Talk:Chatham Island

New Zealand Low‑importance

	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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Islands

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of islands 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.IslandsWikipedia:WikiProject IslandsTemplate:WikiProject IslandsIslands articles

[Untitled]

This double naming is deprecate on Wikipedia, it should be plain Chatham Island. PatGallacher (talk) 18:41, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Why not plain Rekohu? The use of Māori (or in this case Mōriori) place names alongside English – especially for natural features like mountains, rivers and islands – is strongly encouraged in New Zealand, especially for reference sources. Koro Neil (talk) 15:37, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Because this is English Wikipedia. If several names exist for a place, the most common name in English is preferred, and Rekohu is not the most common name in English, globally. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 19:38, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Discrepant population figures

The Chatham Islands article gives the population of the group as 650 (According to Chatham Islands Council). With the population of Pitt at 38, that makes the figure of "about 300" given for Chatham Island here discrepant. Koro Neil (talk) 15:37, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Name

The article says the island was named after the ship that visited in 1791, with a reference. However, there are references that say it was named after the First Lord of the Admiralty, who in 1791 was John Pitt, 2nd Earl of Chatham. This has come up before elsewhere with detailed discussion involving knowledgable non-NZ editors. The conclusion then was it wasn't clear but more likely than not to be named after the person, not the ship. The fact that the other island was named Pitt supports this conclusion. The ship's name being Chatham would therefore be simple coincidence. At the time, it was more normal to name newly discovered places after people than the ship. I'm sorry I cannot immediately find that discussion which I think was in Project Ships. I would say the reference here to back the ship is okay but not ideal. I also note it doesn't actually say it was named after the ship but rather after the ship's visit. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 03:45, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[1] (p237). A source confirming the confusing nature of the name and the usual practice of naming islands. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 04:32, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]