Talk:Pukekohe

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

New Zealand Mid‑importance 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 Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Auckland High‑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 High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Cities This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

@Andykatib Bartholomew's book is self-published. It is entirely inappropriate to use a self-published source for these serious and contentious claims. I have removed all content cited to him from the article. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:34, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Traumnovelle: Would that affect media articles from 1 News, RNZ and Stuff citing Robert Bartholomew's book and the TVNZ documentary based on it? These would be regarded as reputable mainstream media sources. Bartholomew's book may be self-published but he has academic credentials. He would be different from the likes of Ian Wishart. Andykatib (talk) 20:46, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.1news.co.nz/2020/02/27/no-maori-allowed-new-book-explores-pukekohes-history-of-racial-segregation/ this is just an interview which quotes him, it does not present his statements as facts. The RNZ one didn't verify the specific claims given. The Stuff interview is a synopsis of the documentary itself. I don't know whether documentaries are considered a reliable source and I cannot find any policy or guideline in regards to documentaries. So the documentary itself may be a reliable source but I am unsure. Bartholomew doesn't meet WP:SPS criteria for New Zealand history (or history in general) his academic work is in other subjects. Traumnovelle (talk) 21:01, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Having read WP:SPS, I understand the situation better. Bartholomew is a university-trained medical sociologist and his background is evident in the book No Maori Allowed. However, him choosing to get it self-published after disagreements with his publishers does create problems even though the book is grounded in academic research. There wouldn't have been issues had he gotten the book published via a reputable academic publisher like Auckland University Press or general publisher like Penguin New Zealand. Should we raise the matter at Wikipedia:New Zealand Wikipedians' notice board? It's difficult for me since I put a lot of effort into writing that article's history section but will comply with Wikipedia policy. Andykatib (talk) 21:11, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can raise the matter if you want, although WP:RSN would be a better venue I feel as the reliability of a documentary (if you want to rely on that) could be discussed. Some of the stuff is covered in other sources like this Council report which mentions educational segregation: [1] Traumnovelle (talk) 21:17, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, will do that. Andykatib (talk) 21:23, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]