Wikipedia talk:WikiProject New Zealand/politics/Archive 7

Shai Navot

Hello, I'm interested in making a page of Shai Navot, current leader of The Opportunities Party.

I asked Schwede66 and he recommended I ask here since he is travelling at the moment.

I want to check if she is noteworthy enough for WP:GNG.

Right now I'm making biographies on the non-obvious figures who play a role in New Zealand history, in hopes to preserve NZ history.

Significant media coverage:

Mentions:

Self sources:

Not that it matters, but when I search "Shai Navot" on Google, "Shai Navot Wikipedia" is shown as a related search. I believe this shows people have been seeking it out.

What do you think?

Nexus000 (talk) 11:41, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest using these sources to create a draft page (we have a project page for those here) and we can assess from there. Kiwichris (talk) 02:13, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

List of public service websites

I am collating a list of public service websites. While I can be confident in the completeness of govt.nz domains, I cannot be sure for other top level domains. Would such a list be okay to publish as a list article or does it not meet criteria for new articles? Philipp.governale (talk) 04:52, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Photo of living PMs together

File:Six Former Prime Ministers of New Zealand.jpg

Six former prime ministers of New Zealand

Several similar photos have been circulating on social media in the last day or so of all the living Prime Ministers except Shipley lined up together at the function for the 150th anniversary of the Press Gallery. I was thinking that if the legal use issues can be dealt with, it would be good to have one for use on Wikipedia - I'm thinking particularly of the List of PMs page, which currently has a photo of a similar sort of gathering in 1992 at the top. My understanding of the rules around image copyright is very minimal, so I guess I'm asking whether someone who knows more can determine whether any of the photos doing the rounds are able to be used, or could be made available to be used. One such photo has been shared by Jacinda Ardern, so would it be worth approaching her office for permission (assuming that they have the rights to it)? I recall that the Labour party were quite cooperative when it came to the use of their candidate photos last year. MW691 (talk) 17:00, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I made a request last night for the photo to be released under a suitable license, using the form at https://dpmc.govt.nz/contact-us. You have to select a "business unit", and I selected "Cabinet office". I haven't yet heard back but wouldn't really expect to on the weekend. If I haven't heard anything in a week I'll report back here. If anyone has a more direct link to whoever might have the appropriate power to release the photo, feel free to pursue this in parallel.-gadfium 21:04, 1 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Since you asked: most of the time, copyright rests with the photographer. In limited cases, e.g. when a photographer is contracted AND there is an agreement in place that transfers the copyright (which, presumably, is a process in place when the government commissions photographers), then the copyright rests with the client. Hence, this is by no means a simple area. Often, you get told something that isn't true, not because of malice but because people simply don't understand how copyright works. The PM using that photo on social media does not necessarily mean that it was taken by a photographer on behalf of the government, but you'd hope that somebody in high office wouldn't just help themselves... Schwede 66 04:18, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both, that's very helpful. MW691 (talk) 12:19, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't heard anything, not even an acknowledgement, so it would be good if someone with experience in dealing with the government over photo releases could take this up.-gadfium 23:10, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I know some people who work for the Labour Party. I will ask. Nexus000 (talk) 00:39, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This person told me this: "Heya! I would recommend getting in touch with Andrew Campbell, her head press sec. You should be able to reach him at andrew.campbell@parliament.govt.nz"

Give that a try. Nexus000 (talk) 00:50, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I can do that; have time today. Thanks, Nexus. Schwede 66 01:56, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I found a clue of who may have taken the photo you are after. No guarantees this is the same person who took the photo you are after, but it is a very similar photo. https://twitter.com/Jasonwalls92/status/1391915189453213696 Nexus000 (talk) 00:47, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

After a quick google, Brady Dyer is both a photographer and Hutt City Councillor. He can be contacted here: https://www.bradydyer.com/contact-brady-dyer-photography/ http://www.huttcity.govt.nz/Your-Council/About-your-Council/Mayor-and-councillors/brady-dyer/ Nexus000 (talk) 00:50, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent. Wrote to Andrew Campbell yesterday but no response yet. Have made contact with Cr Brady Dyer via Twitter. Schwede 66 01:14, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ta-da! Brady Dyer is the man. He's uploaded one of his photos to Commons. How do we give him a public shout out? Schwede 66 01:51, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll leave people more experienced to give ideas, but in 2020 List of prime ministers of New Zealand and Living prime ministers of New Zealand combined got 184,690 views. In a year after the photo was edited onto the page, we should tell him how many views the pages with his photo have been viewed. I bet he will be blown away. Nexus000 (talk) 03:27, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Last year's election contributed to that figure, but the wedding (possibly next summer) will boost the visitor count for the coming year.-gadfium 04:40, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How would this be for a tweet? It would come from Wikipedia NZ. It's right on the character limit. A second tweet (in response) could provide the link to the other article, pointing to List of prime ministers of New Zealand: "And here's a link to the other article." Wording changes welcome. I'll tweet and Facebook before I go to bed. Schwede 66 08:04, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good.-gadfium 08:35, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with Gadfium. Gertrude206 (talk) 09:16, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome stuff, looks great. Well done Schwede66! Kiwichris (talk) 05:43, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, well done, and the same to everyone who contributed to this. Great how it all came together! MW691 (talk) 10:46, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MP photos

Hello, I plan on making sure all current Members of Parliament have a photo by contacting parties asking them to release the photos of their MPs.

This will be so every current Member of Parliament has a photo of themselves on their page like Labour does.

These photos are here:

National: https://www.national.org.nz/team
ACT: https://www.act.org.nz/act-mps
Maori Party: https://www.maoriparty.org.nz/our_people

Labour and Greens have photos for every MP.

To make sure I get it right, either the photographer needs to send approval or if the photo is commissioned by the party, the party can grant permission?

Nexus000 (talk) 06:25, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yes. It’s the photographer who usually holds the copyright. What you should know is that there’s a page for missing NZ politician photos. We’ve been at it for years. I myself have tried several times. I’ve had one reply from National (“can’t help; not interested”) and ACT or the Māori Party have never bothered to reply. It’ll be easier to rock up in Wellington and take them yourself. Regarding the post above, zero response from Andrew Campbell. Schwede 66 08:51, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Annoying. Thank you for letting me know. Nexus000 (talk) 10:07, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Nexus000: If you enable email on your account, I can share with you what I've sent to Andrew Campbell. That'll give you a good steer in case you want to follow up with individuals about their photos. Schwede 66 19:08, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ombudman page deleted

The page for the New Zealand Chief Ombudsman/Office of the Ombudsman (New Zealand) has recently been deleted apparently due to copyright concerns. This has left a lot of red links on related pages. Is there another live page we can redirect them to or will we need a new page to be written? Kiwichris (talk) 06:44, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've had a look. The former was a redirect and the latter was the article. Both got deleted as per this note. It's part of a copyright cleanup effort by going through articles created by User:Offender9000. There are other notable topics disappearing. This page shows what is affected. With regards to this particular article, yes, please start from scratch. Schwede 66 03:11, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Draft Jazz Thornton

Is there anyone in New Zealand able to review drafts? I'd encourage you to review Draft:Jazz Thornton.

I believe it passes WP:GNG, is highly topical because she was declared Young New Zealander of the Year and frequently appears in news outlets, and the page will likely be viewed a lot each day when it is published.

It was mostly put on review because I used a Daily Mail article as a reference but I have since removed that reference. Nexus000 (talk) 12:45, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article looks good, though I'd suggest adding an external link section with a link to their IMDB page (there's a template for it). Being young NZer of the year seems to establish notability, and you have heaps of sources. Unfortunately, I'm not an AfC reviewer, and they have a strong caution against people just leaping in. But it seems to pass all the boxes in their flowchart.--IdiotSavant (talk) 13:13, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Added! Nexus000 (talk) 05:34, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Is Jake Bezzant notable now?

This task force prepared a draft for businessman and political candidate Jake Bezzant in 2020 in case he entered Parliament, but he did not and it had remained a draft on the basis that, having not been elected, he was not notable.

However, with recent coverage of Bezzant, I think that he is now notable even without entering Parliament. He has received coverage for multiple reasons across multiple years from reliable sources. While the draft will need updating, do you think it should be moved to the mainspace? HenryCrun15 (talk) 05:48, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A random person who is accused of such behaviour would not get an article, and probably wouldn't even if tried and convicted. I don't see that his having previously been a political candidate for a major party makes a difference (it might if the party knew of this behaviour at the time they selected him, but I doubt that is the case). Certainly we should keep the draft, and watch for further developments.-gadfium 06:09, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, we wouldn't do it if it was a random person accused of it. However, a man who was given a safe National Electorate, a Party insider? I've seen less notable people have a page. The page as it stands is pretty balanced. I'd be in favour of moving it to the mainspace. Nauseous Man (talk) 10:12, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe he is notable enough to satisfy the WP:GNG requirements, even with all the recent news coverage. Ajf773 (talk) 10:45, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was just coming here to wonder about the draft, from a slightly different angle. As I understand it, we keep drafts of unsuccessful candidates in case they stand again and make it, or come in from the list mid-term. I think one can safely say that Bezzant's chances of ever entering Parliament or even standing again are now non-existent. Hence the draft is no longer needed for its original purpose as part of the new MPs project. I can see both sides of the argument for him now qualifying because of the scandal. Incidentally, I've just had a quick look at the editing history of the draft since the election, and it's ... interesting. MW691 (talk) 10:51, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Funnily enough, some Wikipedians are having a parallel discussion about this on Twitter and there, consensus is that he's notable. Schwede 66 22:47, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have doubts about notability, but my main concern is that the page has almost all its content about embellishments and scandals which makes it look like an attack page. Kiwichris (talk) 08:29, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Government Houses of New Zealand, is it necessary?

Kia ora, Should Government Houses of New Zealand exist? It's not in the traditional list format, like we might expect a list to be, and it's not notable enough to have its own page (in my opinion) as the other pages are in depth enough. Really it just seems like a disambiguation page? Would love some feedback. Nauseous Man (talk) 06:19, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

Heads up, RFC taking place, which may affect New Zealand political articles. GoodDay (talk) 21:57, 25 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care - are Acord & Dr Oliver Sutherland notable & requiring an article?

New editor here :-) I watched the short doco When Nobody Was Looking (YouTube) today & thought both ACORD and Dr Oliver Sutherland might be considered notable in terms of recent NZ history and RCI into Abuse in Care. Thoughts? Def not my area of expertise, but interested enough to help get something started.Updated to add: realise this may not belong in /politics, but would appreciate a redirec.--Hineahua (talk) 08:01, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Probably, yes! My hesitancy is that there might not be enough information published about them for them not to be stubs. Would love to hear other thoughts though! Nauseous Man (talk) 09:33, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, his father, Ivan Sutherland (ethnologist), has an entry in the DNZB. Oliver Sutherland gets a mention in it for having done notable things. Schwede 66 18:33, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

General election templates up for deletion, again...

Heads up, that the templates used on NZ election pages are up for deletion (see here). I've lost count how many times this has happened! Kiwichris (talk) 02:11, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yes. But we should convert them to transclusions. I'll write a workflow on how to do that. It's actually very simple (which is not the idea that you get when you look at the documentation). Schwede 66 18:45, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox inclusion criteria

I recently remembered an incident where I got into a brief edit war over the non-inclusion of the Country Party in the 1938 election infobox. I was a relatively new editor then and hadn't realised I needed to establish consensus before changing it. My issue hasn't changed, so I feel I should raise it here as it applies to other pages as well.

In various infoboxes for modern-day elections parties that won seats at the previous election but not at the election concerned are listed in the infobox (e.g. NZ First in 2020, Māori in 2017, Internet Mana in 2014, NZ First in 2008). However, the infoboxes do not include other comparable instances such as the Democrats in 1987, Social Credit in 1969 and indeed the Country Party in 1938. I see this as a fundamental inconsistency. If there is a reason for this, please say so. YttriumShrew (talk) 01:43, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Update: someone has added the Democrats to the 1987 infobox. YttriumShrew (talk) 19:26, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The pattern of the past has been different between the FPP and MMP election pages. The MMP pages show parties that lost parliamentary presence while the FPP ones don't. Not sure why exactly the different electoral systems are treated differently. Kiwichris (talk) 08:04, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jenny Kirk

Hello all, asking for assistance with a slightly odd situation. In Parliament on Thursday morning, Emily Henderson mentioned that Jenny Kirk had just died - see Hansard here [1]. (That has Wednesday's date because it was during an extended sitting). Over the last few days, there has been no mention of her death showing up online, not even a death notice. An MP's remark during debate seems too flimsy a source for this sort of thing, but it's not clear when there'll be anything else to go on. Eventually the Speaker will make the usual formal announcement to the House, but all such observances have been postponed until the whole country is at Level 2 or below (see [2]), which could be a long way off, and in any case there isn't another sitting until the 19th. So I thought I'd ask people to keep an eye out for a mention in print media. I've checked my local paper, but if Kirk still lived in the Auckland area, I'm at the wrong end of the country for anything to show up. MW691 (talk) 07:32, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MW691, there’s a death notice in the NZ Herald. Schwede 66 17:42, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much! Have used that to make the appropriate edits. MW691 (talk) 18:10, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with election results in electorate articles

I looked at a few electorate articles and see cases of:

2020 preliminary results with no statement to say they are only preliminary
2020 final votes but citation is for preliminary results
2020 turnout figures with citation that links to 2017 results

Some of these issues are repeated across multiple articles. Flagging this in case members of the task force wish to fix them. Nurg (talk) 08:39, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there are a few instances of that, and still a number of electorates with no 2020 results table at all - which I'd like to do something about, but it's a slow process without spreadsheet skills. It also bugs me a bit that the electorate maps haven't been updated after the most recent boundary changes, but that needs a user with the time and the technical ability. MW691 (talk) 06:49, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know this was an issue, otherwise I could have done it – I have been doing the result tables for Australian elections for years and have several techniques to automate the process and consistently generate the latest/final tables, and use excerpt templates to allow the results to be generated in a single list article and displayed in each electorate article and historical summaries. I'm happy to adapt my code for the 2020 election, and I can also do the electorate maps if they need doing. --Canley (talk) 10:28, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, that sounds like a great offer to me - I don't know if anyone else has thoughts. I've been through and corrected the citation errors flagged by Nurg, or at least any that I could spot. I might set out here the gaps in the actual results, so that people can see what's missing. Taupō, Waikato, Whangārei, and Ikaroa-Rāwhiti have no 2020 results at all (the last one has the heading, but nothing under it). Botany, Remutaka, Te Atatū, and Waiariki have preliminary results, and are noted as such. Bay of Plenty and East Coast have preliminary results, without a note. Selwyn has a strange unfinished table of preliminary results, without a note. MW691 (talk) 11:36, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That’s great, MW691. Not much more to do. Canley, is it worth firing up your script or would it be faster to do those results manually? Schwede 66 16:23, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If it's just the ones that MW691 noted, probably quicker and easier to do them manually and I'll concentrate on the electorate maps, then check all the tables later. --Canley (talk) 21:28, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated all the electorate articles listed above as having preliminary or missing results (thanks for the summary MW691!). The process was semi-automated I used a script to download the results and do the calculations, but typed up the wikitext tables manually, so there could be typos. In future I will write a script to output the tables as well, which could be used for the next election if needed (I'll make the code available on Github). Let me know if there's any systemic issues with the data or calculations, NZ MMP elections are a bit new to me so I may well have got something wrong! I am making progress with the 2020 electorate maps as well, hopefully can upload them this week. If anyone spots some other tables that are outdated or need to be generated, list them here and I can easily generate the results. --Canley (talk) 09:43, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's brilliant, thank you! I've had a quick look through and corrected a few small random errors. I haven't checked the data carefully, but certainly nothing systemic has jumped out at me. If there are any issues others might spot them. It's really great to have that done - thanks again! MW691 (talk) 11:45, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Parlbox shading

The background colours in the party sections of the parlboxes on the pages of current and former MPs have been changed to have much darker shading. With some parties' colours, this makes the text virtually unreadable. I think it comes from a edit made to Template:NZ parlbox by User:Primefac, which appears to be part of a wider technical change. The ins and outs of this are all far beyond my knowledge, but I'm sure such a result wasn't the intention. Does anyone know how we can get this fixed? MW691 (talk) 12:48, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MW691, thanks for pointing this out. Yes, these tables are now unreadable for some colour. user:Primefac, can you attend to this ASAP or shall we revert your changes in the meantime? Schwede 66 19:09, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to have been fixed for that template, but there's also Template:NZ parlbox allegiance, which is a separate template for lines in the tables where an MP changes parties during a term - see Peter Dunne for a good example. MW691 (talk) 07:03, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You need to @Primefac: for them to notice any post.-gadfium 08:18, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve reverted the changes to that template. Schwede 66 08:48, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I actually received all of the pings here, but I hadn't checked my notifications in the last day or so. Apologies for messing with the /shading, I made an assumption that they were more or less the same as the /color values, though clearly I was wrong. Personally I think the shading provides more issues than it solves, but I don't really care about that right now.

It would have been nice, however, for my changes to not be wholesale reverted, since I now need to run null edits again on the dozens of pages that these templates are used on so that I can determine if there are any /shortname templates still in use. Primefac (talk) 14:12, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Primefac, sorry, it wasn’t clear to me which part of your edit caused the problem. Neither was i aware that a revert would cause issues. Schwede 66 17:33, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's fine (and not totally the end of the world); I was mostly cranky at having to redo a lot of what I had already done. Primefac (talk) 17:50, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Primefac, oh, I see what it is that you are working on. HS, that is a big project. Thanks for being an awesome Wikipedian. Schwede 66 18:26, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I do what I can :-) Primefac (talk) 18:28, 4 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Revert: There was no discussion or concensus for any of this, and Now I see that Wikipedia:Index of New Zealand political party meta attributes has been seriously damaged, and categories of templates of political colours and Shortnames have been deleted ... I've just seen notice that there's an AFD notice on Template:Political party extended meta, which collates colour, shading and shortname for represented parties, both current and historic. All this started because of a boneheaded insistence that non-US English political must use US English in background templates like these. ... and that has caused an avalanche of "good faith" vandalism on this project. This is a lot of repair work, caused by well-meaning editors who've parachuted into this project without bothering to do the least bit of due diligence. FanN | talk | 01:54, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth {{party colour}} redirects to {{party color}}... I've also updated the module to accept both colour and color. Primefac (talk) 13:52, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Except it hasn't been redirected. It appears that the original template was deleted, then a redirect was created to "fix" the screwup. How about resorting the deleted template along with its edit history, and then talk about whether a redirect is appropriate. Fan

| talk | 19:50, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure which "it" you're referring to; nothing has been deleted other than an old redirect at {{party color}} which pointed to {{party color cell}}. Primefac (talk) 20:45, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Political party/color has no history ... other than your edit/move. Fan

| talk | 12:59, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, sure. I created it there in the early days of the template because I thought a subpage would make more sense, then through discussions in various locations decided that it wasn't the best of ideas. The entire history of the page is still at {{party color}}. Primefac (talk) 13:07, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"The entire history of the page is still at ...". That is nonsense, even if it's good faith nonsense. You state you, "went through discussions in various locations", ... except apparently, the one location where it actually mattered - aka this page. The fact remains a whole wrecking crew has driven through this project for no benefit whatsoever. Templates burned to ash, categories obliterated, and a trail of destruction that will take until Easter to fix. All because whoever went on a mad spree didn't think this project's contributors needed to have any input. Fan

| talk | 14:11, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be honest, I still have no idea what is so horribly broken. I am more than happy to fix things, but I need to know what actually needs fixing. Primefac (talk) 14:14, 16 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Raf Manji

Following his appointment as TOP leader I've written a stub for Raf Manji. Its a bit basic, and there's likely more stuff that can be mined out of the existing sources (plus more to find, since I didn't look very hard). Given the number of sources, he should probably have had one some time ago, since he easily passes GNG.--IdiotSavant (talk) 02:16, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

IdiotSavant, he became notable when he was a Christchurch City councillor. He had a number of in-depth write ups in The Press. It didn't take long and he was basically put in charge of anything financial by the mayor. Schwede 66 02:34, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

FL nomination for List of prime ministers?

I've been looking through List of prime ministers of New Zealand and it seems to me to meet the featured list criteria. I wouldn't want to nominate it myself as I haven't worked on the article much, but would someone else wish to? YttriumShrew (talk) 01:51, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

YttriumShrew, looking at the page stats, the page has been edited by 270 different editors. Which one would you want to pick? In more seriousness, putting this forward as an FL comes with the commitment to respond to the reviewer's comments. Given that you are keen, I nominate you to be the nominator! That said, if you want a helping hand, Friendlyhistorian would be the most qualified, as they have provided just over half the the list article's content. Schwede 66 02:11, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the encouragement! YttriumShrew (talk) 05:24, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dan Rosewarne and Soraya Peke-Mason

Right Now I have moved the page of Dan Rosewarne and Soraya Peke-Mason into articles and they are due to be sworn in after the resignations of Kris Faafoi and Trevor Mallard. Kris Faafoi who is a Minister and Trevor Mallard is also resigning as a Speaker which will take up a diplomatic post in Europe. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern announced that Deputy Speaker Adrian Ruawhe is nominated for Speaker role. Mallard last week crticised for pefromances which included wrongful trespass notices to five former MPs and blasting music to steer away protesters which he did not want to talk to the media last week. --Villian Factman (talk) 14:18, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

PMs list is now an FL!

Our most important list is now featured! Thanks and congratulations to everyone who has worked on the article. YttriumShrew (talk) 01:17, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're a star. And you deserve a Barnstar. Schwede 66 04:47, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The move of Tino rangatiratanga to Tino rangatiratanga (phrase)

Recently a user moved Tino rangatiratanga to Tino rangatiratanga (phrase) to create a disambiguation page. I have started a conversation over at talk:Tino rangatiratanga (phrase) to gauge whether this is appropriate. Feel free to add your thoughts to it. Nauseous Man (talk) 22:36, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mayoral bios

I suppose we should add a few mayoral bios. They are not inherently notable unless they represent a (big?) city. There are no hard and fast rules where the cutoff would be. Anyway, so that we don't trip over one another, how about the following list for work in draft space and if any of the links turns blue, well, then someone else has started the draft. Feel free to join in. Apart from those below, who I assume are notable, who else is there? If Ben Bell makes it (and numerically, it would be astonishing if Tracy Hicks could still turn this around as there's just 67 special votes to come), we'd have the youngest New Zealand mayor ever. And that in itself generates a lot of publicity; don't worry that he represents Gore District (which isn't exactly a metropolis. So here's my provisional list; please add to it: Schwede 66 01:32, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Phil Mauger – Phil Mauger (Q114480326) (Christchurch)
Draft:Kirsten Wise – Kirsten Wise (Q114565355) (Napier)
Draft:Anita Baker (mayor) – Anita Baker (Q114565361) (Porirua)
~~Draft:Ben Bell~~ – Ben Bell (Q114564462) ~~(Gore – on the proviso that he does win)~~ – published

I will just note, on the off chance you weren't already aware, that there is a page for Anita Baker under Anita Baker (New Zealand politician), though it is currently just a redirect to Mayor of Porirua.--Radicuil (talk) 13:26, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That’s ok. Once an article is ready in draft space, it can be moved over an existing redirect. If a different dab is more appropriate, the redirect can be changed. Schwede 66 17:18, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've started the Phil Mauger page and I intend to work on it more thoroughly but I've never created an article before and am hoping for some collaboration. For example, I have no idea when or where he was born. Regardless, just thought I'd put it here so you amazing people can do your amazing things. AlphaZetta (talk) 02:38, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bit short on prose thus far. 😀 Schwede 66 07:34, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AlphaZetta, don't worry about when or where Mauger was born. Find reliable sources that talk about him in some detail and write what it says in those sources. If nobody reports on some aspects, the bio just won't cover those parts. What I'm saying is: get going with what you can find and don't worry about those things that are missing. Schwede 66 20:44, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Finishing 2022 local body mayoral winners

I Have finished adding the new mayors in, so I am leaving out Kapiti Coast and Gore since they have a margin of less than 200 to 11 respectively. Villian Factman (talk) 14:14, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Northland hasn’t been decided either and the "runner up" is currently in the lead. Schwede 66 17:27, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Villian Factman, Matamata-Piako is listed by this source as being uncertain, whilst Kapiti doesn't show as uncertain. Schwede 66 20:55, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hamilton West by-election

So now that Gaurav Sharma said he will resign as MP for Hamilton West and force a by-election should we start a page for it yet or should we wait a bit? The reason I ask is that a few years ago Jami-Lee Ross said he would do the exact same thing in Botany and a Wikipedia page for it was created only for the by-election to never happen. Kiwichris (talk) 05:55, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The first step in calling a byelection is "The Speaker of the House of Representatives publishes a notice of the vacancy in the New Zealand Gazette" ^[1] so I'd recommend that be the point at which the page is started. Daveosaurus (talk) 06:46, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with Daveosaurus. Schwede 66 06:55, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I concur. In the event that a user who hasn't read this little disussion creates a page before a gazetted notice should we just leave it or take it out of mainspace as a draft? Kiwichris (talk) 22:07, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's easy to draftify an article; I have a script installed that does it. Schwede 66 00:20, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Its official now see here. Kiwichris (talk) 00:42, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. I've just had a look at the most recent by-elections and it always took between 6 to 8 weeks from someone vacating a seat to the by-election being held. Going by that, this by-election would definitely fall this side of Christmas. Schwede 66 05:15, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Schwede66: Since it is happening, I have started a article which is currently look a mess. I have beat you to starting a by election article. Villian Factman (talk) 11:27, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We ought to have a draft ready for Tama Potaka; there's every indication that he'll win. Could somebody with time on their hand please start a draft? Schwede 66 20:38, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

^ https://elections.nz/democracy-in-nz/about-elections/what-is-a-by-election/

[1] ttps://elections.nz/democracy-in-nz/about-elections/what-is-a-by-election/

[1]