Jump to content

Talk:Geography of New Zealand

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Xibin1, Cnb8201, Meghan.scottchaber, StephenMavs97.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 22:15, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Errors and omissions

[edit]

The currently this article states that New Zealand has a water area of 10 sq km. This is obviously wrong as Lake Taupo alone is 616 sq km. And given all the other lakes and rivers it would be several thousand, maybe even 10,000 sq km. However I have yet to find an answer which seems right. A past edition of the CIA world factbook seems to have got it wrong and a lot of people have copied this wrong result. So I have removed it only leaving the total area. -- Popsracer 22:33, 23 Oct 2003 (UTC)

This article should have a geographical map. 67.113.40.155 21:08, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Under geology the article states New Zealand experiences 14,000 earthquakes per year, yet under Natural Hazards it states there are 3,000 per year. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.107.139.117 (talk) 09:43, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Map Revisions

[edit]

I have revised the previous map of New Zealand to vacate new towns and cities. If their are any problems with this or any comments/questions. Feel free to contact me via my talk page.--Matt von Furrie 01:07, 31 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Map scale is wrong

[edit]

Unfortunately the map scale in the NZ map from the CIA World Factbook is wrong. Please see: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:New_Zealand_map.PNG and a further note at: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image_talk:New_Zealand_map.PNG

I have put a brief note in its caption. Until this is resolved I think it is wrong to display a map which is giving a wrong impression of the country's size.

Becase this affects more than one article I respectfully suggest that discussion about the map is best kept together at: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image_talk:New_Zealand_map.PNG

Thank you.

warning removed - it's fixed. See the talk page referenced above for more. (from anonymous, grouchy old git)

Zealandia

[edit]

Is it reasonable to have Zealandia (continent) in the infobox? Zealandia is an ex-continent.-gadfium 01:36, 11 April 2007 (UTC) At first glance you would think so but Zealandia is considered a continent even though it is largely submerged. The other continents also have submerged parts-its just the proportions that are different. Since 2011 scientists have been developing a new definition of "continent" to take into consideration the fact that Zealandia is largely submarine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.62.226.243 (talk) 23:13, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Geography of New Zealand. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:35, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Evaluation of article of New Zealand: Possible ideas for the article There are several areas that I think I would like to expand on. There is a small paragraph on population geography where there is some basic information but nothing beyond where most people live. I would like to find some more information on population pyramid and the density structure. Does the small total population or it being a country of islands affect the population pyramid and density? Also, look at how the population has evolved through time and where people have migrated. Has there been an immigration period and where have people come from. Also the wealth of people and the economy of the country through time and in different areas of the country. What wars have taken place in NZ or any the government has gotten involved or why not if they haven't. Didn't see any detailed information on geography of religion and architecture. The article does seem fairly neutral which is good. There may need to be citations for the information in the first paragraph of the article. The rest of the article seems to be fairly well cited. Possible Sources: https://www.populationpyramid.net/new-zealand/2017/ UNDATA: http://data.un.org/for economic indicators to get a sense of what the economy is like Peter Carswell, Deborah Rolland, (2007) "Religion and entrepreneurship in New Zealand", Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, Vol. 1 Issue: 2, pp.162-174, https://doi.org/10.1108/17506200710752584Cnb8201 (talk) 08:23, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Antipodes stuff

[edit]

The article contains a bit of content about "antipoides" that is sourced to some blog or other non-WP:RS source. I've made a couple of edits to reduce this, but have been reverted by a user who thinks that basically the material is relevant or something like that and has been there awhile so shouldn't be removed. I feel that the content is excessive and not really relevant to the geography of New Zealand. And as it is poorly sourced, it should be removed or cut back a bit. So please explain how "the specific point on the other side of the earth" is relevant here. To me, it is simply irrelevant trivia and without some good source to explain its relevance it should be chopped. Thanks, Vsmith (talk) 01:36, 19 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that section falls under WP:TRIVIA. It might be out of place on a brief summary of New Zealand geography, but the breadth of this article allows for some side discussion about certain points of interest, such as, in this case, New Zealand's antipodes. After all, New Zealand is a noted to be a geographically isolated country, so its antipodes are noteworthy. I agree that one of the sources could be better; I would not object to removing that one. I have removed any references to particular cities, which I do think is too in-depth. --Hazhk (talk) 18:54, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I want to move this section into the Physical Geography Overview section and tidy it up a bit. It is interesting but can be better integrated into the page (Dushan Jugum (talk) 02:58, 28 November 2018 (UTC))[reply]

Moving from group sandbox to article

[edit]

To fellow wikipedians.. Wanted to let you know I'm moving information from our class group sandbox to the article.Cnb8201 (talk) 03:51, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Does the new "Language" section really belong here, though? It's not really "Geography", and duplicates material that's already covered extensively in New Zealand and Languages of New Zealand. Ross Finlayson (talk) 05:39, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Ross Finlayson. Cultural geography is a thing, but it's not the thing this article is about. Most or all of the content in User:Andymilson/NewZealandSandbox appears to belong in other articles (which already cover the concepts), not here.-gadfium 06:57, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I removed the new section, for reasons stated in the edit summary. (I didn't see this comment on the talk page, though I would have removed it anyway.) I question the relevance of the information on this article. There is no strong geographical element to language distribution in New Zealand, e.g. no enclaves speaking a particular regional language.
I also discourage you from wholesale copying content from other articles; it would be better to tailor the information to the specific topic. --Hazhk (talk) 18:39, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have taken a look at the sandbox. Most of that information is, likewise, not applicable to this article. I would have advised you to view the list of New Zealand-related topics and integrate your content into relevant articles, however it appears that nearly all of your work was lifted from those articles. The little content that is original seems to be pitched at a level that is more appropriate for Simple English Wikipedia. It's a nice project - it works OK as a standalone collection of information - but it would best remain as a class exercise. --Hazhk (talk) 18:45, 4 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I didn't see this sooner but the information that is in our group sandbox User:Andymilson/NewZealandSandbox we have been working on are based on topics of our Human Geography class. We were assigned to work on this particular article. We have worked on the topics of Agricultural Geography, Cultural Geography, Political Geography, Economic Geography and Population Geography. Cnb8201 (talk) 00:35, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, but it has no value in this article. I am removing this again. --Hazhk (talk) 06:46, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I respectfully disagree that this content has no value in this article - and also with the assertion that this content is not geographic. I am a human geography professor and have asked my students to contribute to this Wikipedia page and apply the concepts they are learning about in the class. Please do not simply delete large chunks of text because you don't believe them to be relevant. The proper Wikipedia etiquette is to engage the person who posted the content you dispute on the talk page. Andy Milson (talk) 23:56, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

----
It's great that you're teaching your students how to edit Wikipedia, but I think it's also important that they learn when to edit Wikipedia, and where to edit it. You seem to have an unusually broad definition of "geography"; much of the material that you've been adding is already covered by other, existing pages - such as Demographics of New Zealand, Economy of New Zealand, and Culture of New Zealand. Perhaps your students would be better off looking at how they might improve those pages, rather than adding lots of new text here that duplicates what's already there. Ross Finlayson (talk) 01:15, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I gave editing the Cultural Geography section a go, I am a geologist so please be bold in improving my edits (I will be back to tidy up in the morning, i mostly want to add some ref and check grammar etc)(Dushan Jugum (talk) 21:37, 28 November 2018 (UTC)).[reply]
@Cnb8201, Rsfinlayson, Hazhk, and Andymilson: I agree that this class has a pretty big scope. In fact, I even reverted some edits myself because I was concerned about duplicating information across articles [1]. However, I self-reverted when I noticed that Geography of the United Kingdom has political and economic geography (although demographics just kicks over to Demography of the United Kingdom). Do any non-physical geography sections belong on Geography of X articles? Clarification would probably be useful to this instructor and their students (and to me) so that they can make constructive and helpful edits moving forward. Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 18:58, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Rsfinlayson: the content on that sandbox would be better incorporated into other New Zealand-related topics. However, as I noted previously, much of that content has been taken from those articles and indiscriminately applied to this article. I would encourage the students to work on improving the existing content rather tahn adding additional information which is not even tangentially-related to geography.--Hazhk (talk) 19:10, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As a geographer, I vigorously disagree with the notion that my concept of geography is unusually broad or that this content "is not even tangentially-related to geography." What are your qualifications to determine what counts as geography? In fact, geographers recognize two broad branches of geography - physical and human. If the purpose of this article is to discuss only physical geography then it should be re-titled "Physical Geography of New Zealand" or "Climate and Landforms of New Zealand". If it is "Geography of New Zealand" then it should include content from both physical and human geography. For more on how geographers define our discipline, see the following links - What is Geography?Geography Specialties Geography Courses at University of AucklandAndy Milson (talk) 21:36, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

From your first link: "how human culture interacts with the natural environment and the way that locations and places can have an impact on people." Please review the sandbox and see that the content contained there does not meet even this broadest of definitions. Your students need to identify and selectively apply the information that is most pertinent to the topic of human geography; their content makes barely any reference to the 'natural environment'. We have articles on Culture of New Zealand and Demographics of New Zealand where their content might be better placed (with extensive improvement). Best of luck. --Hazhk (talk) 22:49, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A case example, taken from the sandbox:

New Zealand is a British colony, [wrong] so it is technically ruled by the British crown.[again, incorrect] They have their own government, but it is very closely modeled[sic] off Great Britain's.[further explanation required] Their government is based on a parliamentary design, with legislative power held mainly in Parliament, and executive power placed within the cabinet, which is made up of prime ministers.[should be 'ministers'] Parliament has 120 seats, seven of which are reserved for those of Maori descent. Anyone eighteen and older can vote.[2][technically incorrect] New Zealand was actually the first country to give women the right to vote in 1893.[41] The electoral process is currently based on a Mixed Member Proportional System (MMP), imposed in 1996, which gives each voter two different votes: an electorate vote and a party vote. The purpose of party vote is to award a proportional amount of seats to the different political parties. The MMP system has helped small parties to gain more relevance.[2][how?] However, the two main parties remain the New Zealand National Party, (the conservative party) and the New Zealand Labour Party (the liberal party.[wrong]) [42] In February of 2018, The New Zealand National Party elected it's[sic] very first indigenous Maori leader, making political history. [43]"

Please explain how a (weak) summary of the national political system has any relevance to the country's geography? Is the political system shaped by the natural geography? If so, why is this not explained? --Hazhk (talk) 23:10, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Width and length

[edit]

Overview says, "a maximum width of 400 kilometres". Where is the country 400km wide? The greatest width I can find (on Google Maps) is 334km from an unnamed headland between Fannin Bay and West Cape, across to Ohinepua, south of Papanui Inlet. In the North Island the greatest width was claimed in the 1860s to be 198 mi (319 km), between Tirua Point (south of Marokopa) and Tolaga Bay.[1] Google maps shows that distance as about 323 km (201 mi)..[2] The greatest length seems to be not "extending 1,600 kilometres (990 mi) along its north-north-east axis", but 1,505km from Hikura / de Surville Cliffs to South Cape / Whiore? List of extreme points of New Zealand says "northernmost to southernmost (Nugent Island to Jacquemart Island) is 2,813 kilometres". Johnragla (talk) 00:02, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The 400 kilometre width was added to this article by @Hazhk: in this 2016 edit, but that was copied from New Zealand. It was added there by @Aircorn: in 2011. The widest point I can find (using the ruler tool in Google Earth) is between Taranaki just north west of Warea to the easternmost point of Māhia Peninsula, which I make out to be 365 km. This is not completely over land as it cuts across the northern part of Hawke Bay.-gadfium 01:37, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well that's a blast from the past. I have trouble remembering what I did ten days ago let alone ten years. You have piqued my interest so I will investigate. I was relatively new back then, but thought I would have still added a page number. Hmmm it is from 1987 so maybe better to look for a more modern source. Aircorn (talk) 04:54, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ok so I definitely added it. Curious that Britannica gives 450[2] which still makes this wrong. Can't find anything else sorry. Aircorn (talk) 05:25, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not on topic, but how do you find who made a particular edit without doing some very hard research, link to the page or one sentence would be great. Dushan Jugum (talk) 08:42, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
On the history page, "Find addition/removal" (also called "WikiBlame" after a feature from the very old Source Code Control System software). If dealing with very old edits, then a manual binary search works well.-gadfium 08:56, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To add to the OR if you measure from Cape Egmont Lighthouse to East Cape Lighthouse you get 450KM. I guess you could argue whether or not that is "width", but it is probably where that measurement comes from. Aircorn (talk)
That is almost perpendicular to the main length of the North island, ok not really, just more than I though when I first read it. Dushan Jugum (talk) 10:28, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "ENZB - 1867 - Stevens and Bartholomew's New Zealand directory for 1866-67 - AUCKLAND PROVINCE, p 277-286". www.enzb.auckland.ac.nz. Retrieved 2021-12-04.
  2. ^ "Google Maps". Retrieved 2021-12-05.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Geography_of_New_Zealand&oldid=1235228361"