Wikipedia:New Zealand Wikipedians' notice board/Archive 31

Wikimedia User Group of Aotearoa New Zealand Meetup
The first online meetup for the year will be held Sunday January 9th at Noon NZST. The following link gives the agenda and Jitsi link to join the virtual meeting. All editors working on New Zealand content are very welcome. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Aotearoa_New_Zealand_Online/20. - Ambrosia10 (talk) 21:10, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Copyright question
I've started a copyright query related to the New Zealand Police at Media_copyright_questions. Stuartyeates (talk) 06:41, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

FAR notice
I have nominated Michael Woodruff for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 07:23, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

First Wellington Wikipedia Meetup happening virtually
The #Wellington #Wikipedia meetup, the first of the year 2022, will be held virtually tomorrow Saturday the 22nd of January at 10am NZST. Please join us! More information and the link to join can be found here Ambrosia10 (talk) 00:35, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section has an RFC
Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. BilledMammal (talk) 03:03, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

COI editing by parliamentary services staff
Hi all, I've just blocked the IP 202.22.30.101 for edit warring. This IP belongs to Parliamentary Services, i.e. all the public servants who work for MPs use this as their IP address. When you look through the contributions, it's clear that there is a lot of conflict of interest editing going on. This will presumably never change going forward. Hence the thought crossed my mind – shall we consider keeping a permanent block in place but allowing the creation of accounts from that IP address? That way, we'd be dealing with individuals and it's easier to communicate about COI. Pinging active NZ admins but I invite anybody's thoughts.  Schwede 66  03:16, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Doesn't this belong at AN or ANI, as I believe that IP blocking goes beyond what can reasonable be discussed within a Wikiproject? BilledMammal (talk) 03:22, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * , if enough of us, especially the active admins, agree on an action, that is good enough for me.  Schwede 66  03:33, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * (Edit conflict) A few minutes earlier, I put semi-protection on the article Harete Hipango which the IP was edit warring on. I note that the talk page of that article does not contain any material related to the IP's disagreement with the sourced content of the article. If no such material is forthcoming, the neutrality tag on the article is invalid and should be removed.
 * I am happy with Schwede66's block on the IP, and his suggestion that we allow the IP to create an account.- gadfium 03:29, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't want it blocked because I live for the drama, but yeah it's probably the best call. I was surprised to see the neutrality tag put on there, and reckon it should probably be taken off, considering the editor didn't flag why he thought it wasn't neutral on the talk page. Nauseous Man (talk) 03:49, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Seems like a prudent move - I wonder if it's worth someone getting in touch with Parliamentary Services as a friendly heads up as well? Turnagra (talk) 04:03, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * , good idea. I'll get in touch with them.  Schwede 66  04:23, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Seems sensible to me, too. If they want to edit, let them make an account. That way we can keep track of them if they start playing sillybuggers. Grutness... wha?   04:07, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * We've had similar issues in Australia (COI editing from Parliament House IPs and registered accounts that have the appearance of being linked to politicians or their staff). As a note, this has repeatedly ended up in the media, with Wikipedia editors' posts being quoted, so I'd suggest that NZ editors responding to this be careful about what they say in case the NZ media picks up on this editing. For instance, definitely warn and block the IPs as normal, but don't leave any warning messages or comments you wouldn't want to appear in the news. Nick-D (talk) 05:10, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I've written to parliamentary services. In line with your advice, Nick, it's probably best if we don't put the exact message here. If anyone would like to see the email, send me a Wikimail and I'll reply to that.  Schwede 66  08:34, 26 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Newshub article, NZH  Nixinova   T   C  00:54, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * There are in fact four news organisations that have reported on this. They are linked from the header of Talk:Harete Hipango.  Schwede 66  01:20, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree with the proposed action. I note the IP quoted as saying: "Controveries" [SIC] section is false, and is causing a lot of distress to her family," I have no opinion on the merits of that case but I think it is sometimes easy for WP editors to forget the effect a casual poorly written and poor sources comment can have on the lives of real people and those close to them.Roger 8 Roger (talk) 01:35, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * , can I just clarify with you that with "casual poorly written and poor sources comment", you are not referring to any specific Wikipedia articles (especially not the Hipango bio), but it is meant as a general comment? Given that this page is being watched by journalists and the wider public, it would seem important that we are not saying that these particular problems apply in this case.  Schwede 66  02:27, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, my remarks where not about what is happening on the Hipango article: as per my remark above, "I have no opinion on the merits of that case". I was making a general comment that sometimes some editors write detail into articles that can be quite damaging in different ways to real people, which makes it extra important that what we write is carefully worded and properly sourced. This would apply specifically but not exclusively to bios. Sorry for not making that clearer. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 04:03, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

COI edit notice
I have added a template message to the top of Talk:Harete Hipango and started a discussion about adding this notice to other articles edited by anonymous users using IP 202.22.30.101. I also wondered if the template should also be added to articles where those contributions, indicate a sitting Member of Parliament's biography has been edited, too. Schwede66 advised that the best place for that discussion is here and asked me to identify the articles concerned. Comments in the edit summary of one article indicate Member of Parliament and their staff do not know how to address a Conflict of Interest when editing Wikipedia articles and do not realise they can raise any COI issues on talk pages and seek to have any perceived inaccuracies appropriately modified. To give fair and equal treatment to all concerned, I think all the articles below are candidates to have a COI edit notice and a connected contributor notice on their talk pages. While I agree that some articles are not obviously connected to a sitting Member of Parliament and could be casual editing by readers wishing to remain anonymous, the fact that several recent edits to seemingly unrelated articles have been immediately reverted suggests that something inappropriate might be going on. So, to give fair and equal treatment to all concerned, I think any anonymous contribution from this IP address to those articles should at least be examined and considered for a COI notice, as well. The following list of candidate articles, with contributions since 2017, is ordered by the most recent edit of each candidate article (duplicates removed). A couple of Talk page contributions have been omitted as those edits are not COI issues. Entries marked with a "*" have a tag indicating the latest edit was reverted. The entry marked "?" indicates the edit undid an edit by another user. I would welcome any thoughts. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 22:58, 28 January 2022 (UTC)


 * Based on the Australian experience, I'd suggest being cautious in adding these types of tags on BLP grounds, as well as to discourage unnecessary drama. Some Australian politicians have been criticised in the media and social media for editing of their article that they might not have had anything to do with. Some government agencies have also been criticised for insignificant edits made by their staff (for instance petty vandalism made during lunch hours), which the media has beaten up into stories claiming that this was official editing by the agency! I'd suggest only tagging articles where the IP(s) have added material that is clearly highly promotional or highly critical of the subject. Nick-D (talk) 23:22, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I've added an extra column to the table, so we can note down whether or not the edits seem OK. I've had a look at a small handful that were not obviously connected to NZ politics, almost all of which seem fine. Grutness... wha?   03:07, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Good idea. I have added a few more notes about some of the recent contributions. Also, in the WikiProject Biography banner template there is the option to add the attribute: |activepol=yes which would display the notice at . I am not sure it is any better than a COI notice, apart from election time. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 04:57, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
 * , excellent work; thank you. That'll help with any cleanup if that's still required and it shows that as a community, we actively mitigate COI editing. Just for the record, the most egregious COI editing that I've ever come across was the Judith Collins article, where User:Jc press sec was having an obvious conflict. In 2014, Nicky Hager revealed in his book Dirty Politics that it was Cameron Slater who was paid by Collins for work on Wikipedia and who owned that username. It was quite something!  Schwede 66  22:18, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I would like to point out that the checks by Turnagra and IdiotSavant helped, which saved me a lot of work. So they deserve credit too. My general impression is that many of the edits from this IP address are made in good faith but the people making them seem unaware of core Wikipedia policies like verifiability, no original research and neutral point of view and that following the biography of living persons guidelines supports these fundamental policies. Some constructive edits are well sourced and it appears the people who make those edits know what Wikipedia requires of them to have their anonymous edits accepted. A lot more of the edits are made in good faith by people who boldly edit an article but do not engage in discussion if their edit is reverted. And many of them are. Sometimes other editors even come along and clean up the mess by making constructive edits to improve the edited articles. The residual few articles where content has been removed in a similar way to what happened in the Harete Hipango article are perhaps candidates for notices, but this could be a graduated response. A first reversion might trigger enabling the "active politician" message in the biography banner. A second reversion might result in adding the template to the talk page, while a third reversion might result in the full COI edit notice treatment. Consideration could be given to removing notices once there is consensus-seeking discussion about adding content by closely related users. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 04:02, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
 * , yes, credit also to the other worker bees! Going forward, "active politician" isn't really the right message right now as we are far out from an election, and we won't need the "connected contributor" tag either as I think we'll keep the parliamentary IP blocked. We have yet to hear from on the proposal but if he also agrees, I'll turn that into a permanent block.  Schwede  66  04:34, 30 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I think requiring any anonymous users to create editing accounts when using this IP address makes sense. That way, other Wikipedia editors can communicate directly with the individuals concerned, rather than having all Wikipedia readers using the parliamentary service IP address being alerted to any Wikipedia editing issues. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 05:35, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Parliamentary services COI – update
Two things:
 * As agreed, I've extended the IP block (it had expired at 3pm today and there were a few hours when the IP was available for editing again but no edits were done). The block renewal reminded me that there is no such thing as an indef block for an IP address; 3 years is max. I'll put a reminder into my calendar.
 * Four of us had a meeting with a handful of staff from parliamentary services and the parliamentary library this afternoon. Very useful session. This can be a very fruitful working relationship. In the first instance, we will upskill some of the key staff on the rules around WP editing. We'll also work towards setting up a project page. Other Wikipedians in the meeting were, , and.

There'll be more to report in due course and there'll be opportunity for everybody to have input.  Schwede 66  08:22, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Use of kawanatanga in treaty issues
User:BilledMammal recently made a couple of changes (1, 2) in which the term kawanatanga is replaced with governance in relation to what was ceded by Māori with the Treaty of Waitangi / te Tiriti o Waitangi. Given the potential WP:NPOV issues that such a move brings up, I'm keen to get some wider input on what the most suitable term to use is, or whether there's another way we can approach this when describing what was ceded by Māori with te Tiriti. Also, just to quickly clarify, this isn't intended as a slight against BilledMammal - they have agreed that the edit could have inadvertently caused NPOV concerns and that it's worth a wider discussion. I'm sure that wasn't their intention with the edits. Turnagra (talk) 05:11, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks Turnagra, good issue to flag. I think this Te Ara page could assist in explaining why the term kawanatanga is not exactly equivalent to governance, if needed. As a side note, I'm not sure this is currently well-explained in the kawanatanga article, and maybe that article could also do with some work? (I'd add it to my list, but real life commitments at the moment mean I'm not sure I'll get to it in the near future.) Cheers, Chocmilk03 (talk) 05:25, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Agree that the kawanatanga (sidenote: it seems that this should actually have a macron, so kāwanatanga) article, and articles relating to te ao Māori in general, need a lot of work. I'll try and get to it at some point if no-one else gets there first, but I'm not sure whether I could do it proper justice. Turnagra (talk) 07:59, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Indeed, thank you. Generally, I prefer to use terms that readers can understand without having to read a separate article, but I forgot that in this example the translation itself is at the heart of historical disputes that remain relevant today. In longer articles, we can address this with explanation of the term and the dispute, but I don't believe we can do that with lists. BilledMammal (talk) 05:38, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I can see it being difficult to have a proper explanation in the list, which is why I'm hoping someone might have a better term to use. Or alternatively we could have both (eg. "...ceded kāwanatanga (governance)...") even if that's still not great, it at least lists both? Turnagra (talk) 07:59, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I would normally support clarification like that if there was a consensus against just using the translation, but in this case I don't believe it addresses your NPOV concerns, as it still supports the meaning being governance rather than sovereignty. Hopefully, someone can come up with a better term, but I'm not sure one exists. BilledMammal (talk) 10:55, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
 * When a complex word isn’t easily explained in parentheses, I suggest that the next best thing is to use a footnote based on the templates efn and notelist.  Schwede 66  16:54, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree that 'governance' is incorrect in this statement - is not a neutral point of view. I suggest the statement be re-written so the question of translation isn't one. Instead of "Treaty of Waitangi between the British Crown and the indigenous Māori tribes cedes governance of New Zealand to Queen Victoria." How about "Treaty of Waitangi where the British Crown 'acquired the right to govern' from indigenous Māori tribes". My preferred longer version would be with this at the end "... in exchange for the protection of Māori interests." The reference for this is p14 He Kupu Tuarangi by Chris Finlayson and James Christmas 2021. It is a paraphrase / quote mash up so would need to be referenced as per Schwedes suggestion. I will look for other summaries too. Just the book I had to hand and a very recent publication... Pakoire (talk) 04:59, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
 * In any case I think "governorship" may be a better word to use than "governance". "Governance" is one of those tricky words which doesn't mean exactly what a lot of people think it means. Daveosaurus (talk) 08:28, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

List_of_kākāpō and related articles
I have posted a note to User:GreenKakapo's talk page about List_of_kākāpō and related articles. There is over-coverage and reliance on primary sources. These articles appear to be being largely built by well-meaning but not wiki-aware folks who are invested in Kākāpō. If someone or some people could give them a hand bringing them to wiki norms, that would be great. There are ~5000 kakapo articles in google scholar, so there's lots of sources, but twitter updates shouldn't be our first stop. Stuartyeates (talk) 21:50, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Personally, I think the List of kākāpō article is fine as a concept, though it could potentially do with a bit of work. I note that it's got a fairly robust edit history going back over a decade with quite a few different authors. I wonder if an issue with sourcing could be related to whether journal articles are likely to use the names of individual kākāpō? Turnagra (talk) 07:54, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I beg to differ, it's a train wreck. More than 75% of the references are to primary sources. Much is made of 'Fiordland kākāpō' without mentioning that most are from Stewart Island / Rakiura. "As of today, the New Zealand Dept of Conservation site shows a population of 201" is clearly wrong and has been for some time. It seems improbably that the 1970's era captive birds weren't named and their info published, but these are not mentioned. The "quite a few different authors" include a large number of IP addresses and SPAs (User:TheyLookLikeUs, User:Kauaikakapo, User:SōkLemon, User:GreenKakapo, etc). Need I go on?Stuartyeates (talk) 19:06, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry - for clarity, I meant that I think the concept of a "List of kākāpō" as an article is fine. I agree that the article itself needs a fair bit of work. Turnagra (talk) 02:26, 7 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Primary sources are fine for "straightforward, descriptive statements of facts". WP:PRIMARY OTOH, is one of the odder templates I've seen. Furius (talk) 23:25, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Category:Regions of New Zealand
Every time I visit this category or one of its subcategories I'm instantly reminded of how haphazard the naming scheme is. There are categories for: but also for The unitary authorities are equally mixed, at Ideally, it would be more intuitive if they were all at Foo Region (which is how they are on commons), but it's more a cosmetic change than anything else, and I'd understand it if Gisborne, Marlborough, and Tasman were all at Foo District. It'd be nice to have some consistency, though. Anyone got any thoughts? Grutness... wha?   01:15, 6 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Auckland Region
 * Bay of Plenty Region
 * Hawke's Bay Region
 * Northland Region, and
 * Wellington Region
 * Manawatū-Whanganui
 * Otago
 * Taranaki
 * Waikato
 * Canterbury, New Zealand
 * Southland, New Zealand, and
 * West Coast, New Zealand.
 * Gisborne District
 * Marlborough Region
 * Nelson Region (which contains a Nelson, New Zealand subcat for the city proper), and
 * Tasman District
 * Region would probably work, but I wonder whether it would be suitable in all cases (except for the districts you mentioned) - in particular, I'm thinking of Manawatū-Whanganui, which I'm not sure I've ever heard of as "Manawatū-Whanganui Region". For consistency I think it'd be fine even if some of them are a bit clunky. Turnagra (talk) 02:32, 7 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Just to throw further confusion into the mix - Auckland is now a unitary authority (not a region as such) and there's also the Chatham Islands which is almost but not quite a unitary authority, and there is an Area Outside Territorial Authority, population: lots of penguins and a handful of weathermen and DOC rangers. Daveosaurus (talk) 07:11, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * You might all want to check out previous move requests. Yes, there was an attempt to have a clean naming convention for all regions, a multi move request was put forward and shot down in flames as unworkable, it then went to individual move requests and the outcome is what we've got in front of us. That's not to say that we couldn't straighten this out but it's worth knowing that this has been tried before.  Schwede 66  08:03, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Mmmmm. At the very least, I think Canterbury, Southland, and West Coast should be moved. Currently they look like towns. Grutness... wha?   23:55, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I assume that they are there to avoid ambiguity with similar regions elsewhere (e.g. West Coast, Germany, West Coast, Tasmania, West Coast, Singapore) and that consideration does seem to trump the desire for consistency within the set of NZ regions. Furius (talk) 00:23, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

New location maps
Thanks to the wonderful Ikonact, we now have a range of new location maps which can be used for NZ articles. So far, this includes Fiordland, Banks Peninsula, and the Marlborough Sounds as I thought these areas were the most detailed and not sufficiently covered by existing location maps. I'm going through and updating the relevant articles now, but thought it worth posting here in case others wanted to update things or add these to their new articles!

Turnagra (talk) 21:02, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Grant Tilly
The link on the Grant Tilly page to Carry Me Back is to something other than the 1982 comedy feature which Mr. Tilly was in. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christopher1968 (talk • contribs) 05:25, 12 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Thanks for letting us know - it doesn't have an article, so I've fixed it to point to where the article would go if it got written. Daveosaurus (talk) 05:48, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Mangamutu
I see that has translated one of the locality articles—Mangamutu—from the Māori Wikipedia (but not linked to it via Wikidata for some reason). Gildir, can I please ask that you don't do these translations? What's on the Māori Wikipedia is bot-generated crap. The map is totally meaningless. Most of the article has nothing to do with the place itself. Have you translated anything else or is this it? I'm asking because this needs serious cleanup and we might as well know about all instances of this.  Schwede 66  22:16, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Totally agree Schwede. Pointless if you're not at least going to add a bit more info. I quickly gave a clean up, added a infobox, and added a bit more. Still needs work.ShakyIsles (talk) 23:29, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * , that's looking a million times better already. Well done, ShakyIsles.  Schwede 66  02:01, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Mangamutu is the only article I've translated from Māori Wikipedia. I won't translate any more of these kinds of articles. Thank you so much for improving the article, -- it looks great! Gildir (talk) 04:36, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * , thanks for reporting back. Much appreciated.  Schwede 66  07:38, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

New Zealand academics and categorisation
There's a discussion I'd encourage you to engage with at Categories_for_discussion/Log/2022_February_19. Stuartyeates (talk) 01:30, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Rapid Grant to attend National Digital Forum conference 2022
Just to let members of WikiProject New Zealand know that I've just submitted my report on my attendance at the National Digital Forum 2022. This was funded by the Wikimedia Foundation via a rapid grant. Ambrosia10 (talk) 23:29, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

International Women's Day 2022 Weekend Editathon 5 & 6 March 2022
You are invited to join in an upcoming editathon to create and improve content about women on Wikipedia in recognition International Women's Day. The event starts at 9am on Saturday March 5th and goes until 9pm on Sunday March 6th. Our goal is 20 new articles and 20 improved articles. The intention is people can contribute for a short time or for longer - whatever suits you and your other activities over the weekend.

There are many ways you can participate:
 * find a short article about a New Zealand women and improve it
 * create a new article on a notable women from your region or your area of work
 * join us online in some informal Zoom time to meet some other editors
 * add your name to the project page
 * add your improved or created articles to the project page
 * join the dashboard to track your edits
 * get coaching from an experienced editor to upskill in any area, or ask those questions that pop up
 * see a list of suggested articles with references already collated

Please see the project page for more details: New Zealand International Women's Day Wikipedia Editathon. To join the zoom you will need to register for a ticket with Eventbrite.

Biographies of women are currently sitting at 19.16% of bios on Wikipedia. Join in to address the imbalance and enjoy celebrating and learning about notable women in our communities.

Pakoire (talk) 05:38, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Invitation to meeting to establish NZ group
We plan to hold a community meeting to establish Wikimedia Aotearoa New Zealand Inc ("WANZ Inc") as an Incorporated Society and register as a charitable entity

Thursday 17 March 2022 7:30 pm Online: please register here and you’ll be sent the Zoom link: []

The WANZ Establishment Working Group (WEWG) consists of the following people: User:Giantflightlessbirds (Mike Dickison) User:MurielMary User:Einebillion (Victoria Leachman) User:Marshelec (Marshall Clark) User:Noracrentiss (Christine Richardson) Why an incorporated society? Our purpose is to establish an organisation in New Zealand that can promote and support development of content on Wikimedia Foundation platforms and encourage increased participation by New Zealand residents and those associated with our country. In particular, we require a more formal organisation if we are to apply for and receive significant grants. The proposed structure (an incorporated society with charitable status) enables grass-roots involvement of the membership in all the important decision-making of the society. The proposed society will:
 * keep members informed of its activities through a range of media
 * provide learning pathways for developing Wikimedia-related skills
 * coordinate projects
 * apply for or support applications for funding

What will be the entitlements and obligations of being a Member of WANZ Inc? Entitlements: Members of WANZ Inc can Obligations:
 * stand for election to the Committee
 * vote at the AGM
 * Members must pay an annual membership fee (determined at the AGM) in order to retain their entitlements as a member. Members can resign their membership at any time.

What’s been done so far: WEWG prepared an initial draft Constitution for WANZ which was made available for comment. Notices were placed on and off Wikipedia calling for input. The WEWG received and considered several comments and suggestions and made a small number of changes to the document. The revised draft is now available for the next step. You can read it here:[] Meanwhile, Marshall Clark has begun drafting a set of Standard Operating Procedures for consideration and adoption by the new organisation. These SOPs will cover the everyday running of WANZ including things like Role Descriptions for Committee Members. Next steps: The WEWG will convene an online meeting of "members" (people interested in setting up the Society) to do the following:
 * approve the rules/constitution
 * resolve to apply for incorporation
 * decide who will be the president, vice-president, secretary and treasurer (two-year terms)
 * choose who will fill the other committee positions (two-year terms)
 * decide on a physical address for the registered office plus an email address for communications
 * decide on the month in which the Society's AGM is to be held (The Society's financial year is the calendar year so April seems a suitable month for the AGM.)

After that meeting, the newly established Committee will:
 * gather 15 signatures for the application for incorporation
 * submit the application to the Registrar of Incorporated Societies
 * apply for registration as a charity with Charities Services
 * establish a bank account

WANZ Committee The Constitution requires formation of a Committee so please consider whether you wish to put yourself forward for one of the Committee roles set out in the Constitution. (While the Constitution states that the term is for 2 years, a Committee member can resign at any time.) MurielMary (talk) 09:48, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Merger discussion in progress
Mactra ovata appears to be a synonym for this and should, if that's correct be merged/redirected to Paphies australis (pipi). Grateful for comments on this at Talk:Paphies australis, since biology is quite a way outside me wheelhouse and I may have misunderstood the situation. Furius (talk) 00:58, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Meeting Invitation: to establish Wikimedia Aotearoa New Zealand Inc ("WANZ Inc") as an Incorporated Society and register as a charitable entity
Kia ora,

We are meeting on Thursday 17 March at 7.30pm on Zoom to establish Wikimedia Aotearoa New Zealand Inc ("WANZ Inc") as an Incorporated Society. Please do join us. You can find more information including registration details here Einebillion (talk) 02:50, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Otago page move
Hi. Please see this discussion. Thanks.  Lugnuts  Fire Walk with Me 08:21, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:Otago
There is a requested move discussion at Talk:Otago that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. — Shibboleth ink  (♔ ♕) 22:24, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Aotearoa New Zealand Online Meetup
This meetup is happening virtually on Sunday the 3 April from Noon until 2pm NZST. The video conferencing link to attend the online meetup is given in the meetup page. Any Wikimedian working on New Zealand content is very welcome to attend. Einebillion (talk) 02:27, 1 April 2022 (UTC)

Auckland Wiki Meetup
Kia ora,

A few of us have been wanting to organise an Auckland wiki meetup for a while and have finally given up waiting to have it in person. We will be holding it over zoom this weekend on the Saturday at 11am. For our first one we're keeping it short and sweet, we'll be having breakout rooms so beginners and experienced editors can be paired together and get hands on help and also allow for discussions of a wider range of projects. Details can be found on the Meetup Page Susan Tol (talk) 21:38, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Culture of Auckland
If anyone could help get Culture of Auckland to the same standard as Culture of Sydney or Culture of Melbourne, that would be super cool. --Aubernas (talk) 03:01, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Invitation to peer-review of Draft:Sam Duckor-Jones
Kia ora, I would appreciate if anyone has a moment to peer-review Draft:Sam Duckor-Jones before I submit it for the AfC process. Thank you! Nauseous Man (talk) 10:38, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
 * It's Duckor not Ducker. :) --Gertrude206 (talk) 20:23, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
 * How on earth did I do this lol. I didn't want to keep typing his name, so I just copy and pasting. At least the title is correct heh. Thank you!! Nauseous Man (talk) 21:44, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

The draft is now in the AfC process, if there's any admins lurking around who want to speed up the process.... Nauseous Man (talk) 23:31, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
 * That's not quite correct, Nauseous Man. What editors need is the New Page Reviewer right (which admins automatically have). If editors could be interested in that, follow the link and have a read. If you think you meet the criteria (the bar isn't very high at all), please apply for this.  Schwede 66  00:23, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
 * oh! Excellent. I didn't know that. I'll have a look, thank you. Nauseous Man (talk) 00:28, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Avondale Road Station discussion
I've just opened a discussion at Talk:Avondale Road railway station about whether that station ever actually existed - any input would be greatly appreciated! Turnagra (talk) 06:15, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Wellington Wikimedia meetup - online
Kia ora,

The Wellington meetup will be held virtually on Saturday the 16th of April at 10am. The video conferencing link to attend the online meetup is given in the meetup page. Any Wikimedian in Wellington or working on Wellington content is very welcome to attend. -Ambrosia10 (talk) 19:23, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Is there any interest in resuming in-person meetings at He Matapihi in May? --Gertrude206 (talk) 00:25, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I would certainly be keen. :) Chocmilk03 (talk) 00:51, 30 April 2022 (UTC)

Meeting notes from the Wellington Meetup
Here are the notes from the Wellington meetup held this morning. Einebillion (talk) 00:36, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Move request on Cam River (Canterbury)
Kia ora koutou, just a quick notice to let you know that there's an ongoing move request at Talk:Cam River (Canterbury) which affects a few NZ places that you might be interested in.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cam_River_(Canterbury)#Requested_move_22_March_2022

Cheers Turnagra (talk) 00:51, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

New Wikiproject - NZThesis
Just noting the creation of a new Wikiproject, NZThesisProject which aims to upload metadata for New Zealand theses to Wikidata. Thus far the team have developed a model for a thesis on Wikidata and collected a large dataset, which is in the process of being cleaned ready for upload. Please visit the project page to find out more, and let us know if you have any interest in the area. DrThneed (talk) 23:43, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

User script to detect unreliable sources
I have (with the help of others) made a small user script to detect and highlight various links to unreliable sources and predatory journals. Some of you may already be familiar with it, given it is currently the 39th most imported script on Wikipedia. The idea is that it takes something like and turns it into something like
 * John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.
 * John Smith "Article of things" Deprecated.com. Accessed 2020-02-14.

It will work on a variety of links, including those from cite web, cite journal and doi.

The script is mostly based on WP:RSPSOURCES, WP:NPPSG and WP:CITEWATCH and a good dose of common sense. I'm always expanding coverage and tweaking the script's logic, so general feedback and suggestions to expand coverage to other unreliable sources are always welcomed.

Do note that this is not a script to be mindlessly used, and several caveats apply. Details and instructions are available at User:Headbomb/unreliable. Questions, comments and requests can be made at User talk:Headbomb/unreliable.

- &#32; Headbomb {t · c · p · b}

This is a one time notice and can't be unsubscribed from. Delivered by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Aotearoa New Zealand User Group meetup
The monthly Wikimedia User Group of Aoteaora New Zealand meeting will be held virtually today in about an hour. Apologies for the late notification. See Meetup/Aotearoa_New_Zealand_Online/23 for further details and hope to see you there. Ambrosia10 (talk) 23:00, 30 April 2022 (UTC)