might argue that that is not an improvement. Ok. But how is "it will not make it harder" an argument against the move? Especially when it will reduce the number of steps for those looking for any of the other meanings of "Aotearoa". Paradoctor (talk) 11:56, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Paradoctor. "Less text to skip" is good, but is a very minor factor in this case. The "other meanings" point brings us to the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC issue, which gadfium mentioned and you disagreed with him. I think that Aotearoa (the Māori name for New Zealand) is the primary topic, and that by a country mile. You've suggested that one of the other topics might be just as highly sought, mentioning specifically the anthem article. If I read you right, you've suggested that "it could be that a sizable part of the anthem's [the article titled God Defend New Zealand] pageviews should be credited to [the redirect] Aotearoa (anthem)". I consider it highly unlikely that people will be seeking "God Defend New Zealand" by the anthem's Māori name anywhere near as often as they will be seeking the article about the Māori name for New Zealand. The same goes for all the other topics. Nurg (talk) 00:59, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

"a very minor factor" The point here is that, however you break it, the move will not worsen path length for any of the meanings, and improve it for most.

"I consider it highly unlikely" Do you have any additional data? Because what we have so far does not support this claim. It doesn't contradict your theory, sure. But we don't know. Compare the recent discussion at Talk:MBE#Requested move 15 April 2020, where, in a similar situation, it was decided make the move, and to use special purpose redirects to gather data for later review. As I said above, "When in doubt: disambiguate, therefore: retarget. We can revisit the topic" when we have load-bearing data. Paradoctor (talk) 02:24, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

I appreciate the value of empirical data, but I have none, unfortunately. I give no weight to your data about pageviews of God Defend New Zealand. As far as data goes, we agree that we don't know. I am against moving the page as a data-gathering exercise. If there was a no-impact way to do the science, that would be great. My opinion that it is "highly unlikely" is based on my personal knowledge of the use of the word "Aotearoa" in the world. I don't think I will try to prove it and I will understand if you consider it subjective and wish to disregard it. I have given a fair chance to having my mind changed. I understand your opinion and we disagree. I confirm that I still oppose the proposal. Nurg (talk) 04:53, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

WP:PTOPIC: sometimes one of these topics can be identified as the term's primary topic (my emphasis) In other words, it needs to be shown that a topic is primary. If not, we do not randomly assign a primary topic. "I believe so" does not constitute identification.

"based on my personal" WP:NWCFTM applies here: inevitably tainted by the personal background, location, biases, ethnicity, and other pieces of one's own life, but we are trying to build an encyclopedia that is untainted by systemic bias

"moving the page as a data-gathering exercise" It's not. The guideline tells us that, lacking positive evidence that there is a primary topic, we disambiguate. The data-gathering part is about finding out whether there actually is a primary topic. I'm not sure I understand your objection here.

"you consider it subjective and wish to disregard it" It's not me, it is policy: the communal norm that it is "not the vote" that matters, but the reasoning behind the !vote that is important And it's not that I "consider" your opinion subjective, you yourself stated it clearly: "based on my personal". Paradoctor (talk) 10:42, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

• Support disambig page: With regards to the original premise - I'm unconvinced that people would search for "Aotearoa" (instead of the more familiar English name) if their intention was to reach the article about New Zealand. I would guess that people searching for "Aotearoa" are looking up an unfamiliar name, or wanting to read about the origins of the name. That's my reasoning, but it's only an opinion. We don't know for sure what readers are looking for. So, I think turning the page name into a disambig page (and also moving the article to Aotearoa (place name)) seems like a reasonable compromise. It does, however, pose the small problem that multiple article links will need to be amended. --Hazhk (talk) 11:00, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

"multiple article links will need to be amended" Only about 220 articles, I can do that in a few hours. There is probably even some bot that can be requested to do the task. Paradoctor (talk) 11:28, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I'm also happy to help with changing some links. Using a bot is a good suggestion. --Hazhk (talk) 12:12, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

• Possibly move the DAB to the base name otherwise oppose per Gadfium. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:51, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

If the dab page is moved, where should the article go, if not to "(place name)"? Paradoctor (talk) 08:30, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose. Fine as it is. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:30, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Best I can tell: WP:LIKE. Paradoctor (talk) 17:34, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

No, no need to move because this is a solution seeking a problem. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:24, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

WP:NOTVOTE: It is important therefore to also explain why you are voting the way you are. You have not addressed the arguments raised in favor. Paradoctor (talk) 17:18, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose. Compare Lloegyr (and Logres), Cathay, New Amsterdam, Dahomey (and Republic of Dahomey), Francia, etc. It is normal for a significant variant name to have its own article. As long as there's a worthwhile article to the name, keep it as is. — the Man in Question (in question) 20:15, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Errm, this is a move discussion. Nobody wants to delete anything. Paradoctor (talk) 20:27, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes… Who said anything about deleting? I'm saying keep it where it is. — the Man in Question (in question) 01:45, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

"Who said anything about deleting?" Grammar: The "it" in "keep it" refers to the article, not its placement, but its placement is what we're discussing, not the article itself. "Keep it where it is" would have been clear.

Ok, now that that is settled: I don't understand your argument for not moving. Lloegyr (disambiguation) and Dahomey (disambiguation) do not even exist, so why do you mention them? How do they relate to the arguments in support raised above? Paradoctor (talk) 08:16, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose. To me, the page looks just fine the way it is. I haven't seen a convincing argument for the proposed change. Rangatira80 (talk) 10:22, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

As I said above. Paradoctor (talk) 11:04, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Pronunciation 2020

The pronounciation file is a bit old-fashioned. It reflects how some Pākehā speakers used to pronounce it, but I haven't heard anyone use this pronunciation in over a decade. You won't be able to find any examples of this pronounciation in national media. Nowadays most New Zealand English speakers pronounce it as in the external link. I've read the discussion above, but also notice that some of the participants have been banned from Wikipedia for abusing sock puppets. I propose the external pronounciation is moved to the top, and the old-fashioned pronounciation is removed. -- haminoon (talk) 20:34, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

This is definitely a tricky one. The external translation may not be free usage to be cleared. However, if the audio file currently used is not a reflection of how the majority of English-speaking New Zealander say the word then it should be removed. AussieWikiDan (talk) 08:26, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

That's correct that the external link is copyright. It's not ideal, but it would be an improvement to move the "external audio" up to the top of the page. -- haminoon (talk) 20:18, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

If there has indeed been a shift in English speakers' pronunciation of the word, then that's something very well worth documenting in the article. But of course we can't do so unless there are reliable sources available. Nardog (talk) 09:07, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

That goes both ways. The pronounciation currently on the page isn't referenced. However there are thousands of examples online of the pronounciation in the external link being used in national media. For example [2]. -- haminoon (talk) 20:18, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

I think we should consider it being removed. Many similar pages do not have an audio file anyway. AussieWikiDan (talk) 03:11, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Nu Tirani

The article says in a couple of places without citation that Nu Tirani means "new terrain". It seems much more likely it's just a transliteration of "New Zealand" because how else works New Zealand be transliterated? Does anyone know if there is any support for Nu Tirani meaning new terrain? Schnackal (talk) 14:02, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, typo: how else *would* New Zealand be transliterated? Schnackal (talk) 14:03, 30 August 2021 (UTC)

That looks like utter nonsense to me. I'll remove it. -- haminoon (talk) 06:31, 31 August 2021 (UTC)

English pronunciation, again

The page was protected because of vandalism related to the English pronunciation. Now that protection has ended users are removing the long-standing and sourced English pronunciation while claiming it is "incorrect", "offensive', and a "mispronunciation". Am I wrong in thinking that the above threads show a consensus to keep the English pronunciation? Meters (talk) 21:51, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

The issue does not seem to be that there is a different English pronunciation that is more correct than the one we describe so much as an intent to completely remove any English pronunciation in favour of the Māori pronunciation. Meters (talk) 21:56, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Quite happy with current layout, however if someone comes along with reliable references (two or more) explicably saying different, happy for the conversation. Otherwise the suggested changes are original research/synthesis. Dushan Jugum (talk) 22:12, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

I mean, the current reference doesn't really support the material. It doesn't support the previous claim; all the reference is is a pronunciation dictionary that says "Aotearoa ,a: au ti[:] à 'rau a" [3]. Not sure thats the best source anyway.  Nixinova   T   C   23:18, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

I don't know how it's pronounced. My main concern is that the intent of the recent edits appears to be to completely remove any English pronunciation, without any attempt to correct it. What I am seeing is a POV position that the Māori pronunciation is the only pronunciation that should be mentioned. Meters (talk) 23:25, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

That is an OCRed text of a pirated copy of a different edition of the cited source. What the source actually gives is "ˌɑː əʊ tiː‿ə ˈrəʊ ə ‖ ˌɑː oʊ tiː ə ˈroʊ ə", which translates to /ˌɑːoʊtiːəˈroʊə/ in our WP:DIAPHONEMIC scheme set out in Help:IPA/English.

How the word is commonly pronounced by English speakers is definitely a relevant piece of information to include in our English encyclopedia. It is up to each reader if they want to imitate it. If there are reliable sources that show that someone reputable or a large number of people consider it incorrect, recommend another pronunciation, etc., that will also be relevant. And if a reliable source shows there is a more or equally common English pronunciation, we may replace or augment the current one. Otherwise there's just no reason to remove the sourced statement. Nardog (talk) 00:17, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

I was born in Aotearoa and still live here. My ancestry is entirely European in origin, but I have been learning Te Reo Māori on and off since the mid-90s (including some uni level study). I mention this for context; I am a) a direct observer of the pronunciation of Māori words in Aotearoa, and b) the closest to being capable of a NPOV on this that you're likely to find on WP.

The confusion here seems to be caused by the fact that there are two commons pronunciations. The anglicized one used in the audio file under discussion, and the correct pronunciation of the original Māori word, which everyone here seems to agree is *not* represented that audio file.

But although both have been in common use, there's a broad consensus among government officials and news media presenters on using the original pronunciation for place names from Te Reo Māori. As a reference, here's an article from Radio NZ, the public broadcaster. I think it's fair to say the anglicized pronunciation of Aotearoa is declining, as people either follow their lead, or insist on calling the country New Zealand and refuse to say Aotearoa at all. This has become politically polarising in recent years, and this in itself is probably worth a mention on the page. --Danylstrype (talk) 04:10, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

What you fail to realise is that the Maaori pronunciation is not the _correct_ (only) pronunciation and is highly offensive to many non-Maaori citizens of New Zealand.

In New Zealand common English usage is is "our-tea-a-rower" (or "Aa-otea-a-rower"). Now if we were taking Maaori language courses or it's usage in Maaori songs or stories then, yes, the Maaori pronunciation is only version.

But there are majority of non-Maaori New Zealand born citizens who are fed up and rightfully offended by people trying to destroy or bury their native (aka "Kiwi") language, and to bully and coercion authorities and information sources into "indigenous-wash" the "Kiwi" culture out of existence. A very indigenous culture, only really found in a certain time and place in the world. 122.252.155.69 (talk) 20:58, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

@122.252.155.69 It sounds like you get offended too easily. I've never met someone who is offended by hearing a non-English pronunciation. The best thing to support your case is to provide a source. —Panamitsu (talk) 21:22, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Nukuroa

Maori did have a name for New Zealand as a whole, Nukuroa (meaning Father Land) was applied to the land in older times I believe 121.98.239.99 (talk) 04:45, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Do you have a source?-gadfium 05:29, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

[4]https://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-SmiHawa-t1-body-d3-d6.html#:~:text=One%20of%20the%20oldest%20names,therefore%2C%20it%20is%20very%20ancient. Joshville (talk) 23:36, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

Israeli flag??

When hovering over links to this entry (e.g. on the pages on New Zealand or Jacinda Ardern) the Isreali flag is shown. Is this a fluke in some algorithm or outright vandalism? 78.50.88.90 (talk) 10:54, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Vandalism. It's been reverted, please be patient until the cache expires. Nardog (talk) 11:01, 16 September 2023 (UTC)