Talk:Fort Takapuna

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC
	This article was accepted from this draft on 21 October 2024 by reviewer Bkissin (talk · contribs).

Architecture

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

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

Auckland Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

O peretu

@Ewhite31 O Peretu is the name of the headland but isn't the fort itself. [1] Traumnovelle (talk) 19:48, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is the name given by Heritage New Zealand for this historic place. [1] Please put forward an RM request so that this name change can be discussed. Ewhite31 (talk) 20:24, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Heritage New Zealand only uses the name in the registration—in the actual text of their report they refer to the fort as 'Fort Takapuna'. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:31, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 21 October 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 - Consensus not to move, based on accuracy, conciseness, and naturalness grounds. No need to relist since no comments have been made in the past week. FOARP (talk) 14:52, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fort Takapuna → Fort Takapuna O Peretu – I am proposing that the name is returned to Fort Takapuna O Peretu, in line with the naming conventions of Heritage New Zealand register for it as a category one historic place. [1]. This location and the structures upon it have been known by many names over the years, as can be seen from this New Zealand Herald article announcing the opening of the Department of Conservation Historic Reserve in 2000.[2] While O Peretu refers to the headland specifically, Fort Takapuna has been used to refer quite narrowly to the 1886 fort building and also broadly to the structures across the headland including the current Naval base that is not part of the historic reserve. Rather than removing O Peretu from the title, I propose including a section about the changing names of this location, its structures, and earlier histories of the headland. I would also like to note that O Peretu Fort Takapuna or Fort Takapuna O Peretu is being used increasingly frequently to refer to the reserve, e.g. [3] Thanks, Ewhite31 (talk) 20:58, 21 October 2024 (UTC)— Relisting. —usernamekiran (talk) 18:40, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will note if this is closed as on consensus it should be returned to the original title, I did not imagine this would be controversial when I moved this.

edit: I will also note that per WP:CRITERIA Fort Takapuna is the better title. More precise, more concise, and more natural.

Oppose Many articles on Heritage listed places use a different title to the one registered by Heritage New Zealand.

This is an article on the fort itself, which is known as Fort Takapuna in all the other sources used in the article and in the actual text of the Heritage NZ report which uses just 'Fort Takapuna'. The reserve is known as Fort Takapuna / O Peretu but this isn't an article on the reserve.

The NZ Herald article is about Takapuna Head not Fort Takapuna (which isn't mentioned in the article) which is further evidence O Peretu refers to the headland.

The DOC page for the fort [2] states: 'O Peretu is the ancient name for this headland' Traumnovelle (talk) 21:19, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. The article is specifically about the fort, not the headland. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 22:20, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support - As a category 1 historic place it is recorded by the crown entity Pouhere Taonga Heritage New Zealand on the Rārangi Kōrero as Fort Takapuna / O Peretu.

Pouhere Taonga have used this nomenclature recognising that the fort and headland are part of the same place. The fort is contained within the headland. Adopting the new name over its long-established name would therefore be inappropriate. Tirotai (talk) 01:40, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Per Traumnovelle and Derby. Article is about the fort and not the headland. --Spekkios (talk) 19:58, 30 October 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.