Talk:Port Hills

Which References?

References are nice and necessary, but AFAICS, this stub only lists stuff that can be taken form the official page (link already included) and any decent map of that area. I therefore do not understand the "This article or section does not cite any references or sources." banner. I have enjoyed the Port Hills while I was there and could imagine contributing to this article, but I'd like to know what kind of references are necessary and desired. Jenser 18:54, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I've added some info and refs. Only took a couple of years! Kiwikiwiki (talk) 23:48, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks indeed, I had forgotten about this article. I guess I should look for some photos and info to contribute now. Anything that we should aim for? Maybe Geology (intersect with Banks Peninsula) or the old fortifications on the eastmost tip? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jenser (talk • contribs) 19:25, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

I think what was meant by the, now removed, banner that "This article or section does not cite any references or sources." was that, at the time, there were no notes or in-line citations so that one could verify that each statement made came from a particular reference source and where in that source the statement was being made or what was being sumarised. It is Wikipedia policy to write verifiable articles and citing sources with in-line notes supports this. I was initially tempted to add back a banner about citing sources but the more that I think about it the less productive I think that would be. What really needs to happen is that the article be expanded and I have added a few in-line tags to hopefully elicit additional information. It is all very well relying on an official web page for a stub article but where did they get what they source their information and have they summarised events reliably? Being able to triangulate the same information from multiple different sources is one accepted way to believe the information is likely to be reliable. Recent source material may propagate misinterpretations and assumptions made by earlier researchers so relying on a single recent source might not be ideal. Identifying multiple earlier sources may provide insights that recent sources might have overlooked or misinterpreted. Wikipedia articles ought be written from a neutral point of view and part of that process involves identifying the biases, conscious or not, in the sources we use. Using many different sources reduces the chance that the biases in any one source will colour the Wikipedia article. Please be aware that bias can exist in any source, sometimes it is intentional, often it is unconcious, and comparing multiple sources can reveal how biases have changed over time, which may be a revealing insight in itself about what may seem important now but was not relevant consideration originally. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 01:04, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

History section

I think the History section needs to be more precise and expanded further. The idea of a tunnel was first addressed in 1849 by Captain Thomas and H. J. Cridland, more than a year before the first 4 ships arrived. There are 4 passes over the crater rim that are crossed by legal roads, if one counts the Bridle Path. There are three legal roads that were intended to lead to Evans Pass from the Sumner side, alone, including the abandoned Captain Thomas Road, now a walkway for some of its length, and there are two road lines from the Lyttelton side, too, the earliest is from 1849 as well. The importance of the Evans Pass route should not be understated, either, as it was rebuilt in the early 1920's along the 1849 road line and after it was closed by the February 2011 earthquakes was remediated and reopened in 2019. The other roads were built later in the twentieth century along with the Summit Road, which is not even mentioned.

The Bridle Path is the second surveyed road across the Port Hills, but the first road completed because it was essentially a footpath and required much less work to build. The need for the Bridle Path significantly reduced after 1858, when the Sumner Road opened to cart traffic, and was completely redundant after the Moorhouse Tunnel was opened at the end of 1867, less than 20 years after the first 4 ships arrived. To say this is many years is a bit like primitive counting that calls the numbers after 3 as many. Given we are talking about events spanning a small number of years over a century and a half ago, the word many is much too vague. The number of years we are talking about can be counted on ones fingers and, perhaps, toes - not more. We have better and more accurate words in the English language than many. We could even use numerals! - Cameron Dewe (talk) 23:40, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Article focus and development

What should this article about the Port Hills be about and focus on? This article seems to be discussing the geographic and ecological aspects of the topic very well but only lightly touches upon any human impacts of development on, or through, the Port Hills. While there are a several headings, the content under those headings does not seem to be entirely consistent. What story does Wikipedia tell here? What story should it tell? Where is the section about how the Port Hills formed by volcanic, action to support the lead paragraph? Where is the story about the naming of these hills? Their use for telecommunications, and not just television. Roads over the hills and tunnels under them. Walking tracks in them. Development on them. Earthquakes under them. Their administration and land ownership. The way this article is connected with various Christchurch suburbs suggests there should be a lot more content here that refers to those individual suburbs as sub-articles. Also, there appears to be a subtle city-centric point of view of the Hills, as if the Hills end on the crater rim and anything facing Lyttelton Harbour is on Banks Peninsula. I can understand how this viewpoint might exist, so perhaps there is even a need to discuss the psychological aspects of these Hills and how they impact on how Christchurchians (or is it Christchurch based Cantabrians?) think of them, and how that varies, if it does, depending on where one lives, or works, in relation to them. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 03:38, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Featured picture scheduled for POTD

Hello! This is to let editors know that File:Lyttelton Harbour (Whakaraupō) from Mt Ada, Canterbury, New Zealand.jpg, a featured picture used in this article, has been selected as the English Wikipedia's picture of the day (POTD) for March 1, 2023. A preview of the POTD is displayed below and can be edited at Template:POTD/2023-03-01. For the greater benefit of readers, any potential improvements or maintenance that could benefit the quality of this article should be done before its scheduled appearance on the Main Page. If you have any concerns, please place a message at Wikipedia talk:Picture of the day. Thank you!  — Amakuru (talk) 12:22, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

The Port Hills are a range of hills in the Canterbury Region of New Zealand, so named because they lie between the city of Christchurch and its port at Lyttelton. The hills are an eroded remnant of the Lyttelton volcano, which erupted millions of years ago. Starting at Godley Head, the range runs approximately east–west along the northern side of Lyttelton Harbour and thence to the south, terminating near Gebbies Pass above the head of the harbour. It includes a number of summits between 300 and 500 metres (980 and 1,640 feet) above sea level. This photograph shows a panoramic view of the Port Hills from Mount Ada, looking towards Lyttelton Harbour in the distance.

Photograph credit: Michal Klajban

Recently featured:

• Katherine Johnson
• Blue-billed duck
• The Inquisition Tribunal