Talk:Motukorea

Confusion

I am confused by the wording "Not long after Brown and Campbell had taken up residence on the island, the ‘gifted’ by Ngāti Whātua chief Apiha Te Kawau to entice Captain Hobson....the island claimed for the Crown, but upon hearing what was transpiring, Brown and Campbell returned to their island and protested their right to occupy the island". This makes no sense. If Brown and Campbell were in residence they would not have to return to the island. "the gifted" must surely mean "the island was gifted". If Te Kawau gifted the island to the Crown, it would not have to be claimed by the Crown. And right of occupation is not the same as right of ownershipRoyalcourtier (talk) 22:50, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 24 October 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Weak consensus to move to Motukorea. No such user (talk) 08:12, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

---

Browns Island (New Zealand) → Motukorea / Browns Island – Proposed rename to the island's dual name. This would remove the need for a geographical disambiguation, and would be fitting with WP:NCNZ along with a growing number of New Zealand place articles - including other volcanoes in the Auckland volcanic field, such as Maungakiekie / One Tree Hill. Some volcanoes with dual names do just have the Māori name as the article title, such as Maungawhau for Maungawhau / Mount Eden, but I think in this instance a dual name would be preferable to either the current name or simply 'Motukorea'. While the island does not have any officially gazetted name, the dual name is the most prevalent form of the name, used by media, both local and central government, advocacy groups, and tourism operators. Turnagra (talk) 01:01, 24 October 2020 (UTC) —Relisting. BD2412 T 05:45, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Does the island in fact have a dual name if it's not gazetted as such? I personally can't stand dual names, and think we should only use them if they are all but unavoidable (i.e. they are the best choice for disambiguation and are extremely prevalent). WP:NCNZ certainly doesn't require the use of slash-names either. This video put out by the Herald this month uses Brown's Island, and while it's hard to source, we should always use the name people use to refer to the place naturally (ie, in speech; which is very rarely a dual name). If it's not gazetted, I would suggest considering a move to Motukorea for disambiguation purposes. You might find enough sources that use that more than "Brown's Island" that it's a viable alternative by now. — HTGS (talk) 00:51, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Topo maps published by LINZ have a dual name listed (albeit with the older style of Browns Island (Motukorea)). I'd also point out that the video you posted not only has the location listed as "Browns Island / Motukorea" but the name is given at 0:24 as "Motukorea / Browns Island" and then at 0:52 as just Motukorea. I'd argue that the interchangeable use of the English and Māori names is how dual names work in practice - people don't say "Piopiotahi / Milford Sound" each time, but they will say either "Milford Sound" or "Piopiotahi" interchangeably. Based on the sources I linked above, as well as your video, I'd argue that this is the case with Motukorea / Browns Island. Turnagra (talk) 06:18, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

To be clear, I don't disagree with you about how dual names work or are supposed to work according to the govt et al., I'm just one of those people who doesn't like them to begin with. I believe a place name should be either "Brown's Island" OR "Motukorea" in English (I really don't mind which), and then naturally "Motukorea" in Te Reo. There makes little sense having an English language place name represented in two languages to me, especially with a slash. I am less opposed to the use of brackets (parentheses), as that implies that one is interchanged with the other, not that they both have equal part as making up the whole name. But I am definitely opposed to introducing a slash-name when it's not even official. — HTGS (talk) 06:32, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

Personal preference doesn't really come into it though if a name is being used. I'd prefer that Christchurch was called Ōtautahi, but that doesn't change how we should refer to it. The presiding convention for place names in this manner is currently "Māori name / English name", with some outliers for earlier iterations which either placed the English name first or the Māori name in brackets, regardless of how some people may feel about it. Dual names have also gained increasing recognition in recent years, including in the instance of Motukorea / Browns Island. Ultimately, in the absence of any official name, references to the island have shifted in recent years from a single name to predominantly the dual one, and we should reflect this change in a manner which is consistent with other dual name geographic features (eg. how the dual name for Lake Ellesmere / Te Waihora in that article uses a slash despite the official orthography being "Lake Ellesmere (Te Waihora)", as defined in WP:NCNZ. Turnagra (talk) 18:00, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

• Support Use of the dual name has become common over the last two years. I agree with Turnagra’s rationale about how dual names are used in practice. Even though this isn’t the gazetted name, the two names are both in common use. Schwede66 16:47, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose. I oppose the renaming of articles to dual names where the "dual name" uses a slash, and strongly oppose where there is no Gazetteer precedence. But aside from my own preferences broadly, the argument for this specific case is even clearer. On the five guidelines on naming the slash-name falls short on both naturalness and conciseness, though gains in precision; both Brown's Island and Motukorea are better choices on every other criterion, and the deficit in precision (for Brown's Island, not Motukorea) is easily made up by the disambiguation as it currently stands.

The use of a slash-name for Motukorea in some text-based sources does not correspond whatsoever to speech or what we would consider a common name for any other context; it is the functional equivalent of a verbal "or", rather than a hyphen which joins the two. People writing "Motukorea / Brown's Island" are using the slash to indicate two different names for the one place, not one "dual name". This is made evident by every incidence in speech where someone indicates one name and then the other, not both as if separated by a slash (see RNZ here for a reliable source using both names separately).

I propose if a move is to be made, it be to Motukorea (or Motukorea Island). (It does appear, through some crude Google searches, that Motukorea is more commonly used than Brown's Island.) — HTGS (talk) 23:55, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

• Good points. If we go the Motukorea or Motukorea Island way, I would prefer Motukorea. Schwede66 19:44, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 6 October 2024

Motukorea → Browns Island (New Zealand) – Motukorea is an obscure name people are not familiar with. Article titles should be recognisable to the average person. The names have roughly equal usage in sources with many different forms provided but Browns Island is far more recognisable to Aucklanders. Browns Island (Motukorea) is the legally recorded name of the island although such a title might suggest it is the Browns Island of Motukorea. See link below for data on search Traumnovelle (talk) 09:51, 6 October 2024 (UTC) [1]

Oppose if the names have roughly equal usage in sources then the current title is more suitable as it is more precise and does not need the use of disambiguation (note: per WP:NATURAL, this stands even if Motukorea turned out to be slightly less common, but I don't think that's the case here). It also better meets the other WP:CRITERIA for article titles, and you haven't provided anything to back the move up other than vague reckons. Your "source" you've used to justify the move request does nothing to specify that it's this Browns Island people are searching for, and not one of the several others. I'd be open to use of the dual name, which is widely used and familiar to people as per the sources outlined in the above move request, but I suspect the issues which were outlined above would still persist and that you wouldn't support that course either. Turnagra (talk) 18:06, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

People in New Zealand are obviously going to search for the island in New Zealand over foreign ones. If Motukorea came even close in search results you could assume it is likely as understood, but it is not close at all. I have never heard this name until today, the average Aucklander knows the island as Browns Island and is the name they would expect. Per WP:CRITERIA names should be recognisable as well as natural and Motukorea introduces a surprise to readers. Traumnovelle (talk) 21:30, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

This is all based on assertion, with no evidence to back it up. We don't rename articles because you've never heard of the name, nor do we base the title off our reckons for what others know it as. We base them off the sources, which you state have roughly equivalent usage (but, looking at articles since 2023, it's actually 13 for Motukorea, 5 for Browns Island, 2 for a dual name, and 6 for other Browns Islands). We also base them off guidelines, which state (among other things) that we should avoid disambiguation if it's possible (WP:NATURAL), article titles should be concise, recognisable, and precise - all of which favours Motukorea over Browns Island.

As for your comment about surprise, I presume you're misreading WP:ASTONISH or WP:RASTONISH, neither of which are relevant here. If anything, that's more of an issue with the proposed title given the number of other "Browns Islands" which there are here in Aotearoa. Turnagra (talk) 23:38, 6 October 2024 (UTC)

I'm not misreading anything. Article titles are supposed to be recognisable, this simply is not recognisable to the average person. I've given the google search trends which shows no one is searching for 'motukorea' in any substantial number. 'Motukorea' might appear more in academic papers but it certainly is not recognisable to the average person.

WP:NATURAL states not to use obscure names, this name is obscure compared to Browns Island. Traumnovelle (talk) 00:41, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

You said yourself that the names have roughly equal usage in sources and that it appears more in academic papers. That's literally the opposite of obscure. Turnagra (talk) 21:32, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Obscure to people, not in sources. Many terms common in academic papers are not used for titles on Wikipedia due to being unrecognisable to a general audience. Traumnovelle (talk) 22:33, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Oppose. The proposed title is not unambiguous – according to the LINZ Gazetteer there are two other islands in New Zealand that are called Browns Island, either in full, or as part of a dual name. As an aside, as someone who lives in Auckland, I now hear the name Motukorea more frequently than Browns Island. As a child in the 1970s, I remember Browns Island being used almost exclusively, but the use of Motukorea in my experience has increased significantly in the last decade or so to the point where it predominates. Paora (talk) 09:34, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

One has a different name on Wikipedia and Browns Island (New Zealand) is still a redirect here. The other is a broken entry or a copyright trap or something. Traumnovelle (talk) 18:46, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

Oppose. Nothing has changed since the last move request. Schwede66 02:51, 8 October 2024 (UTC)