Talk:South Island Independence

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	South Island Independence is part of WikiProject New Zealand, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.
Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

moved from a user page:

Contents 1 Sole external link to arguments for independence 2 Vogel and South Island independence 3 Fact tags and potential POV issues 4 What modern independence movement?

[edit] Sole external link to arguments for independence

I don't have a problem with a link to any genuine SI independence movement. I do question whether the link you have readded represents such. The image of a woman's bouncing breasts on the website makes it clear that this is someone's idea of a joke. The other images fail to dispel that impression. I think the whole page, if not a prank, is an advertisement for a book publisher. Please actually look at the website before readding.-gadfium 01:57, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Your advice to look at a site before you jump to conclusions is appropriate, Gadfium, and one I always try to practice (especially in my professional life).

This is a multiple page site that has had a lot of effort expended on it. The jokes may not be to your taste or mine but it is NOT a pornographic or joke site.

If you actually read the text you will see that the bouncing breasts draw attention to the news item that women in Nelson (in the South Island) have the biggest breasts - not the clincher in a political argument, I agree, but please also look at the economic and health arguments for independence this site advances befoer you condemn it as being without merit - there are at least 4 separate pages you need to thoroughly read...

Please don't make vandalistic reversions without reaching a consensus here first.

<Please consider how few external links are likely to be placed here and read Wikipedia policy before you delete the external link to http://www.cutthecable.co.nz. again without reaching a consensus here.

• South Island Independence movement unofficial website. (Caution may offend some North Islanders)

Note to the deletionist tendency: please don't try and exercise political censorship on what is quintessentially a political topic. The arguments for independence are better rehearsed on an external website than here on Wikipedia and, if you are still tempted to delete the link, I can only suggest that a neutral PoV requires you to at least make an effort to précis the arguments expressed on that external link here in this article before you delete a link to an alternative viewpoint to your own...Gaimhreadhan 02:28, 18 March 2007 (UTC) i

Yes, I did read the website's claim that South Island women have bigger breasts. I don't consider it authoritative, and I don't see what that has to do with independence. The whole website has clearly exaggerated claims: comparing the South Island to Tibet? It isn't even funny. I also don't consider the website as evidence that a modern South Island independence movement exists. I think this is someone with a strange sense of humour and too much time on their hands. Wikipedia is not a place for such jokes.-gadfium 05:28, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

The source is inappropriate, what is necessary is an independent source. Without one the article would surely fail an AfD nomination. Please see Wikipedia:Citing sources; the source should be removed. - Shudda ^talk 06:18, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Agreed with not linking, site appears to be mostly a joke rather than a proper political site advocating change. - SimonLyall 07:18, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Link removed. A better source should be found, and I've added {{sources}} to the article. --Coredesat 09:20, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vogel and South Island independence

I've tagged the claim that Vogel supported South Island independence. I've never heard of, or read about, Vogel ever stating this; he certainly didn't while he was Premier (the article currently implies he was Premier in 1865). Certainly the issue was debated then, and I have a feeling a resolution was put, but the outcome was moving the capital from Auckland to Wellington. --Lholden 02:02, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fact tags and potential POV issues

I've added further fact tags along with sections. Some of the claims really do need to be backed up with a proper source - e.g. the claim about Treaty of Waitangi settlements. I know for a fact that support amongst the general population for ToW settlements is a lot higher than the article implies (cf NZ Study of Values, 2005) --Lholden 23:47, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What modern independence movement?

The article has consistently failed to provide any evidence of a modern independence movement in the South Island, apart from the South Island Party which appears to be defunct since 2002. Where is the evidence that there is an independence movement? We need sources in reliable media and names/links for specific groups who have some influence or at least organisation. The existing list of arguments for South Island independence appear to be original research, since they are attempting to use cited facts to make a case on Wikipedia, rather than reporting an outside body making such a case and getting media coverage for it.-gadfium 19:52, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I have removed the list of arguments for an independent South Island, as there are no links to groups advocating such independence. The article now mentions several internet-based groups advocating independence - we should link to their websites, assuming that they are sufficiently organised to have achieved coverage in national media. For example, we should add "Group X [website] has called for blah since 2005 [ref to Otago Daily Times, or Christchurch Press]". A website which has received no such coverage from reliable sources isn't worth linking to.-gadfium 20:10, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

The moderators of this page, obviously have their own agenda, given the continued attempts to censor any links or acknowledgement of pro-independence groups within the South Island. Perhaps this page needs to have a change of title because it certainly doesn't reflect the current one. May also be appropiate to remove the image of proposed South Island flag because it has not received any coverage in the national media either. Son of Zealandia (talk) 13:03, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Please familiarise yourself with Wikipedia's linking, verifiability and Manual of Style before you accuse anyone of censorship. None of the edits of this article have been done with the intent to get prevent acknowledgment of the topic - I've only put in fact tags on statements I believe to be wrong (e.g. the claim that European New Zealanders don't support Treaty of Waitangi settlements - as noted above, I've seen figures in academic studies that contradict this claim). If you can find verifiable statements otherwise, what you've written will stand. --Lholden (talk) 21:39, 18 April 2008 (UTC)