Talk:Māori renaissance

	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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Māori task force.

Dates?

I always took 'the Maori renaissance' to refer to what went on in the 1920s and 30s under Ngata. --Helenalex 04:18, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not yet worthy of a link from the Maori article, BUT

This article could be a useful way to expand on the information in the "Revival" section of the main Maori article. That section should probably be reduced to summary style.. Ropata (talk) 15:20, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Māori Renaissance. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111230141015/http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/te-maori-exhibition-of-traditional-maori-art-opens-at-the-metropolitan-museum-of-art-in-new-york to http://www.nzhistory.net.nz/te-maori-exhibition-of-traditional-maori-art-opens-at-the-metropolitan-museum-of-art-in-new-york

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) 11:45, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

lists of people question & in general

I am adding to this article - I feel it needs a more definitive definition at the beginning and a shorter lead. The lists of people seems a bit random with no explanation. Why do we think they are here? There are hundreds / dozens of people that could be added to these lists? Perhaps it could be 'notable people who contributed to the Māori renaissance in the 60s and 70s' (once the time period of the term has been better defined). Pakoire (talk) 01:47, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I also need to comment on the lists. They are problematic because there is no way that you could define who should be listed here and who does not belong. The next problem is that every entry should be supported by a reference. I suggest to delete these lists and any individual who ought to be mentioned in relation to this topic should be incorporated into the prose. Schwede 66 16:23, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You can see I've been trying to structure that article better and am near the end. I have left everything that was there on the page to get sorted at the end, which should be shortly - there are some useful bits there. That list is totally out of place and I agree should be removed. I had thought of either creating another list of far fewer people who were involved in the renaissance, like a 'notable people' list, or just doing what you say and incorporate some into the article text (Whina Cooper is already there, unintentionally). Roger 8 Roger (talk) 19:31, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

State of article

user:Aubernas, I suggest you stop[ making large changes to several wiki articles, this one included. Discuss your concerns on the talk page first. This article is in need of a major overhaul, I think that is not in dispute, and I was slowly attempting to re-structure the article. However, you should not remove quality sources as you have just done. Maori dying out? Yes, most definitely they were, or that was the perception a hundred years ago - read the sources. I suggest you could help by finding quality sources and using them. The list of people has to be heavily culled or simply removed IMO. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 19:36, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Māori dying out" is a gravely offensive perspective put held by many of the Europeans of the time. Māori were decimated by disease and many tribes were dispossessed of their lands, that's true, but to assert they were going "extinct" was a Pākehā justification for further expansion. Those words were even said when the population was growing. I think the espousal of patronising and baseless views like these is one of the reasons so few Māori edit Wikipedia. Aubernas (talk) 22:19, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Dying race" myth

This article discusses nearly two centuries of negative press views of Māori by Pākehā. It also asserts my point that the patronising idea that Māori were "a dying race" was one that was widespread among Pākehā but baseless and offensive in reality. It was solely an opinion and an offensive one. If we include it in every article about Māori, why not include the European concept of Aboriginal Australians as inferior on every page about them? https://i.stuff.co.nz/life-style/103871652/cunning-deceitful-savages-200-years-of-mori-bad-press Aubernas (talk) 22:27, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your source above is an opinion piece not a reliable secondary source. I don't care if you're offended, if what is written in the article is condescending or patronising. I also don't care if two centuries of media coverage has been unjustifiably negative. And guess what: you shouldn't care either. What I, and you, should care about is what is written in reliable secondary sources. Paul Moon, whom you have removed, is a quality source, you won't find better. It says, (p.191) that "...in the decades following the Second World War, concerns among some Maori about the fate of the language and culture became more acute. A long standing argument has been that assimilation policies did have a positive impact on Maori health, particularly in the early part of the century. But there was a growing acknowledgement that elements of traditional Maori culture were draining away." (my stress) The other source you removed that I don't have time to quote is also a good academic RSS that confirms the perceived, and actual, post WW1 decline. I suggest you take some time getting more familiar with how WP works before making any more sweeping changes and indulging in edit wars, otherwise you will be blocked. This article needs a re-write, I accept that, but it must be about, not for, the Maori Renaissance. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 23:15, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Another way to support the article being stronger Aubernas could be to let other editors know of other references in this talk page. I also agree the article needs restructuring and clarity. I often search for Māori authors writing in the subject area of the Wikipedia article. I have been looking for writing about this topic and often a 'Māori renaissance' is mentioned in passing in the references I have but not explored in depth. The dying race myth was perhaps a motivation for Ngata and others in their actions that supported a renaissance? Pakoire (talk) 02:40, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I also looked for "Maori Renaissance" and didn't find much more than passing mentions, which is why the Paul Moon book stood out, with a chapter on 'The Maori Renaissance'. From memory the term 'dying race' was mentioned in the other academic source. From what I have seen the issue is more about the perception and hence worry (by some academic and political Maori) of a possible dying race rather than a dying race in reality. I don't think there is much dispute that core cultural elements of Maori, and their language, were being eroded by post 1840 contact with new immigrants. Whether that amounts to the dying of a race, or development in an alternative direction, is probably a matter of opinion. However, there was clearly enough concern in the 60s and 70s about what was happening to lead to activism and change.

On a different topic, I too see no purpose in the large list of names. I would think it should be reduced to half a dozen at most, if not removed entirely. Any persons who do warrant mention could be in a 'see also' or 'external link' section. I don't know who if any on that list are worth keeping so I have not changed anything. A while ago I did remove some names that didn't have an article or a reference. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 03:24, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes thanks for picking up on the list question. I'll have another look. Pakoire (talk) 05:17, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]