Talk:Te Pāti Māori

Party metadata

This New Zealand article has some associated metadata templates to display political party colours and names in election candidate and results tables.

The table below shows the content of these metadata templates.

Te Pāti Māori — political party metadata
Color		Shortname
	#B2001A	Te Pāti Māori

Fascist?

Copied from my talk page: The Maori Party (is) definitely (a) fascist organisation, as....one of the leaders of the so-called Maori Party, Tariana Turia was directly involved in leading illegal occupations of both private property & public parks (most notably, Moutoa Gardens in Wanganui back in 1995). Tariana Turia is hated by a lot of people. There are some people in Wanganui who want her to be put to death for treason, which the illegal occupation of Moutoa Gardens was. That is why (this) organisation must be listed as (a) fascist organisation. - (Aidan Work 03:40, 11 January 2006 (UTC))

My inclination is to say that this assertion is not sound, using the definition of fascism as above. However, more information on the Māori Party's economic policy and whether it subscribes to some kind of "leader principle" would be useful to know. --Stlemur 08:29, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

New Zealand Maori are hardly fascists. They may be Nationalistic to some degree but I hardly see them advocating collusion with big business and wanting to kill white people. The posting above is ridiculous and insulting to people who have suffered under real fascists such as in Italy and Germany. Dankru 09:26, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Honestly, as Stlemur said, the Māori Party has not got enough policy to be categorised. Their policies are seemingly solely based on the seabed and foreshore bill or Te Tiriti o Waitangi. On that basis alone it is not fascist and it is amusing to suggest that they are. If anything they are the Alliance reborn with a rigid Mana Motuhake back-bone; they're probably the furthest to the left of all the political parties in New Zealand, and may be the ideological-opposite of fascism. -- Greaser 01:56, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Greaser, the Maori party has neither the power or ideology to be classified as Fascist, although I personally don't agree with a party based entirely on playing the race card 222.153.172.203

Template whose 1st addition incited by a sockpuppeting trollery removed. 68.39.174.238 (talk) 10:45, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Does anyone know if there is another party currently operating worldwide which uses an ethnic/ racial name as its title?

"Worldwide" ? Isn't this party only in NZ? 68.39.174.238 (talk) 10:45, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

The Māori Party is not considered by the vast majority of New Zealanders to be fascist. Aidan Work's viewpoint is that of an extreme minority. I've removed the WPF query template as the party doesn't qualify on any of the grounds given.-gadfium 19:46, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Facist? Definitely not. Racist? Now there's another question. Just consider the recent profanity laden outburst by one of their MP's against Whites. Alternatively just consider their aims. Race based ownership, mandating cultural indoctrination ... Yes okay minor slant with that last bit. You get the idea though.203.25.1.208 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:48, 10 November 2009 (UTC).

Why is there not a criticism section?

I for one consider the Maori Party to be racist. Consider some of the comments by their MP's... race based ownership of land, important land at that. How about someone mention that for the prior 3 elections, Maori Party has always sided with the majority. Just another way to hold onto power. I won't create it, since I am biased of course, but someone with a NPOV could do a write up? Cheers 119.224.9.55 (talk) 23:45, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Most articles do not have criticism sections, and there are differing views amongst Wikipedians on whether such sections are desirable. See WP:CRIS. The articles New Zealand Labour Party, New Zealand National Party, ACT New Zealand and Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand do not have criticism sections.-gadfium 01:59, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Other indigenous political movements?

Does the Maori Party have contact with other indigenous political parties and social movements in the Pacific Basin, North America and elsewhere? If so, this would be a valuable addition to this entry. Perhaps there should also be a Wikipedia category to this effect. Calibanu (talk) 03:50, 26 January 2011 (UTC)User Calibanu

RETIREMENT AGE AT 60?

Apart from being a racial discrimination if "Maoris" (all?) retire at 60, and the rest of New Zealanders retire years later, it is ridiculous because both leaders of the Maori Party are over 60 years old.--83.53.166.189 (talk) 02:32, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

You confuse "retire" with "receive superannuation"? Paople can retire at 30 if they like, but nobody qualifies for super until they are 65 years old. Neither Maori, Pakeha nor Clan Uncle Tom Cobleigh. Moriori (talk) 02:57, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Socialism of the 21st Century

“Socialism of the 21st Century” has been a political ideology and movement within the context of Latin America. I see this listed under the Maori Party’s ideology in the infobox. I clicked on history and this seems to be a recent addition by an unknown person. Could some one elaborate as to why this may be added to the party’s description? Does the party have any connection to Latin American Bolivarians? I'm not aware that they do. Perhaps this label isn't precise for the Maori Party. 71.89.74.239 (talk) 03:08, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

I've removed it and other recent changes to ideology as unsourced.-gadfium 20:49, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

Political Position

The article does not state that this is a right wing party despite the party going into coalition with a centre-right party and having many Right wing views? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.48.17.17 (talk) 01:00, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

It's more complicated than that. The party doesn't comfortably fit in the left/right wing spectrum because its ideology is for indigenous rights. What might be useful is to find some authoritative sources saying that the party is left or right wing, and we could add their opinions to the article.-gadfium 03:58, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Te Pāti Māori/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.

the information that states the Maori Party was "FOUNDED" 7 July, 2004 should be omitted, the reason being is that the Maori party was "ESTABLISHED" ON 7 July, 2004. Not founded as stated. The idea to form a Maori Party was stated at a Tainui Maori Hui at Maketu Marae in Kawhia, 13 March, 2004. This should have been recognised as 'THEE' time of which the Maori Party was 'formed' or 'founded'. The now Maori Party MP's were not present at the time of the political discussions that had taken place on this date, so therefore they are not aware of what had taken place, only through second-hand information, and therefore the fault is on leaders who were there should have made it known and published the truth as it is. It is also mentioned that Tariana was the "Founder" of the Maori Party, which is untrue, and no blame to Tariana, because it is the interpretation of media and what nots that make statements 'untrue' and people need to seek first hand knowledge before publishing.

Last edited at 00:03, 22 June 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 00:44, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion:

• Debbie Ngarewa-Packer.jpg (discussion)
• Rawiri Waititi.jpg (discussion)

Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:28, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 22 September 2021

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: not moved (non-admin closure) Bada Kaji (talk • श्रीमान् गम्भीर) 10:50, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

---

Māori Party → Te Pāti Māori – I've noticed most news articles about the party these days refer to the party as Te Pāti Māori. It also refers to itself as Te Pāti Māori (see its website). YttriumShrew (talk) 22:13, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Oppose Most news articles still call it "Māori Party", more so than "Te Pāti Māori".  Nixinova   T   C   04:07, 24 September 2021 (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.

Double grammatical article

Isn't the "Te" in Te Reo Māori a "the" by itself? So in, "Officially restore the Te Reo Māori names for all towns, cities and place names," under Renaming New Zealand Campaign, isn't the "the" before "te" obsolete? I may be wrong, or perhaps there's a particular Wikipedia practice I'm unaware of when it comes to non-English? CallidSea (talk) 01:52, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Kia ora. I’ve fixed it. Schwede66 08:21, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Liberalism

Since when is a thesis paper by a student a reliable source for a citation? The party is clearly focused on Māori rights. I don't object to talking about a possible liberal stance in the "principles and policy" section if it is correctly cited using a reliable and independent source that complies with WP:SYNTH but to describe the party as a liberal party in a general overview sense in the lead definitely seems like overkill for this party. Helper201 (talk) 14:39, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Helper201, when you reject theses outright one gets the impression that you’ve never read WP:SOURCETYPES. The discussion there about theses is much more nuanced. For example, for a master thesis, it would make a big difference who supervised the work. An expert in their field? That would lend a lot of credibility to it. This is a general reply; I have not checked who was involved in this particular case. Schwede66 17:33, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

I can't find out who supervised the work. The only name I can see mentioned is Butler, Jesse Waiariki Temanava, who doesn't seem to have any Wikipedia page and I can find nothing related to their credibility. The source is also about "liberal culturalism", so it’s debatable whether this extends to justifying the claim that the party holds a liberal political ideology as a whole in so far as complying with WP:SYNTH. Would that mean its "social liberal", just simply "liberal", "economic liberal", "classical liberal" etc? The source is also from 2007, so we could really do with something much more up-to-date than a 15-year-old source. Helper201 (talk) 16:36, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 3 December 2022

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: moved. Both "Māori Party" and "Te Pāti Māori" have been demonstrated to be common enough that we can't just say one is the definitive common name or not.

Additionally, New Zealand English is distinguished from other English dialects through its common acceptance of Māori vocabulary; in effect, though the words may be Māori in origin, they are still used in English speech. Compare with Uluru in Australia; in English speech, the use of its Pitjantjatjara name is greater than the use of its English name.

At the end of the day, this purely comes down to a headcount, which is in favour of moving. (closed by non-admin page mover) Sceptre (talk) 23:36, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

---

Māori Party → Te Pāti Māori – Name the party refers to itself as, including in English. News media, including those which are traditionally more conservative and less likely to use Māori, are also more frequently using Te Pāti Māori than "the Māori Party" when compared to when the previous move was proposed. Turnagra (talk) 21:47, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

• Support I had the thought the other week that it’s time for this article to be moved as indeed, the new name is the one that is more used in news sources these days. Schwede66 16:20, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. In the last year there were 237 news results for Māori Party compared to 199 results for Te Pāti Māori. (Results for Te Pāti Māori are inflated due to a recent story on te ao maori news whose headline, which included "Te Pāti Māori", was copied to multiple unrelated articles like Ngoi Pewhairangi, Tuini Ngāwai inducted into NZ Music Hall of Fame) BilledMammal (talk) 17:53, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
• Comment: Until there’s an overwhelming majority, there might be a benefit to using the “English” name, even if te Pāti is more common, especially for our non-NZ audience. I’m of mixed mind, and I certainly don’t oppose the move, as there’s always the fact that their self-identification is fairly important. Clearly the party prefers to call themselves TPM, but is there a sense that they mind the older English name used by others? — HTGS (talk) 01:02, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

  I'd have to do some digging as to your question - I have a recollection that there was some opposition from TPM about continuing to use the older name when they first changed, but I'm having difficulty finding any of the sources about their own name change because all of that has been dwarfed by their proposal to change the name of New Zealand to Aotearoa. Turnagra (talk) 05:52, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

• Support, they go by Te Pāti Māori on their website and their party name in Parliament is Te Pāti Māori. So, for all intents and purposes, even parliamentary purposes, they go by Te Pāti Māori. News sources also more commonly refer to them as Te Pāti Māori these days it seems as well. I do note WP:COMMONNAME, however, in a more political side of things Te Pāti Māori (or TPM) is more frequently used to refer to it in the first place. It's also worth noting that it's definitely been borrowed far enough to have it fall under being an English-language title per article naming conventions.

With specific regard to BilledMammal's concerns over search results, they're about the same when I did a lookup, so—reiterating—I think it's reasonable to change the name given it's more prominently used in mainstream news, overall search results are about the same and it calls itself Te Pāti Māori. Carolina2k22 • (talk) • (edits) 05:50, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

• they're about the same when I did a lookup It will take a few weeks for Google to reindex; I estimate there are a few dozen results that shouldn't be there.

  The WP:COMMONNAME is clearer when we look at scholarly results; since 2021 there have been 190 results for Māori Party, compared to just 7 results for Te Pāti Māori.

  The name that the party themselves prefer is not relevant; see WP:OFFICIALNAME. BilledMammal (talk) 21:32, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

  @BilledMammal: The WP:COMMONNAME is clearer when we look at scholarly results That's definitely a completely reasonable note to add, there is a noticeable difference for scholar articles and if we are going to base it purely off of that I would be inclined to agree with you, though it's worth noting the general reader typically will not be combing through academic papers and research, they will have likely come from hearing the term elsewhere—typically from the news, etc... The name that the party themselves prefer is not relevant; see WP:OFFICIALNAME I am aware of WP:OFFICIALNAME completely but given both names in a more general non-academic sense tend to be used just as much as already addressed, I do think it is reasonable for us if both are used just as much to apply a slight preference to the name that is preferred by both the party and news organisations (I will note that sometimes Te Pāti Māori is (somewhat incorrectly) spelt as Te Paati Māori, which also doesn't help in terms of measuring this). I appreciate your response, given your genuine point which I do acknowledge I will just clarify that I'll amend my stance to omit strongly before support. Carolina2k22 • (talk) • (edits) 11:49, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

• Support On their own (mostly English-language) website, they use "Te Pāti Māori" exclusively. (Ironically, they don't seem to have a Te Reo version of their website at all.) This, combined with the fact that current usage elsewhere on the Internet is close to 50-50, suggests that it's time to make this change, if not now, then soon. PatricKiwi (talk) 06:43, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

• Support - its the name they've chosen, and it has been normalised in media coverage e.g. of tonight's political poll. Basicly, it is their common name now.--IdiotSavant (talk) 10:34, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

  @IdiotSavant: See the results for Google News and Google Scholar above; the evidence doesn't support the position that it is their common name now. BilledMammal (talk) 21:32, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose: In addition to what's been said above, it's standard on Wikipedia to refer to political parties by their English translation if they have a clear one. See politcal parties in Mexico, Russia, India, Japan, Poland, France, Italy, Germany, etc. In rare cases when the party is refered to using it's non-English name, like some parties in Ireland, it's extremely clear what the common name of that party is, and other parties in that country are refered to using their English name. --Spekkios (talk) 19:21, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

The difference here is that "Te Pāti Māori" is the name that this party now uses in all English language media - for example, its own web site: [1]. With one exception, the countries that you list above do not have English as a major language, and so their political parties will likely use different names or spellings internally than we do in the English Wikipedia. The exception is India, which has English as a major language. In your list of the national political parties in India, each of them has an English-language web site that uses the same name that's used in the English Wikipedia. So, if anything, your examples actually lend weight to the Support case. PatricKiwi (talk) 21:40, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

The Maori party do not use te pati Maori on their official website universally. For example, in their policy sections. They clearlty alternate between the two, as does news media. We also need to consider WP:CRITERIA, including the title is one that readers are likely to look or search for, which will almost certainly be "the Maori party". --Spekkios (talk) 21:57, 10 December 2022 (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.

Lede phrasing

Given the recent edit warring around how exactly to word the lede, I've reverted it to how it appeared prior to the first change and wanted to open this to get a discussion going and hopefully a consensus. Through the last couple days, there have been several different ledes, including:

• Te Pāti Māori, also known as the Māori Party, is a...
• Te Pāti Māori (English: the Māori Party) is a ...
• Te Pāti Māori, also known in English as the Māori Party, is a...

Personally, my concern with the latter two are that they imply that Te Pāti Māori isn't used in English, which is contrary to what the above move request and recent sources demonstrate. I'm open to what people think the best approach is, but I think it's far better to have that conversation here rather than through an unconstructive edit war.

Pinging editors who have been involved: @Rreagan007 @5.81.63.77 @Vif12vf @LilianaUwU. Turnagra (talk) 23:00, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

I think I'll go with Option 1, as it doesn't imply that the Māori name isn't used in English. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 23:03, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Option 1 is best for the reason given by Turnagra. Schwede66 23:19, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Option 1 and 2 would be the most common solutions, based on what is done elsewhere. Option 3 seems a bit awkward in my opinion. Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 02:39, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Option 1 is best. Option 2 is wrong because the Maori version is not exclusively used. Option 3 is wrong because the Maori name is commonly used in English which means it is being assimilated into English and should therefore not be treated only as a foreign/Maori name - it is becoming an English phrase by its use in English. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 03:58, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Maori is not a foreign language in NZ. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 20:42, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Left or right or neither

Talk here please and don't edit war. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 03:51, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

It is far-left? It does not mention separatism. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 03:57, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Whatever answer is reached, it is normal for the infobox to include both position and ideology, even for parties which claim to "transcen[d] left or right" [2]. Both should obviously be supported in the body of the article. Removing it is inappropriate. Instead, restore the status quo-ante while seeking consensus.

As for what should go there, the claim of "left-wing" was at least supported by references, unlike previous claims. It also seems to fit: while the party has been more centrist in the past (e.g. in 2008), it has moved leftwards in the past few years, and now broadly sits in the same space on the left-right spectrum as the Greens, who are classified as "left-wing". I'd say they certainly fit there on the basis of their tax policy (raising taxes on the rich and imposing wealth taxes are viewed as clearly left-wing in Aotearoa). And they're placed there by the Herald [3], Newsroom [4], TVNZ [5], RNZ [6], SMH [7] and implicitly by the WaPo [8], and classified as "very leftwing" by the Guardian [9]. By contrast, I'm not finding a lot of supporting references for "far-left" (that guardian piece seems to be the closest).--IdiotSavant (talk) 04:49, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

I think a Guardian ref is borderline RSS. It is a foreign newspaper giving what could be seen as an opinion piece, not a reference of fact. I also am hesitant in labelling the maori party as left or right. Its purpose is to promote maori issues. That might NOW be better promoted by alighning with the left but it might easily be better promoted with the right, as in 2008. The Greens are the same - they promote Green issues not left or right. The distinction between left and right gets blurred the father you move from the centre. The NAZI party was a socialist party but is usually labelled as extreme right wing. It is better described as a nationalist party and to achieve its aim it would follow left or right wing policies. A supposed right wing NAZI party was happy to sign a treaty with Comminist Stailinist USSR (Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact) in 1939 to divide and annex Poland. So, a left-right description is not always appropriate IMO. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 11:57, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Sources mention that its left-wing. Articles must be written from a NPOV. Some sources might call TPM right-wing.. TePati Maori have 3% of the vote. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 12:21, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Last time looked, New Zealand content written for The Guardian was produced by journalists based in New Zealand. Therefore, their content is a RS, unless their business model has changed. Schwede66 13:56, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

And in this specific case, Henry Cooke is an NZ journalist. While currently based in London, he used to be chief political reporter for Stuff. IdiotSavant (talk) 23:57, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Even ignoring the Guardian article (which we shouldn't do as it's a reliable source, but anyway) there are a range of sources which describe Te Pāti Māori in its current iteration as left-wing, enough that we can easily justify including that in the infobox. The Greens are also pretty clearly left-wing, and anyone who says otherwise has never looked at their policies or anything that talks about them - but that's a separate issue. Turnagra (talk) 19:50, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 20:31, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

The sources should be read carefully. Being in a left wing coalition doesn't mean a party is necessarily left wing. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 23:55, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

And in terms of practical changes to places other than the infobox: the article lead and body (in "principles and policy") both note that since 2020 the party has been described as left-wing or progressive, with copious references. I think the transcending left and right quote should probably be added there to provide context, but the infobox is a fair summary of both the article body and the available references. IdiotSavant (talk) 00:04, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

This is on their website at the start under the heading 'Policy' - "The Māori Party believes that indigenous solutions can help unlock the wellbeing of our whānau, and our nation. Our policies and practices are derived from kaupapa tuku iho, and aim to provide for the wellbeing of all, recognising that we must improve the outcomes of whānau Māori if we are to be a truly diverse, happy and well nation." Although it might not be easy for some people to understand what that actually means, it is pretty clear it focuses on promoting Maori issues and increasing the well-being of Maori. To assume that means a socialist left wing leaning is original research. Look at the facts that are not disputed - TPM has gone into coalition with both left and right parties. Not all parties can be put into a left-right description. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 00:09, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

That is what TePati Maori is described as. And it is not just for Maori, there are many pakeha supporting TPM too. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 00:37, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

That stuff is well-covered in the article (in the lede, and in policies and principles). It is in the infobox, under ideology. But we are talking here about positioning, not ideology. At the moment we have a wealth of sources for a (current) position of left-wing. If you wish to claim that this party has no ideological position, then you need multiple, independent reputable sources for that. IdiotSavant (talk) 00:40, 3 July 2024 (UTC)