Talk:Provinces of New Zealand

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on November 1, 2012, November 1, 2013, November 1, 2014, November 1, 2015, and November 1, 2016.

New Zealand: Politics Top‑importance

	New Zealand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the New Zealand politics task force (assessed as Top-importance).

blurb

Should the blurb enclosed by the {{cleanup}} tags be reformatted?100110100 05:34, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed it to use a standard template for such things.-gadfium 18:38, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Election dates

Elections for the provinces were meant to be every four years, which means they would've been in:

1853
1857
1861
1865
1869
1873
abolition?

Thoughts anyone? --Lholden (talk) 07:20, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Date format in the table

Two thoughts on the date format used in the table:

the edit from earlier on 19 April 2010 is not the NZ date format, but
when that format is used, you can actually sort the table by date in a meaningful manner (which the NZ date format doesn't achieve).

What should we use? Schwede 66 00:59, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I reverted the edit as it looked like vandalism, I didn't realise it actually made the wikitable work properly... --Lholden (talk) 22:03, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stewart Island / Rakiura

I've been trying (without much success so far) to piece together the history of Stewart Island / Rakiura in relation to Provincial boundaries. As far as I can tell: The 1846 Constitution Act attaches Stewart Island / Rakiura to New Munster Province. The link to the 1852 Constitution Act only links to one section which contains no information about provincial boundaries.

A.H. McLintock, in “The History of Otago: The Origins and Growth of a Wakefield Class Settlement”, Otago Centennial Historical Publications, Dunedin, 1949, p. 411, states:

“Southland received but a small portion of the Murihiku Block, the province being confined to the area between the Mataura and Waiau Rivers, with the western limit running as a line from Eyre Peak to Lake Manapouri.”

This appears to indicate that Southland as created in 1861 did not include Stewart Island.

The citation I added a week or so back refers to Stewart Island having been annexed to Southland in 1863 after a period of not having been in any province. The missing data can't really be filled in until I can find the actual New Zealand Constitution Act 1852 - I've tried searching on the London Gazette site which has the text of the 1846 Act but it isn't helpful either. Daveosaurus (talk) 06:32, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Try your luck here. Schwede 66 07:34, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help. Unfortunately that link seems to be a list of acts of the New Zealand parliament, and the New Zealand Constitution Act 1852 is an act of the British parliament. Daveosaurus (talk) 09:04, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Try http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/ and http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts.htm. I assume that you know that the Act has its own WP article. And lastly, I found the text on Google Books. Schwede 66 01:06, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again... the Google Books link works and the answer seems to be "look it up elsewhere". The only reference to boundaries in that Act seems to be section II: "... the Limits of such several Provinces shall be fixed by Proclamation by the Governor as soon as conveniently may be after the Proclamation of this Act in New Zealand." This indicates that someone who has access to issues of the New Zealand Gazette back to 1852 will have to look up the Proclamation in question. Daveosaurus (talk) 07:49, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of New Leinster Province for deletion

The article New Leinster Province is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New Leinster Province until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 16:18, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article" - what's the policy on this? Can you remove such a template message when you regard it as vandalism? Schwede 66 17:45, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it should be moved while the AFD is still live. I'm assuming the AFD was created through ignorance rather than vandalism as per WP:AGF. Daveosaurus (talk) 23:02, 5 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Modern uses of the old names

In this section there is a claim that "some of the names of former provinces and current regions have a tendency to be preceded by 'the'". Examples are then given of where this is and isn't commonly the case.

Unfortunately, all bar one of the former provinces are listed as examples where 'the' is not commonly used. None of the examples where this is the case are former province names. So in effect, this claim is disproved by it's own examples.

Given this is the case, is there a logical place for this curious fact in another article (suitably amended)? Its-mrb (talk) 03:49, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What's right and what's wrong?

The constitution text from 1846 (New Zealand Constitution Act 1846) says that NZ should be divided in two provinces, each of it on each island. -> New Zealand Constitution Act 1846 PDF 6.5 MB

In my understanding of the source I found, New Zealand was divided in three provinces by letters patent on 16th of November 1840 (not 1841) each of them in one island (North Island eq. New Ulster, South Island eq. New Munster and Stewart Island eq. New Leinster). On the 10th of March 1848 reform was done by proclamation. New Leinster was added to New Munster and the southern part of North Island from the mouth of Patea River to the East was added to New Munster als well.

This is the text I found: „The part of New Ulster south of the Patea River is added to New Munster by proclamation“.
Source: Alison Dench, Essential Dates - A Timeline of New Zealand History, Random House, Auckland 2005, ISBN=1-86941-689-9, Page 71

Another Text: „In 1846 a further Royal Charter divided the colony into two provinces and provided each with its own political institutions in addition to those of the central government. The two provinces were called New Ulster and New Munster. New Leinster was merged with the South Island and the southern portion of the North Island as far north as the mouth of the Pātea River in a reformed New Munster“.
Have a look here: -> NZ History

Another source: New Zealander, Volume 3, Issue 187, 15th of March 1848 -> Paperpast

If this sourcees are right, the animated time line map is wrong and the text which describes the reformed provinces from 1846 on is wrong as well. Could it be, that Governor Grey mad his own decision, because he didn't accept royal charter from 1846. Does someone knows something in detail about it? -- Ulanwp (talk) 18:29, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]