Talk:Puketāpapa

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.

Volcanoes Low‑importance

	Volcanoes portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Volcanoes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of volcanoes, volcanology, igneous petrology, and related subjects 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.VolcanoesWikipedia:WikiProject VolcanoesTemplate:WikiProject VolcanoesWikiProject Volcanoes articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Mountains Low‑importance

	Mountains portal This article is part of WikiProject Mountains, a project to systematically present information on mountains. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page (see Contributing FAQ for more information), or visit the project page where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.MountainsWikipedia:WikiProject MountainsTemplate:WikiProject MountainsMountain articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Auckland Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Auckland, which aims to improve the coverage of Auckland, New Zealand, on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page.AucklandWikipedia:WikiProject AucklandTemplate:WikiProject AucklandWikiProject Auckland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

On 17 September 2024, it was proposed that this article be moved to Mount Roskill (mountain). The result of the discussion was not moved.

Additional source

Additional information can be added to the article from here: Fox, Aileen (1979). "The Pa on Mount Roskill, Auckland (N42/11): Dating Evidence from the 1961 Excavations". Records of the Auckland Institute and Museum. 16: 45–61. ISSN 0067-0464. JSTOR 42906274. Wikidata Q58677096.. --Prosperosity (talk) 23:12, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 17 September 2024

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. (closed by non-admin page mover) reading beans 03:51, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Puketāpapa → Mount Roskill (mountain) – More common name Traumnovelle (talk) 20:10, 17 September 2024 (UTC) See scholar results for example: [1] with many not being about the mountain with searching for "Mt Roskill" and 'geology' to help filter out results about the town/suburb adding up to 200 [2] [3]. Most searches are for Mt Roskill instead of Puketapapa: [4][reply]

Oppose That is in no way supported by published sources - you need to check and validate each one instead of doing a wide scholar/news search, because of results coming up for Mt Roskill the suburb and Puketapapa the local board. I've tried to find as many explicit media sources (reports, published books, journal articles, news articles, etc., excluding theses and Auckland Council / Tupuna Maunga documents) that make explicit mention of the maunga. There's a clear trend away from Mount Roskill, and towards a dual name, Puketāpapa / Mount Roskill.

2009-2012
- Mt Roskill: 10 [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14]
- Mt Roskill / Puketapapa (or a variation): 3 [15][16][17]
- Puketapapa / Pukeiti (or a variation): 2 [18][19]
2013-2017
- Mt Roskill: 5 [20][21][22][23][24][25][26]
- Puketapapa / Mt Roskill (or a variation): 5 [27][28][29][30][31]
- Puketapapa / Pukeiti (or a variation): 2 [32][33]
- Pukewiwi / Puketapapa / Mt Roskill (or a variation): 1 [34]
2018-2024
- Mt Roskill: 4 [35][36][37][38]
- Puketapapa: 4 [39][40][41][42]
- Puketapapa / Mt Roskill (or a variation): 11 [43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53]
- Puketapapa / Pukewiwi / Mt Roskill: 1 [54]

Prosperosity (talk) 01:17, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Link 41 is invalid and 42 uses both names interchangeably. I dislike dual names due to naturalness and concision but I'd prefer a dual name over this because it'd be more recognisable to most people. Traumnovelle (talk) 03:45, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose based on Prosperosity's good analysis. I especially appreciate the assessment over time, showing that there is a move away from English names towards using te reo. That phenomenon mirrors my experience from the proposal to add macrons to New Zealand naming conventions; the same trend towards macron usage reflects the change in societal use. Schwede 66 09:41, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose It's only 109m high, so mountain doesn't seem an appropriate name. The suburb is Mount Roskill, so Puketāpapa distinguishes them. Johnragla (talk) 09:43, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Per the very-well researched source analysis by Prosperosity. It's also a very suitable case of natural disambiguation. AusLondonder (talk) 14:09, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Suggest title does not seem to support WP:COMMONNAME. Georgethedragonslayer (talk) 17:11, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per the very convincing sources above and the fact that the proposed title unnecessarily introduces disambiguation when there's a much better (and more common) name where that isn't required. Turnagra (talk) 10:10, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, seems much more appropriate for the feature as opposed to the suburb. Also, what Prosperosity and Schwede66 said. Somej (talk) 07:14, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.