User talk:Tirana

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

Hello, Tirana, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  Jamyskis Whisper, Contribs Germany 09:01, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Waitangi

Thanks for fixing my AWB AutoWikiStuffups on Treaty of Waitangi. Hopefully that's the only page I broke. --Scott Davis Talk 02:05, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your edits of Treaty of Waitangi. Good to see some more objective editing of such articles. --Lholden 00:45, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Treaty of Waitangi Grievance Industry deletion

See:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Treaty of Waitangi Grievance Industry. --Midnighttonight 01:18, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cat:Race relations in NZ

I have set it up and included some articles. See Category:Race relations in New Zealand, and of course to add articles to it is the usual [[Category:Race relations in New Zealand]] at the end of articles. To set up a category (for future reference), simply add it to a page then follow the red link and add some text to it (e.g. "the main article for this category is____" or categorise the category). --Midnighttonight 04:22, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks - wasn't really sure how to go about that myself Tirana 05:47, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Belated welcome

Gidday! Tēnā koe! I'm sorry I hadn't noticed your arrival before tonight. Been doing more on the Te Reo version; but that's much less of a chore now that User:Kahuroa has adopted it, and his pen-name seems to have been prophetically chosen.

Too busy to do a User page - or just not seen all the advantages?

Ka kite -- Robin Patterson 06:20, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Treaty of Waitangi page - SOE case

Hi Tirana,

Thanks for the edit of my addition to the ToW page; I should have mentioned that the SOE case was the one that first set out the principles of the Treaty. However I think that it should still be mentioned that the judgement found the Treaty relevant only because it was specifically mentioned in the SOE legislation. As the entry stands now it implies that the govt always had to be consistent with the principles of the Treaty. As I understand it the ruling only found that they had to do this if the relevant legislation mentioned the Treaty. It wasn't until the second NZ Maori Council case (the radio frequencies one) that a ruling was made that the Crown had to pay attention to the Treaty even concerning laws which don't specifically mention it.

Rather than instantly re-editing your edit, I thought I should contact you and say why I think a further change needs to be made. Get it touch if you think I've got it wrong, otherwise I will make the change in the next few days or so.

I'm glad that there is interest around this page. It would be pretty sad if the major additions I've been making lately went completely unnoticed, given the importance of the topic. In the talk page for the ToW page I posted a list of suggestions for improvement. Since you seem to be a major contributor to the page I would appreciate your feedback, other suggestions etc. --Helenalex 00:28, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Sociology vs Law

Hi Tirana "Treaty is about international law and property rights even if it's unenforceable, not sociology".

Your edit is fine with me, but just wanted to respond to your edit summary and note (for the record) that "legal" and property rights which aren't enforceable aren't, as a matter of reality, legal rights. They can therefore only really be understood as sociological phenomena - a reflection of how people tend to behave in the community (a bit like "morals"). This is not to say the Treaty is about sociology; just that its effect on New Zealand society can only be understood in terms of sociology. In the limit, the same is true of postive law in any case.

ElectricRay 08:13, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. But at the end of the day, even law is a sociological phenomenon (why do we obey laws? we don't do it because they're laws, but because the government has the factual power to enforce them). And given there is no government enforcement of the principles, the very credibility of the treaty (as, indeed, with any law) is a sociological phenomenon. It's only paid any attention because public discourse in New Zealand (which is a greassroots thing) generally accepts that it should be paid attention. That has changed over time (the Treaty was not nearly as big a deal for the every day New Zealander in 1981), and could change again over time (who knows?). I would say that is a sociological phenomenon.

ElectricRay 10:53, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Tiriti

Thanks for your work (with others I know) on the Treaty of Waitangi. Nice to see! Kia kaha koe Kahuroa 23:05, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "New Zealand" culture

I've been working on the Culture of New Zealand page and have come to the conclusion that one of the reasons why it is not very good is that whoever originally wrote it doesn't know the difference between Pakeha culture and New Zealand culture in general. Since I don't think there is a single NZ culture, I've proposed renaming the page Cultures of New Zealand (plural), moving all the specifically Pakeha stuff to Pakeha culture and limiting the NZ culture page to brief overviews of Maori, Pakeha and other NZ cultures and how they interact, as well as the arts. I'd appreciate you having a look (there is a fuller proposal and explanation on the talk page) and commenting if you have an opinion one way or the other. --Helenalex 05:03, 16 March 2007 (UTC)