Talk:Wellington/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Wellington. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Untitled

This entry is one of only seventeen that have won the March 2005 West Dakota Prize for successfully employing the expression "legend states" in a complete sentence. --Wetman 08:02, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

City & region naming

Wellington applies to the major city, but the also applies to the region (provincial administration level) that encompass the greater urban area known by the same name. The Wellington region is administered by the Wellington Regional Council, while Wellington (not Wellington City) is administered by the Wellington City Council. The city and the region are known as Wellington but the primary meaning of Wellington is the city, with the region as a secondary meaning. Since Wellington City, New Zealand is rather obscure and using Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand seems totally redundant, very obscure and both are still ambiguous, I have left Wellington, New Zealand for the city unchanged and added Wellington (region), New Zealand for the greater urban area, with cross linking on both pages. Is this a reasonable approach? -- kiwiinapanic 16:46 Dec 31, 2002 (UTC)

I created the first version of the Wellington article. I realised there were several places named "Wellington" in the world, so made Wellington a disambiguation and Wellington, New Zealand to refer to the city. These days, it seems like a mistake: the city is the topic that most articles want to link to. Even the Wellington region is relatively unimportant (you can see this by looking at the "what links here" list on the Wellington page). So using current naming conventions, the disambiguation list should be at Wellington (disambiguation) and the city should be moved to Wellington. ( 09:36 20 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Southernmost capital city

It is the southernmost capital city in the world - what about Port Stanley, Falkland Islands? -- Zoe

Are the Falkland Islands a true country or just a protectorate of the UK? -- kiwiinapanic 12:46 Jan 31, 2003 (UTC)

Or Melbourne at 38 degrees south?Mind you. Melbourne stopped being the capital of Oz in 1927.

Wellington is 41 degrees south! And it is the capital of a country, not a state within a country. -- kiwiinapanic 12:46 Jan 31, 2003 (UTC)

Melbourne isn't even the most southerly capital of Australia. Tangerine Cossack (talk) 22:01, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

How did it come to be capital

A question for the NZ experts, one that I can't seem to find an answer to anywhere on this page or related ones - how did Wellington come to be the capital? A para on this woud be interesting. Tannin 03:12 Jan 29, 2003 (UTC)

I do not claim to be an expert - I only live and work here - but I think it had something to do with the abolition of the provincial governments over a hundred years ago. I will have a look around and see what I can find out as all that history is missing from the NZ pages generally. -- kiwiinapanic 12:46 Jan 31, 2003 (UTC)

Thanks Cameron. I'll look forward to seeing it. Tannin (Reminder to self: revise the appropriate Australian entry to flesh out the way that Canberra was chosen as Australia's capital - the tale doesn't seem to be told with any flavour at present.)

I noted this request and added a paragraph about it, based on info at the WCC website. -- Ppe42

Why Wellington?

From the article,

"Apparently there was concern that the southern regions, where the goldfields were located, would form a separate colony. Commissioners from Australia were of the opinion that Wellington was suitable because of its harbour and central location."

New Zealand/Australia were founded as multiple colonies.. it was only through a local government process that the countries became seperate.. as all the Australian states decided to join together as a union, and asked NZ to join.. NZ declined. The choice of Wellington as capital follows the reasoning of most countries too, that is choosing a "politically correct" and geographically unbiased location but in an independant location. Even in the USA today, the capital is not in New York or LA.. AUstralia follows suit, as does Brazil etc.. (interestingly not the UK). Back in the goldrush the South Island economy was amping majorly, and it was put to a vote to become a seperate country (again remember these colonies were not founded as independant countries, the borders got sorted out later by political means). The North Island rejected this proposal through voting numbers and continued to become the powerhouse of the NZ economy, especially Auckland. Though interesting to note, as most created capitals, Wellington enjoys the highest average wage for a NZ city now.

Wellington was first settled before New Zealand ever became a colony, but with the hope that it would eventually become the capital. In fact the improper pressure that the New Zealand Company was using to "purchase" land for the new settlement was one of the factors leading to the decision of the Crown to sign a treaty with Maori. As the European/Pakeha population centre of gravity moved southwards it came to be seen as a more neutral site for a capital than Auckland, as a harbour town central between the agricultural North and the growing gold-fields of the South. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.36.141.141 (talk) 01:56, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Scope

Most of the comments below seem quite old, so I'm going to start updating this page by myself, but I will talk about what I'm doing here in case anyone wants to be involved.

I've cut out the "infamous for its wind" comment, and written a couple of introductory paragraphs, to be a bit more upbeat. A section on weather is probably appropriate, and the wind is definitely relevent for that.
I think the distinction between "greater Wellington" and "lesser Wellington" is always going to be a vague one. This page will inevitably serve to describe both, so I don't think we should fight it. I think we should follow this policy:
- This page refers primarily to the Wellington urban area as a whole (including Hutt Valley/Porirua) and secondarily to the area covered by the Wellington City Council. I would expect a Sydney page to tell me about the whole metropolitan area, not just a local government area.
- Content specific to Upper Hutt, Lower Hutt or Porirua should go on their respective entries, but content specific to central Wellington should stay here.
- The Wellington Region page should stay. Most countries have second-tier units (states, provinces). New Zealand has regions. The Wellington Region page reflects this. The Wellington Region covers the Wairarapa and the Kapiti Coast as well as the four cities of Wellington.
There needs to be a structure to the page, much in the same way as national pages are divided... maybe Introduction, People, Events, Climate, History

Ben Arnold

Ignore the above and look see the section further down where I talk about the new Wellington City article. Ben Arnold 10:36, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Location and demographics - 1,100 people??

Is this really right, from Location and demographics ?

The area administered by the Wellington City Council includes 1,100 people who live outside the urban area in the adjacent rural communities of Makara and Ohariu.

It's just that 1,100 people out of 363,400 seems such an incredibly small number to even note - I know it could be right, of course, but equally I wondered if it's lost a zero or something? I will look forward to some well-informed local putting me right on this! :) --Nevilley 11:30, 30 May 2004 (UTC)

That was me, I was having a pedantic day. It's true there are about 1,100 people -- no zeros missing -- and it's true also that they're too few to note, at least in article about greater Wellington. I'll go and edit now. 210.86.47.175 10:17, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Hey, the mere 700 (seven hundred, two zeroes) residents of the Chatham Islands get their own Time Zone, and that this is mentioned on the main New Zealand page. Silenceisfoo 13:30, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Yep if you knew the land around Wellington you would know that this is true, about 1100

CBD stuff

The figures about numbers of people working in the CBDs are derived from 2001 Census figures. I should put the detail in a footnote. For Auckland I included the area units of Auckland Harbourside, Auckland Central West, Auckland Central East, Grafton West, Grafton East and Freeman's Bay. For Wellington I used the area units of Thorndon-Tinakori Rd, Lambton and Willis St-Cambridge Tce. Ben Arnold 07:33, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

1840 shoreline plaques

I thought that the 1840 shoreline plaques were the position before the extrensive land reclamation took place. the first stage of land reclaimation began in 1940. The earthquake section says that they were the position of the shore before the earthquakes but if this were the case surely the dates of the quakes would be morte appropriate?

The date reflects that that was when the Treaty of Waitangi was signed. There were major earthquakes in 1855 and 1940 along with the man-made reclamation. Those have significantly changed the shoreline. --Gregstephens 08:21, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Something should be entered in regared to the size of wellington CBD in comparison of other NZ Cities. For example Wellington is the largest CBD in the country by some way. Also something to do with "density" - Wellington is one of the most densely populated city's in Australasia203.144.32.165 01:30, 25 August 2006 (UTC)Me

Suburbs

I've rejigged the suburbs section so that it takes up a bit less space and is arranged geographically (as the suburbs of all the other cities in NZ now are, too). Can't help thinking that it might look better as a subsection of "Demographics", though... any thoughts? [[User:Grutness|Grutness ^hello? ]] 01:17, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

New Wellington City article

The Auckland page has successfully employed the technique of creating a separate article to describe the territorial authority. Having seen this done I can now see the benefits and I've done the same thing for Wellington. It makes the complicated geographical concepts a lot clearer and it will give us somewhere to house all that really specific stuff (like suburbs, schools, etc), without cluttering the main Wellington article. I hope nobody disagrees with this too vehemently.

So we now have three articles:

Wellington refers to the Wellington Urban Area, just as London refers to the London metropolitan area or Sydney refers to the meteropolitan area of Sydney
Wellington City refers to the district of Wellington City Council
Wellington Region refers to the area within the jurisdiction of the Wellington Regional Council

I still argue that we shouldn't have separate territorial authority articles in cases like Whangarei, Rotorua, etc. where the district is no more than an extension of the urban area into the rural hinterland. In these cases I think it should suffice to have a section of the article dedicated to the territorial authority.

Ben Arnold 10:36, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks Ben, I more or less agree. in the other article i wrote: Two articles about Wellington City? a short one with the correct name and a long one with the short form, that is ambiguous? The legal geographic situation is that Wellington City (a T/A) exists as multiple areas of meshblocks and area units, and Wellington Region exists as an aggregate of 8 multiple T/A's. Wellington Suburb is newly proclaimed by Wellington City Council, and shouldn't offer any issues. Greater Wellington is an aggregate of 4 T/A's ( a community of common interest). I suggest that we have 4 articles, with each one appearing on the Wellington disambiguation page, but I imagine you will collectively prefer longer names: Wellington Region, New Zealand or something like that? please comment before this escalates too far. moza 16:57, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

This page isn't about the urban area. I see a page about the Wellington CBD. A page about the region might mention things like the Dowse, or Belmont, hell it might even go so far as to mention Island Bay. It looks to me like what we need to do is merge Wellington Region in and then movee a bunch of Wellington City info out. The main Wellington overview page (the regon) should be your classical history-geography-demographics about all points south of Otaki and Eketahuna, and a lot of throws to main articles. This article, though belongs on wikitravel. I think we can turn this into a feature article, but this, this is just...well...fourth form social studies is what I think of. Kripto 23:51, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Changed photo caption "wooden"

The first photo now refers to "wooden" buidings on the left. Is whoever made this change to the caption absolutely sure those buildings are made of wood?

Absolutely ☺. The largest wooden building in the Southern Hemisphere. Built to look like stone. Big fire risk. From a quick search you can find proof at New Zealand Parliament Buildings and in Places to Visit at http://www.wellingtonnz.com/AboutWellington/

BTW, please use the four tildes to sign your posts.

Barefootguru 00:42, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Well they fooled me — they sure do look like stone. But I never got close enough to see beyond the illusion. Thanks for responding JShook | Talk 12:55, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Upon reflection, I still feel that referring to these buildings as "wooden" — while true — is distracting. Nowhere in the article text is this referred to, and in the photo (and at the site) the buildings look like they are made of stone, as they were evidently intended to do. Only by following a link at the end of the article and reading to near the end of the linked-to page does one find confirmation that the buildings are in fact made of wood. The fact that they are made of wood is indeed interesting, but that it can be verified only by reading another article makes the pedantry of the caption confusing in the context of the article in which it appears. JShook | Talk 17:16, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

If have no great affinity for the caption, feel free to adjust. I changed it because it stated they were part of the government buildings complex, which is incorrect. Barefootguru 18:51, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Well, the inaccuracy of the original caption was all mine. I just grabbed this picture while waiting on the steps of the RR station. I'll edit it ever so slightly. JShook | Talk 20:45, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Notable Wellingtonians: Criteria for inclusion?

I notice Darius_Dhlomo has added a few Field Hockey players to the Notable Wellingtonians section (this revision, for future reference - if it's changed). I realise they're high profile players in that sport, but if we're going to start including successful sports people in there, what are the criteria going to be? Is Kyle Pontifex more worthy of a link than Johnny Bares? The only All Black, for example, in the current list is the captain Tana Umaga. Should the list be expanded to include other notable sports people? Ex-or-current world champs like Melissa Moon, Jonathan Wyatt and Kate McIllroy?

How about captains of national sports teams, and individuals (or members of teams) who have had a top 3 finish in their respective World Championships? Thoughts?

--noizyboy 21:46, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Links section

I removed some non-Wellington links a few days ago but more have just been added:

Victoria University of Wellington
Wellington International Airport
City Gallery, Wellington
Wellington Zoo

I think we should stick to links about Wellington *itself* rather than places in Wellington, otherwise it's quickly going to get out of hand (i.e. remove the above), but what do others think? Barefootguru 04:58, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

The problem is that these links are all perfectly relevant. The city is a big place, though - too big for all the inks we'd need. I think we should make a new page - attractions in Wellington - perhaps on WikiTravel? Then we could store all the relevant links there, with descriptions, pictures, and links to their own articles (eg Te Papa). The links should be important though - big attractions and not just link spam for every restaurant and conference center. Perhaps the Famous Wellingtonians should be a separate page too? Ppe42 09:51, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, the Category:Wellington_Region is already linked, and wikitravel:Wellington already includes all the things to see and do in Wellington… If no better ideas or objections are forthcoming I'll prune the links and add one to Wikitravel. Barefootguru 07:47, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

I've removed a couple of links which were covered by the Wellington Region category (I think that's a better option than Wikitravel), and put an HTML comment in there about limiting how many we have. Barefootguru 23:49, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Public transport

I've just created an article on public transport in Wellington. Trouble is, I'm not sure where to put a link — the page doesn't seem to have a See Also section. Any thoughts? -- Vardion 23:14, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

It has a See Also now ;-) Nice article. Barefootguru 23:47, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

This is great, but I came to the article looking for information on transport and there is nothing in the main body of the article. There must be other ways to get around Wellington, roads etc. Having it as a small link which was difficult to find is not ideal. I suggest creating a section in the article called "Transport", and just under the heading, have something like or even better ... ! --Biatch 05:26, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

What is "Vodafone X*Air"?

This large picture of a recent event is attractive but not very informative to a non-Wellingtonian. It apears to be some sort of aquatic event. A more informative caption might justify this photo's inclusion, size and significance. JShook | Talk 13:58, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Mayor

The urban area has no mayor. Each council does. I've removed it and replaced it with " various, see each council". --GeLuxe 08:54, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Iron Duke

I would support adding Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington to the dab header, now it exists. Many people will come here looking for him, just as many come here looking for the City of Wellington. Septentrionalis 18:42, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Capital of New Zealand

Why was there a three-year gap between the first sitting of the parliament in Wellington, and the time it became the official capital? Why did the parliament go back and sit in Auckland in ~~1963~~ 1863? In what way was Wellington designated as the capital? Is it explicitly designated capital, or simply because it is the location of the parliament? Thank you. — Insta ntnood 06:27, 6 May 2006 (UTC) (fixed 20:47, 8 May 2006 (UTC))

The decision to move was made in November 1864, the move took place in early 1865, and the buildings were opened in July 1865. New buildings were opened in 1866 on the current site. But the first suggestion to move was in 1863. (John E. Martin 2004 The House, Dunmore Press) --Midnight tonight 03:04, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

The Parliament sat in Wellington in 1862, and it went back and sat in Auckland in 1863. Is Wellington explicitly designated the capital? Or is it like London? — Insta ntnood 20:47, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Wellington has been explicitly the capital since the 1860s. Parliament could however decide to shift location if it saw the need (extremely unlikely) Mostlyharmless 04:46, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

In what way is it explicitly designated? Was there a law or statute passed by the parliament? Why did it sit in Wellington in 1862, and back in Auckland in 1863? — Insta ntnood 19:38, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Is Wellington or the Wellington City the capital? — Insta ntnood 15:24, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

When the Gov-Gen summons Parliament, they summon it to met in the "City of Wellington", not in Wellington. So Wellington City is correctly the capital. --Midnighttonight Remind me to do my uni work rather than procrastinate on the internet 03:33, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Wellington (the city) is the Capital of New Zealand, not Wellington (the region). "most populous national capital in Oceania" is incorrect —Preceding unsigned comment added by HowBoutDemLakers (talk • contribs) 08:05, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

X Air pic

The X Air pic was removed because it is not about the city. All the other photos are either of Wellington, or something unique to Wellington. The X Air games is neither. Hence, I have removed it. --Midnight tonight 09:23, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Helengrad

I noticed that info was merged in from Helengrad to this article. It would be much more appropiate on the Helen Clark page, but even there- this level of info is too much. It is really quite a small thing and would be unbalanced, but it would be even worse here. I support Wallie's removal of it [1]. --Midnight tonight 07:38, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Lived in Wellington all my life and NEVER heard the term Helengrad before. Enzedbrit 01:07, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I know. It's meant to mean that Helen Clark has an iron grip on the city, like Stalin and Stalingrad. But it's just lame. --Midnight tonight 02:47, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

I never heard that before either. Surely "Kerrygrad" would be more fitting? Petrouchka 02:32, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Photos

I added a small panorama of Civic Square. I think I'll go out and re-shoot it sometime soon, to show more of the square. Does anyone have any suggestions, or have a request for other night shots to use in the main or related articles? — Soupisgoodfood 22:09, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

While not a night shot... Karori Wildlife Sanctury could have some cool pics. Also, from the wind mill doing a 360. Or a really nice one would be from Somes Island (and that could be done at night)! Ummm, that's all I can think of. And that pic is really good.--Midnight tonight 00:11, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes a cool pic Soupisgoodfood (lol at user name), I put it on the Civic Square article as well, and put headings and cat on that, so thats a teensy respectable and no longer a stub. although still stubbish.. There are many interesting subjects around Civic Square, esp up on that bridge. Did you know that pyramidal building is aligned to the celestial south pole? Art, Astronomy and Architecture come together in Wgtn. see Astro_Art I have literally thousands of pics of Wellington, but hard to know where to put any in that main article, we all appreciate your offer to get specific pics. The airport from Melrose is cool. The Hutt valley from Mt Vic? I am out nearly every full moon using buildings etc looking for interesting compositions, see my wiki gallery at User:Paul_Moss/gallery its getting a bit of a bulge though, sorry.moza 00:53, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

I think what I'll do is take a simiar shot to the one I took but much wider, and keep that one in the Wellington article, then take another panorama from the other side, but just use that in the Civic Square article.

Perhaps replacing the current image of Te Papa with one shot from near the crane (in the day) is a good way getting a bit more of Welly in the article without adding more photos. I don't think you'd be able to see the enterance, though, but there would still be one in the Te Papa article. Not sure if this is important or not.

I've added a todo list in my user page where I've listed the photos I currently aim to get.

You have some nice photos in your gallery. Unfortunatly, I couldn't load most of them since I've gone over my limit and currently at dial-up speeds :( — Soupisgoodfood 12:32, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Dreary photo guys. Great outlook, but so grey & green. Surely there is a better one? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.57.128.5 (talk) 22:29, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Wellington city v City of Wellington

A lot of this article confuses the two. The Court of Arms is of the City of Wellington (defined as being the under the governace of Wellington City Council), as opposed to Wellington (under the goverance of the Greater Wellington Regional Council). For instance, the Coat of Arms is C.o.W. (actually its the WCC coat of arms to be precise), and the sister cities are also the city councils.

This article is about Wellington, the place, which can be approximated by the Wellington Urban Area defined by Statistics New Zealand. There are separate articles on the City of Wellington and the Wellington Region which are units of local government, as well as articles on the other councils that administer parts of the Wellington conurbation: Upper Hutt, Porirua and Lower Hutt.

Material that is specific to the Wellington City Council or the area it administers should be moved to the Wellington City article. Statistics about "Wellington City" should go there; statistics about "Wellington Urban Area" should go here and statistics about "Wellington Region" should go to that article.

Ben Arnold 18:26, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

This article seems very Wellington City focused, even though it's defined as a wider. I think that there should either be wider content, or we should move the Wellington City article into this one, as this one is much more comprehensive. --TimClicks (talk) 09:12, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

New Infobox

I've been frustrated by the infobox as it stood and the lack of a pretty picture at the top of the article. My solution was to go to the London article and adapt its infobox for our purposes. This has the spin-off benefit of being able to list the population of all the various areas side-by-side. I think it's good but I'm interested in hearing other people's opinions.

My subjective judgement is that the cable car photo is the best photo in the article, so that's why I've moved it to the top. I don't particularly like the location map for a couple of reasons and the sooner we can get a proper series of professional maps covering New Zealand, the better.

Ben Arnold 12:56, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

looking ok Ben, let me know what kind of map you would like, and I'll consider creating one for comment.moza 00:16, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

My concerns about the existing map are:

I'm pretty sure it's based on a map I've seen in the New Zealand yearbook, which is subject to copyright
The coastline is pretty approximate (although this only shows up at the higher resolution)
The boundary lines are of inconsistent thicknesses, particularly around Taranaki (thin) and Nelson (thick)
The dot to mark Wellington is pretty small, presumably because the creator of the map wanted to colour in the urban sprawl.
The line linking the dot to the text Wellington is non-standard. Normally the label would be alongside the dot, or omitted entirely (as seems to be the practice in many of the other location maps in Wikipedia).

I think we need a map like the one for Ipswich. The boundary files for councils are now "freely available" so we might as well get one of Wikipedia's expert map makers with the appropriate software to make us a series of maps of New Zealand we can place location dots on. I think we need:

A plain map of New Zealand with no boundaries, for putting location dots onto
A map of New Zealand with territorial authority boundaries
A map of New Zealand with regional council boundaries

We might also want an inset showing New Zealand's location in the world. I'll see if I can find somewhere where map makers hang out to refer them to this discussion. If you've got the software yourself then awesome!

Ben Arnold 11:38, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Shouldn't the other Wellington Region districts of Masterton District, Kapiti Coast District, Carterton District, South Wairarapa District as listed on the Territorial_authorities_of_New_Zealand page be listed in the info box? Iamtk421 (talk) 00:44, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

This article covers the Wellington urban area. There are separate articles for Wellington Region, which does contain the list you expect, and Wellington City. There are similar articles for the Auckland urban area, the Auckland Region and Auckland City.-gadfium 05:50, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

How about a statement/link at the top of the page similar to the Wellington City one then? I.e. "This article is about the urban area in New Zealand. For the city council area, see Wellington City, or for the regional area see Wellington Region. For other uses, see Wellington (disambiguation)." Still 3 pages about Wellington is confusing to say the least. I've lived in Wellington for 30 years and haven't come across 'Wellington Urban area' before. It's either Wellington City as administered by the WCC, or Wellington Region as administered by the WRC. Iamtk421 (talk) 20:01, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

I've changed it to be similar to the hatnote for Auckland. I agree it is confusing, but in my experience, most people think of a city as an urban area rather than the area under the jurisdiction of a territorial authority. This may be more true of Auckland, where I live, than it is of Wellington.-gadfium 23:00, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Proposed merger

There is a page for a region and a page for an urban area. And the regional page isn't very comprehensive, and the urban area page gets longer, but it's still rated as a mediocrity. And maybe, if we could cut the pages down, maybe if we could use this as a chance to talk about the article and then make something, maybe we could get this article looking a bit better. Maybe even get it up to a feature article? But first, we have to decide what Wellington is, and why we need two pages to explain this, the page for Wellington City notwithstanding, since I think that should stay. Kripto 22:30, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Proposed merger with Wellington Region

I'm opposed to the merger of this article with the Wellington Region one. The reasons for this are:

The current articles are consistent with other regions of New Zealand - for example Auckland Region and Auckland;
Legally speaking, the Wellington Region (i.e. the Greater Wellington Regional Council) is distinct from the Wellington City Council and other city councils in the region.

--Lholden 22:31, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

okay, cool. I think there's too much ambiguity and overlap between these articles then. Would an article (not a redirect) called Wellington Regional Council make a difference?

Population

Can someone please sort out the population figure. There's no such thing as the Greater Urban Area and if there were it wouldn't have 430,000 people! 80.192.29.107 22:57, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

According to Census figures, the population of the Wellington Region was 466,300 in June 2006. It seems unlikely that the Wellington urban area contains the figure removed by User:80.192.29.107. An appropriate urban area figure would be one adding the figures of several local authorities; a footnote should clearly state which ones.-gadfium 00:46, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Gadfium, Greater Urban Area is an ambiguous term that is used in places such as London and New York but possibly not siutable for Wellington. However 500,000 is too high for Wellington though as the Region has only 466,300 approx. According to the census wellington urban made up approximately 9.9% of New Zealand's population which would leave a value closer to 410,000 - 435,000.Homesick kiwi 15:23, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Whoever has recently changed the population figure, would you please cite what areas you have used to define 'Wellington' in the census count or give the link of the stats webpage you used? - using the term Wellington region is incorrect as this would be analogous to using Canterbury's population for Christchurch. The change also contradicts information in the Wellington Region page. Homesick kiwi 17:20, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

:::: Surely the Kapiti Coast must be included in the Urban population of Wellington. It is an intrigal part of Wellington. It is serviced by the suburban railway service, many people in the Kapiti area work in Wellington and people from the urban area retire to the Kapiti coast. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.130.192.19 (talk) 02:11, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

The figure is from Statistics New Zealand urban area, used consistently across NZ city articles. XLerate (talk) 03:18, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

The population listed in the intro and the demographics sections are different but seem like they are referring to the same figure, they cite the same source. Could anyone explain/resolve this difference. Shmuelic (talk) 18:10, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

The opening sentences conflate Wellington Urban area and Wellington City. Wellington City is the capital city. An urban area is not a capital. A lot of confusion would be eliminated by stating up front that Wellington is both the name of a city and of a region. The correct population breakdown is given in the Wellington region article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wellington_Region#Demographics — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.202.199.28 (talk) 02:08, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Film --> LOTR?

Shouldnt there be some mention of the Lord of the Rings premieres in the film section? When I lived in Masterton that was a huge deal, so it seems like it should be included. Taifar ious1 23:17, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

How about something like this:

"Wellington's is notable in the film industry for being the (administrative centre? base of operations?) for Peter Jackson's production of the Lord of the Rings trilogy. (Insert stuff about Wellington's role during production). (Insert stuff about Wellington hosting the premieres). Jackson, alongside Richard Taylor and a growing team of creative professionals, have turned the eastern suburb of Miramar into one of the world's most acclaimed film-making infrastructures.

Directors like Jane Campion and Vincent Ward have managed to reach the world's screens with their independent spirit. Emerging Kiwi film-makers, like Robert Sarkies, Taika Waititi, Costa Botes and Jennifer Bush-Daumec [1], are extending the Wellington-based lineage and cinematic scope.

I'd also like there to be more coverage of Weta Workshops in the aforementioned paragraph. I'd insert the sentances myself, but I spent most of my time during that period of time a) in Tauranga, and b) frantically avoiding the hype over the production, so I can't contribute too much without researching :P Gialloneri (talk) 18:12, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Urination

I'm pretty sure the bucket fountain is notable for something other than being pissed on by a celebrity. If it isn't, references should be removed. --Helenalex (talk) 03:46, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Te Aro

Why should this be in the 'See Also' section. I do not see any reason why it is important or a point of major interest. CipherPixel (talk) 09:55, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Seems reasonable. Significant article on a significant part of town and confrms to Wikipedia:Layout#See also.Grimhim (talk) 11:18, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree that Te Aro should be included as something notable in its own right. --TimClicks (talk) 09:08, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Notable Wellingtonians

Should we have this section, when Category:People from Wellington already collects articles on people from Wellington. For small towns and schools, lists of notable people/alumni help bulk up articles where there may not be much other content, and with a few exceptions are not likely to grow too large so long as some cursory checks are made that the people listed are truly notable. For a large city such as Wellington, however, there are hundreds of names which meet a cursory notability standard, and such a large list of names contributes little to the article.

I see four possible strategies to limit the size of the list:

Remove any name which doesn't have an article.
I don't think this will reduce the list enough. There are currently only three redlinks on the list, and one of those (Vincent Price) does have an article associated with it.
Implement a more stringent definition of notability
For example, people should be very well known within New Zealand, or have a significant international reputation, not just amongst people with an interest in the area which made this person famous. This would exclude all but the most famous sportspeople, for example. I'm not sure if it's possible to implement a stringent definition in a way that will not lead to disputes between editors as to who qualifies.
Remove the list entirely and leave only a link to the category.
The Auckland and Christchurch articles do not have a list of notable people at all.
Split the list off to List of notable people from Wellington
We would leave a link to the list in the Wellington article. Dunedin has such a list.

What would be the most appropriate strategy, or is the existing list perfectly all right?-gadfium 19:02, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

I think option 4, the list has a brief description which the category doesn't. The list can later be taken to AfD if it's considered unsuitable. XLerate (talk) 23:05, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

I've split it to List of people from Wellington.-gadfium 20:36, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Wellington Metropolitan vs Wellington Urban

As someone who has lived in Wellington off and on for 20 years (I now regard it as my home town):

In all of this one crucial fact is overlooked, the Wellington Metropolitan area includes the Kapiti Coast as far as Waikanae. There are several thousand people who commute to other parts of the urban area everyday and the Suburban rail network goes to Paraparaumu, with a planned extension to Waikanae. Almost everyone I know thinks of the Kapiti area as part of Greater Wellington.

So I am left wondering why the boffins in Wellington refuse to include this area in the Urban data. Yes I know there is the stretch of road past Paekakariki, but that's no different from the Haywards Road or the Hutt Road. In reality, in spite of the classifications, Wellington remains the second largest Metropolitan Area in New Zealand, by my calculation the population including the Kapiti suburbs is around 415,000, still around 30,000 more than Christchurch.

If Christchurch gets to include non-contiguous suburbs (eg Halswell, Lyttelton), then so should Wellington. Not only that, Banks Peninsula was included in Christchurch in 2006 so that Bob Parker could become mayor of Christchurch and promote Christchurch as the second largest city in NZ. The reality is Christchurch has an inferiority complex, and I can say that because I'm from there. It doesn't change the fact that Wellington has more people and is more important than Christchurch, no matter which way the geographers and politicians want to spin it.

Instead of merging the pages how about creating a new one for GREATER WELLINGTON, which could include Kapiti. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GCaisle (talk • contribs) 01:45, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't matter why the Kapiti coast is or isn't classed as part of the Wellington conurbation, only that that classification exists. Additionally, there exists a page for 'GREATER WELLINGTON', at Wellington Region.--Andrensath (talk) 05:15, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Pronunciation

The pronunciation is currently given as /wɘlˈliŋtɘn/ which strikes me as very unlikely (I'm not from New Zealand, but the presence of ɘ and the stress on the second syllable are both suspicious to me). Could someone clarify this, or at least confirm that the default pronunciation, /'wɛliŋtən/ is not correct? --72.93.196.211 (talk) 23:05, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

IPA

Is the IPA for 'Wellington' correct? I'm not sure about the vowels there... Jogloran (talk) 11:46, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I had it as /ˈwɛl.ɪŋ.tɘn/. I have the weak vowel merger so I took my lead from (amusingly) this entry at the Cambridge Dictionary Online which says that the middle vowel should be a short I (the vowel in kit) and the last vowel should be a schwa. Looking through the edit history it seems that someone came along and switched the middle vowel to a schwa with the comment to the effect that New Zealand doesn't have a short I. You can make a case for that, but I believe the pronunciation key is intended to be a phonemic guide to pronunciation and not a phonetic transcription of New Zealand speech. Anyway with that justification, I'll be bold and change it back to the way I had it. Ben Arnold (talk) 11:34, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

You can also give the local pronunciation if you like, { {IPA-en| ... |local}}, though it may not be distinct enough to warrant it. — kwami (talk) 16:04, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

the Windy City

Is this really a nickname? Not really... Benner9 (talk) 00:42, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

I've removed this and replaced it with Harbour Capital. I've long understood that Harbour Capital was Wellington's equivalent of Auckland's City of Sails. Windy City is unfamiliar to me. I've heard people say Windy Wellington, but I wouldn't say it's common enough to be notable. and I'd hesitate to call it a name. You wouldn't use the term unless you were trying to emphasise the wind, either because you were in Wellington and it was windy or because you were intending to disparage Wellington's weather. On the other hand you'd say Harbour Capital even in contexts that had nothing to do with the harbour or civics and you could easily say City of Sails without referencing yachting. Windy Wellington is no more a name than Frozen Arctic or Bonnie Scotland".

A quick Google search will show that Harbour Capital is in the name of a lot of organisations and companies from Wellington.

Ben Arnold (talk) 06:59, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Never heard anyone refer to Wellington as the 'harbour city', but I have heard 'windy wellington'. You don't get to choose cool nicknames, lol. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.90.12.102 (talk) 08:48, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Collage

There should be a collage for Wellington, as it is standard for national capitals and major cities. Auckland already has one. Anyone agree?--RM (Be my friend) 02:12, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Support
- Having a collage sounds like a good idea, though if it's for Wellington as the capital, it may be more appropriate at Wellington City than the page for the Wellington conurbation.Andrensath (talk) 05:05, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
Oppose:

Style

The style of the article is much like something from a tourist bureau. Gingermint (talk) 04:58, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Film

I've glanced through the Stats NZ Screen Industry 08/09 survey here, and can't find any breakdown of revenue by city, let alone one which exclusively deals in feature film review. Unless the IP-editor is using unreleased information, (which I think violates WP:NOR, and therefore should be reverted anyway), I think we're safe reverting their edit entirely. --Andrensath (talk | contribs) 10:57, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Would it be appropriate too add the Maori name for Wellington?

Would it be appropriate to add the Maori name for Wellington into the introduction section of the page? I feel that it should be stated there.

Fpan020-Jesus Saves! (talk) 22:58, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Wellywood?

Do people really call it that? I've never heard the term, outside the few people that were proposing that stupid sign. Surely it's not a common enough nickname to warrant having it in the main box? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.97.110.64 (talk) 20:26, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Transport—the Overlander

Now that the Overlander (long-distance service to Auckland) has been replaced with the Northern Explorer, perhaps the information on past discussions on canning the former train could be removed from the article and perhaps used to add to the article on the Overlander itself? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.93.72.217 (talk) 01:20, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Wrongly Attributed Quote - Section 9.3 - Film

The film section wrongly attributes a quote to Peter Jackson that should be attributed to Adrian Brody - actor in Peter Jackson's King Kong.

This is the quote:

Jackson described Wellington in this way: "Well, it's windy. But it's actually a lovely place, where you're pretty much surrounded by water and the bay. The city itself is quite small, but the surrounding areas are very reminiscent of the hills up in northern California, like Marin County near San Francisco and the Bay Area climate and some of the architecture. Kind of a cross between that and Hawaii.

The reference link provided [Reference # 66: Mark Seal (2009). "Yo, Adrien!". American Way. Retrieved 1 August 2009.] links to an interview with Adrian Brody, not with Peter Jackson, so it's a strange mistake to make.

It should read:

Adrian Brody, actor in Peter Jackson's King Kong, described Wellington in this way: "Well, it's windy. But it's actually a lovely place, where you're pretty much surrounded by water and the bay. The city itself is quite small, but the surrounding areas are very reminiscent of the hills up in northern California, like Marin County near San Francisco and the Bay Area climate and some of the architecture. Kind of a cross between that and Hawaii.

This is quite a basic error. I'm not registered so I'll leave it to someone with more power than me to do it.

Cheers, Anon Wellingtonian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.105.132.241 (talk) 02:22, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Who said celebrity quotes belong on a Wikipedia article about a city? It's an article about Wellington itself and not what people think of it. This kind of stuff is purely promotional tourist information and not encyclopaedic content that belongs on Wikipedia. Please make yourself familiar with the manual of style. Ashton 29 (talk) 04:01, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Poorly written and unstructured article

As far as well-written city articles on this website go, Wellington scrapes pretty low. It's not very well-written and a lot of it sounds like a trivial/tourist article, rather than encyclopaedic, fact-based content and the most of the sections are very repetitive and unorganised/all over the place. If anyone else wants to help get the article in shape, use Featured Articles on cities like Canberra, San Francisco and Seattle for inspiration. Also, the settlements article structure may help. Ashton 29 (talk) 03:57, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Over 24 hours of sunlight a day

Incorrect sunlight hours for December. Someone who knows what it's supposed to be can fix it and remove this message.

The figure is correct according to the NIWA reference. 222.8 hours over 31 days is less than 7.2 hours per day.-gadfium 05:16, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

DARWIN solution

Since the Duke of Wellington is at least as (some would say vastly more) important to the world's history as Charles Darwin, it follows that since Darwin the capital city in Australia is also a quite large and important city, the two cases ought to be treated similarly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin - I find this solution vastly superior to the currect one, where tens of thousands of people seek information about Wellington who won the most famous battle in modern history, but instead arrive at a page of a city named after him with no immediate reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.64.157.243 (talk) 03:35, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

The etymology of the name of the city of Wellington is given in the article, and I don't think it is necessary to add it to the hatnote. If you believe that the city is not the predominant use of the name, per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, then you can request that the article be moved to Wellington, New Zealand and the disambiguation page Wellington (disambiguation) be moved to this title. I note that the city article got 35,433 views in the last 30 days, and the article on the Duke got 32,500 views over the same time, so such a move request would warrant serious consideration. See WP:RM/CM for how to request a move.-gadfium 04:14, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Minor changes to Demographics

I'm an Aucklander and know very little about Wellington. Precisely because of that, I saw several uncertaincies and ambiguities when I read the Demographics section. I'm going to make some small changes. As always, feel free to revert if you don't like. Akld guy (talk) 23:20, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

I notice that the Wellington city population has been updated to 197,019 after the 2013 census but the chart is still showing 2006 figures. Needs updating by someone who can access the 2013 census spreadsheets. Akld guy (talk) 06:04, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Sister Cities

May I suggest that Sister city information be moved from the Wellington City council page to here? Many other cities list their sister-city relationships under the city page, and not governance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.64.99.186 (talk) 08:03, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Porirua, Hutt? They don't think so.

Does this page really need to include Porirua or Lower and Upper Hutt? The people of those places are adamant that they don't live in Wellington. This is a region with four different cities in it, only one of which is called Wellington.

I second this. Wellington should be about Wellington City, and the region should be called Wellington Region. No need to include other cities in this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.149.182.227 (talk) 01:43, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

That's how it was originally, Wellington was the territory of the Wellington City Council [2]. But somebody decided one day that it should be the "urban area" instead [3]. Personally I think the original definition was good and Wellington deserves an article of its own. Wellington (urban area) could be created, but it's not essential given that it's poorly defined, there's perhaps not much to say about it, and Wellington Region already exists. ( (talk) 09:40, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

Since Wellington is not amalgamated, why are the Hutt and Porirua and Kapiti still here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.224.99.63 (talk) 03:57, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Nobody is arguing against it, but it still needs someone bold enough to make the change. It's a similar situation to Manila vs Metro Manila. ( (talk) 20:44, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Wellington. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121202041419/http://www.gridnewzealand.co.nz/f4689,69348771/Chapter_14_Wellington_Region.pdf to http://www.gridnewzealand.co.nz/f4689,69348771/Chapter_14_Wellington_Region.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:05, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Wellington. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:40, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Wellington/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Rated Start Excellent start, lacks source citations. Alan.ca 10:52, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

population in intro In the intro section there is a comment was a comment about Wellington becoming the second largest urban area in new zealand following the chch earthquakes. The English was a little ugly so I tidied it a little. Still not sure if a comment about chch should be in the intro for a wellington article. Also there is no reference for this and I could not find one Nzbroadbean (talk) 12:56, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Last edited at 12:56, 29 November 2011 (UTC). Substituted at 10:22, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

New Montage

Am just about to revert the montage added this morning in the info box. WP:MONTAGE indicates that montages can be problematic and should have some encyclopedic value. In this case most of the images already have similar images in the article and the mix of images in the montage are not composed particularly well and a couple of the images are really low quality. What is the Botanical Gardens one showing for instance. Andrewgprout (talk) 06:02, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Climate record high & low

Hello

I was just reading and noticed an inconsistency in the climate section: the record high/low temperatures are listed as 31.1°C / −1.1°C in the description but in the table with detail by month, the same record high/low temperatures are listed as 30.1°C / -0.1°C?

Aresando (talk) 01:23, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Learning Disabilities | Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology - Credo Reference, Credo Reference, search.credoreference.com/content/entry/penep/wellington_new_zealand/0?institutionId=703. Yasminekhiri (talk) 05:05, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Wellington new content

I wish to add new content to the page but this Hazkh guy keeps removing them with no reason stated other than things that aren't relevant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leavepuckgackle1998 (talk • contribs) 11:07, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

No, I moved much of the third paragraph to the History section. Other editors have repeatedly reverted your additions. I encourage you to integrate your proposed revisions into the main body of the article. The lead should not contain information that is not present in the main body. --Hazhk (talk) 11:12, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Okay, I hear you, bro. Sorry for any confusion before, I just didn't realise there was such an easy way out of my work getting reverted constantly. I've moved most of the history article, integrated a large amount of my work with other paragraphs. I am willing to compromise; so, if you have any ideas of how we can do so, leave a message on my talk page please.Leavepuckgackle1998 (talk) 11:37, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

This isn’t about you compromising. There are established ways, documented in WP:MOS, how we do things on Wikipedia. We will all adhere to that (for example, new material is to be added to the body of the article); no compromises needed. If there is stuff that needs discussion in relation to this article, the appropriate place for this is here, not your talk page. Schwede 66 17:53, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

You haven't listened to my reasoning at all. I have tagged the history section for expansion. Your second paragraph should in that section. I reverted your edits because I want them to be discussed here. --Hazhk (talk) 20:10, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

I have reverted once more, but not because I oppose all of your contributions. We can find a place for some, but not all, of your content. The lead should be brief - it must summarise the article. Moreover, much of your new lead repeats content. Please read the § History section and see that I have moved some of your content to that part of the article.
Speak here, not on my talk page.--Hazhk (talk) 20:13, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Note that I have issued a warning to Leavepuckgackle1998 for disruptive editing. Here's the right place to sort this out. Schwede 66 20:18, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes, this must be discussed here.

I will work on salvaging some more of your contributions, Leavepuckgackle1998. I have moved some facts to other areas of the article.--Hazhk (talk) 20:21, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Can we have this at the bottom of the lead? Thanks

Described by Lonely Planet in 2013 as "The Coolest little Capital in the World"[16], the emerging world city[17] has said to have grown from a bustling Maori settlement, to a small colonial outpost, and from there to an "Australasian creative capital" with a "remarkable creative resurgence". [18][19] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leavepuckgackle1998 (talk • contribs) 23:13, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Wellington. 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) 20:54, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Urban area

The current wording that Wellington is the country's second most populated urban area, which cites Statistics NZ, is incorrect.

As is being discussed elsewhere, under the agency's official SSGA18 statistical standard, the Christchurch urban area is significantly more populated. At the very least, the link to Statistics NZ should be removed, as the page it links to directly contradicts what is being said - none of the population data it displays show Wellington to be the second most populous urban area. Comingupcharlienz (talk) 00:55, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

The discussion elsewhere is WP:NZWNB#Second-biggest city, and is certainly relevant for people following this article.-gadfium 04:11, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Apart from the regrettable fact that the article on Wellington now contradicts the article on Christchurch, I would like to note that “second-most” is a compound attribute and needs to be hyphenated. Unfortunately, the current level of protections means I can't do that. Blur4760 (talk) 23:48, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Please be very careful here, the two articles do not contradict each other - Christchurch is the second biggest city in New Zealand as stated in that article. The four contiguous cities that make up Wellington, as clearly described in this article, add up to more than the Christchurch total, that is why it says urban area and not city. There appears to have been changes to the way Statistics NZ have defined their definition of "Urban Area" this definition is not necessarily the definition that is in common use throughout New Zealand which is what should be being used on Wikipedia. It is probable that the Wellington article and how it deals with the multiple definitions of "Wellington" can be improved and it should be - but any "my city is bigger than your city" judgements should be avoided. Andrewgprout (talk) 01:31, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

I've hyphenated second-most in the lead.-gadfium 02:27, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for correcting the grammar. For what it's worth, the Christchurch article literally states that "The Christchurch urban area at 377,200 is the second-largest in the country by population, after Auckland." in its "Demographics" section and I did not make any "my city is bigger than yours claim", so I think I applied the necessary standard of care. Of course, in the meantime, somebody went ahead and changed the introduction of the Christchurch article without changing the Demographics section, and now that article is protected too whilst being self-contradictory. Blur4760 (talk) 23:31, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Wellington. 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) 18:07, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Pōneke

Wellington is also (more recently?) commonly referred to as Pōneke throughout government-funded organisations (1, 2, 3) and in news articles (4). Given the common use I feel it would be worth adding this to the introductory (?) text, but I'm not 100% sure how to go about it (without implying it's considered the official Māori name) — would the following be too bulky?

Wellington (Māori: Te Whanganui-a-Tara [tɛ ˈfaŋanʉi a taɾa], also commonly referred to as Pōneke) is the capital city of New Zealand.

Pseudomugil (talk) 02:55, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Is Pōneke used more than both Te Whanganui-a-Tara and Te-Upoko-o-te-Ika-a-Māui? If so, I say replace it. Alternatively, to avoid bulk, just append it as or Pōneke. — HTGS (talk) 01:46, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

I went ahead and added HTGS's less bulky suggestion as part of my recent edit --Radicuil (talk) 12:19, 6 February 2022 (UTC)

I totally missed these replies somehow, thank you both! Pseudomugil (talk) 02:00, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Would it not be preferable to avoid cluttering the lead and only present the most relevant information?

Wikipedia Manual of Style/Lead: "Be wary of cluttering the first sentence with a long parenthesis containing alternative spellings, pronunciations, etc., which can make the sentence difficult to actually read; this information should be placed elsewhere". Simulaun (talk) 09:25, 6 June 2022 (UTC)