Talk:Māori people

Sovereignty vs governance

The article currently states that 'The Treaty gave Māori the rights of British subjects and guaranteed Māori property rights and tribal autonomy, in return for accepting British sovereignty and the annexation of New Zealand as a colony in the British Empire.' Referenced to Claudia Orange, 'Treaty of Waitangi - Interpretations of Te Tiriti o Waitangi', Te Ara - the Encyclopedia of New Zealand. I would like to propose the word sovereignty is replaced by governance as this is the Maori language version that was signed and in international law where there is any ambiguity the indigenous language text takes preference. Pakoire (talk) 10:54, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

I'd suggest "governorship" as a translation of "kawanatanga" instead of "governance". "Governance" is one of those tricky words that means something dramatically different than it seems to. Daveosaurus (talk) 14:57, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

It should be noted that the Treaty is introduced in this paragraph from the British perspective, with the British Crown and William Hobson as its agents, and the British did intend a transfer of sovereignty. The following sentence goes on to note that "the Māori version did not cede sovereignty to the British crown". The paragraph could be rejigged to flow more smoothly (what paragraph in Wikipedia couldn't?), and I for one wouldn't complain if the rejigged version approached the Treaty first from the Māori side rather than the British one; but both sides' perspectives and intentions need to be included in the narrative, as both are necessary for understanding the subject.

—VeryRarelyStable 22:38, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Image bloat

Might I suggest, in light of the fact that the article was already over the maximum recommended article size, that the recent additions are bordering on image bloat. If it continues would anyone find a {{Too many photos|date=February 2023}} tag inappropriate? DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 09:34, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

If this continues, I feel a level 1 disruptive editing warning might not be out of place either. —VeryRarelyStable 11:06, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Colonial Bias

I notice this page has 4 images of Maori doing haka. The haka is a globally recognised symbol of Maoridom largely because of its association with the All Blacks (NZ's infamous national rugby team), but there is some evidence that it has led to a general misunderstanding of Maori culture as aggressive and warlike. Is it possible that the over-representation of the haka in this article contributes to a harmful stereotype which propogates violence within and towards Maori communities? Source Other Source Seansi.c (talk) 00:58, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I entirely agree, but I do think the main image could be changed to something that isn't the haka. I've looked through Wikimedia Commons to see if there are any better images, but I can't seem to find any that would be more suitable. Panamitsu (talk) 02:28, 3 August 2023 (UTC)

Historically the Maori indeed were agressive and warlike, towards others (moriori history recounts being culled like sheep) and themselves during fierce inter-tribal battles. Cannibalisim, taking heads as trophies, never ending issues of revenge - you name it.

On the other hand, a Haka in itself is 'agressive' in the same way that rugby is, but is not an act of violence. It's an act of assertion, something uniquely NZ'ish in it's application. To have a haka performed for you is a great honor. Yes, it's powerful and intimidating - that's the point.

Rugby, however, is a poor steriotypical image to use to represent maori. It's not attributable to the culture at all, and is a lampoonish generalisation of a non-NZ view of the culture. 222.155.223.129 (talk) 11:26, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

There are reports from some of the earliest anthropologists to vis Aotearoa that Maori were fierce when roused but otherwise loving and gentle. I see no evidence of ‘a warlike people’ who regularly engaged in practices like cannibalism outside of isolated incidents and independent of coloniser bias. I dispute these assertions. And while your assessment of the haka is accurate, the world sees it as a way dance done to intimidate enemies - none of that nuance comes through and having only haka pictures here therefore seems quite harmful. 43.230.129.148 (talk) 00:08, 1 December 2023 (UTC)

Indigenous people

Per Merriam-Webster, "Indigenous, or less commonly indigenous: of or relating to the earliest known inhabitants of a place and especially of a place that was colonized by a now-dominant group". If anyone thinks that the Māori, the earliest known inhabitants of mainland New Zealand, are not Indigenous, please explain here instead of trying to edit-war. Daveosaurus (talk) 05:59, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

We've had a number of accounts and IPs making this claim recently. I suspect it is all from one person, who is either confused and ignoring good faith attempts to educate them, or a disruptive editor.-gadfium 06:08, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) :{{can of worms}} Technically speaking, the Māori are the descendants of the first settlers of New Zealand. At what point those descendants could be considered Māori rather than Polynesian is debatable. :) That of course does not invalidate the fact that Māori are the indigenous people of New Zealand as per the quoted definition. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 06:14, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

At no point would they be considered Māori rather than Polynesian. Māori people are Polynesian. And indigenous. New Zealand is part of Polynesia.

Sorry, I meant "specifically Māori " as opposed to otherwise unspecified "Polynesian", their exact place of origin in Polynesia (i.e. immediately pre-settlement, without going all the way back to Taiwan) being so far undetermined. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 06:29, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

The latest editor also seems confused about the term "mainland", which here refers to the main New Zealand archipelago (not just its two biggest islands) as distinct from the Chatham Islands. If this was a common confusion I would suggest alternative phrasings, but it doesn't seem to be.

—VeryRarelyStable 06:19, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

This editor was an infrequent editor prior to this year, but the majority of this year's edits have been reverted, so I would assume they still don't understand such guidelines as WP:RS, WP:NPOV etc. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 06:29, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Maori spelling in lead sentence

My (seemingly harmless) addition of the spelling "or Maori" in the lead sentence was repeatedly removed, and I would like to know why. According to WP:OTHERNAMES, various names commonly used for the topic in question are to be mentioned in the lead sentence, or if that would make that sentence too long, in a separate section. That also applies to spelling variants – the article on behavior mentions that it might also be spelled behaviour, organization gives organisation as alternative name, etc.

The same clearly applies to the word Māori/Maori, which has two common spellings in modern English (with or without the macron). Both are widely used, both are listed in dictionaries, and which one any specific publication or author uses is very much a "house style" issue. So why not acknowledge that both spellings exist in the lead sentence, and then move on and use the spelling Māori throughout the rest of the article (as is already the case)? As I understand it, this is something we must do – OTHERNAMES is part of a policy, it's not something that can be ignored for any given article because a few editors decide that they don't like the alternative spelling. Gawaon (talk) 19:18, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

There is a second correct spelling: Maaori, and the incorrect spelling Maori, which is rarely seen in formal writing in New Zealand, is used at least in the United States, so I suggest putting these two spellings in a footnote rather than inline.-Gadfium (talk) 20:14, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Is the spelling Maaori listed in English dictionaries? Maori certainly is, for example in Merriam-Webster. So it's not "incorrect" in any meaningful sense of the word. Gawaon (talk) 20:56, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

This is an article on a New Zealand-centred topic and hence uses New Zealand English. In New Zealand English, the present standard is to use macrons for Māori words.

Māori language and its use is a political issue in New Zealand right now, witness the incoming Government's removal of the Māori names from government organizations; which means there are potential WP:NPOV issues. And WP:NPOV trumps matters of style or "common usage".

—VeryRarelyStable 21:33, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

References