Jump to content

Talk:List of public sector organisations in New Zealand

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Checking against SSC list

[edit]

I regularly check against the list at the State Services Commission. It's not a direct rip as far as I'm concerned, as I need to edit it a little for Māori names, trading names, subdepartmental services and so on. The SSC list, really, is just a minimal list of quangos and organisations they can find. :) IMHO. --Jonathan Ah Kit 08:41, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)

On the contrary, the SCC lists are *the* definitive source, based on legislation and a clear classification of organisation types. Much of this page is out of date, some of it pre 2003/2004. It needs a thorough review. I will add it to my watchlist, but it is such a big job it really needs more than one person. --Januarian (talk) 12:25, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are universities crown entities?

[edit]

Are universities crown entities?? I thought they were independent? Abeorch 07:30, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, tertiary education institutions such as universities that are bodies corporate established under Part 14 of the Education Act 1989 are Crown entities under the Crown Entities Act Part 1 Sect 7. Nurg (talk) 05:19, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Former crown entities

[edit]

Should we be including previous crown entities.. Such as the RHA's and CHE's? I think it would be really good to capture all of the restructuring that went on. Eg history of TVNZ had organisation name swapped from BCNZ to NZBC .. show's just how manic NZ government really can be Abeorch 04:12, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Create redirect pages to the current name and make sure the former names are mentioned in the History sections. --Midnighttonight 08:10, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Māori names

[edit]

Is there really any need to have so much maori language in this article? It just gets in the way of reading. This is the English wikipedia after all. Furthermore, it does not add, but rather detracts from the Encyclopaedic quality of the article. --Hayden5650 09:32, 23 March 2007 (UTC)Hayden5650[reply]

I believe that these are alternate and legal names of the organisations. It would not be appropriate not to list them. I haven't checked, but there should also be a redirect from the Māori name to the English one for each organisation that has an article.-gadfium 09:56, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I understand the the Māori parts of the names are part of the full legal names of these organisations, they are not alternate Māori names. A significant amount of thought goes into choosing a meaningful name, especially in Māori and also in English. Removing the Maori invites culturally more sentive editors to put them back, promptly. While I agree that almost all of these organisations are commonly known by their English shorter form, except Te Puni Kōkiri (which is almost never called the Ministry of Māori Development), Te Māngai Pāho (Māori Broadcast Funding Agency) and Te Papa (Museum of New Zealad), I think including the Māori version actually makes the article more Encyclopaedic rather than detracting from it. -- Cameron Dewe 08:41, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Naming conventions for Government Agencies

[edit]

This version of the article uses the apparent convention New Zealand Agency Name for many agencies, with some having links to articles. This is not the way these departments are normally referred to in a New Zealand context and so probably does not really follow Wikipedia:Naming conventions. While the resulting article names are unique, they are not natural and, as a reader, my common sense objects to them all starting with New Zealand as that is obvious from the context. Also, the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (government departments and ministers) suggests that most of these government agencies article names be (pre-)disambiguated with a (New Zealand) suffix, not a prefix, as follows Agency Name (New Zealand), unless the words New Zealand, or something equally unambiguous connected to New Zealand so that will not be repeated in another country, appear in the name itself. To me it is also a real pain having to remember to rename all my wiki links to the correct article, rather than simply using a disambiguator convention of adding the | character at the end of the wiki link to hide the (New Zealand) disambiguator in the wiki-link and let the wiki do the hard work. Besides, all the articles with the correct disambiguators soon get created as redirect pages. -- Cameron Dewe 11:34, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your suggestion seems sensible to me, but I suggest waiting for at least a week before renaming existing articles in case anyone comes up with a good reason why the current naming scheme was adopted. I'll add a note to Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (government departments and ministers) as further advertisement of this proposal.-gadfium 20:17, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
While I agree that Department of Conservation (New Zealand) is better than New Zealand Department of Conservation, along with most "Ministry of ..." names, I find Army (New Zealand) much less intuitive than New Zealand Army. Ditto for the New Zealand Defence Force, New Zealand Police, New Zealand Customs Service, and so on. So I think some care is needed here. -- Avenue 05:30, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The official names of some agencies such as New Zealand Police, New Zealand Customs Service, Statistics New Zealand and New Zealand Fire Service Commission include the name New Zealand, so no disambiguation is required. Similarly, agencies that use a Maori name are probably exclusively recognisable as New Zealand entities, so do not need disambiguation either. There do not appear to be specific naming conventions for military organisation but I think the normal usage is to prefix the country name to the military force, thus New Zealand Army is the prefered name. Besides, the naming conventions call for common sense. I am not proposing that articles about the organisations with New Zealand already in their official name have their titles changed. -- Cameron Dewe 09:41, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for clarifying that. The distinction wasn't obvious to me in your original proposal. -- Avenue 14:34, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Before any changes are made to the titles of existing articles I would suggest that a separate discussion be raised on each article's talk page to determine the best name for the article. -- Cameron Dewe 10:02, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with this proposal. I think that articles should be named according to the official name of the organisation in question. If the organisation's name does not include "New Zealand", then the Wikipedia artcile title should not include "New Zealand", except as a form of disambiguation (following the title, in brackets). This would mostly apply to government ministries and departments. Ronline ✉ 13:54, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have changed the red wiki links, indicating no articles exist, in the article and, lo and behold, found more oganisations. To me this suggests that others who are unaware of this page have naturally named articles following the proposed convention already. -- Cameron Dewe 09:41, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Affected articles

[edit]

The following articles appear to be affected by the proposal above to rename titles according to Wikipedia:Naming conventions (government departments and ministers).

Please discuss the renaming of these articles on their talk pages, not here. -- Cameron Dewe 11:04, 15 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Legislated name vs operational name

[edit]

Legislation in 2008 created the "New Zealand Transport Agency". But the NZTA seems to exclusively use "NZ Transport Agency". Which to use? Discussion started. Nurg (talk) 00:43, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Autonomy of New Zealand Food Safety Authority

[edit]

As of the 1st of July 2007, NZFSA was separated from MAF and gained status as an autonomous public service, this should be reflected in the list. Resonantinverter (talk) 09:02, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed, thanks.-gadfium 17:36, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

CERA

[edit]

How does the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority fit into all of this? Schwede66 07:42, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Public sector organisations in New Zealand. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:44, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Public sector organisations in New Zealand. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:14, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_public_sector_organisations_in_New_Zealand&oldid=1201456706"