Image Issue: The most minor not issue with one of the images in the article. The carved gateway image did have a creative commons license but it didn't have the notice that the image was allowed as part of the freedom of panorama under New Zealand law. It is and this is a non-issue but I still wanted to note it. Dr vulpes(💬 • 📝) 02:50, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delay: I am still working on this but will be gone for the next couple of days and will not have reliable internet access. I do plan to finish this when I get back. Pinging @Wainuiomartian: to keep them in the loop. Dr vulpes(💬 • 📝) 14:22, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There are statements that need an in line reference.
After European settlement, the island was known for over a century as Somes Island. In 1839 it fell under the control of the New Zealand Company along with much of the greater Wellington region. The island was renamed after Joseph Somes, the company's deputy-governor and financier at the time.
Added further citations in the Toponymy section.Marshelec (talk) 21:25, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The island is 24.9 hectares (62 acres) in area, and lies 3 kilometres (1.9 mi) south of the suburb of Petone and the mouth of the Hutt River.
Added two citations for area of the island, and distance from Petone. Marshelec (talk) 08:55, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Matiu / Somes Island is about 5 kilometres (3 mi) northwest of the much smaller Mākaro / Ward Island.
Added a new citation to support this statement.Marshelec (talk) 08:44, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Wellington Harbour and the surrounding landforms are a product of tectonic activity.
Added a citation to recent book by Hayward. Marshelec (talk) 08:03, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
At various times throughout the 19th and 20th centuries the island hosted quarantine facilities for both human immigrants and animals, and enemy alien internees during wartime.
This is a single sentence that introduces the five sub-sections that follow. Content in each of those sub-sections is supported with citations. I don't consider this introductory sentence requires a citation. A possible option is just to delete the sentence.Marshelec (talk) 08:09, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
n 2009, ownership of the island was transferred to the Māori collective Taranaki Whānui ki Te Upoko o Te Ika. The transfer of ownership was part of cultural redress for Taranaki Whānui included in the settlement of their claims against the Crown for breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi. Following the passing of the 'Port Nicholson Block (Taranaki Whānui ki Te Upoko o Te Ika) Claims Settlement Act 2009', the island is owned by the trustees of the Port Nicholson Block Settlement Trust.
This one is has a source but it's WP:PRIMARY. I'm not saying get rid of it, but just find a secondary source to support it. I know some people get picky about primary sources but as long as they are supporting secondary sources they're fine.
Added citations of two reports from the US News service, from August 2008 and July 2009, about the settlement with Taranaki Whanui.Marshelec (talk) 07:27, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think you get the idea of what I'm talking about, the article has good sources it's honestly pretty impressive. It just needs to be fleshed out a bit and expanded.
Are these sources reliable? I'm not sure if Scoop is a reliable source but if it is just let me know.
ref76?
Scoop often publishes Press releases, so is frequently a form of primary source. I have added further citation of a secondary source from Stuff about relocation of the birds. (Other citations listed now go up by one number). :)Marshelec (talk) 07:11, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ref89?
This is a published Press release from the NZ Government. It is effectively a primary source, but the content is not controversial. The main use in the article is just to confirm the date of the launch of the trust. This makes a useful contribution to the article.Marshelec (talk) 07:11, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ref100?
Replaced with secondary source. Marshelec (talk) 07:11, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The system flags ref79 as not being reliable because it's from Research Gate. Don't worry about it, I know it's not a preprint and that it's from a peer reviewed article but was just uploaded there.
@Dr vulpes and Wainuiomartian: I have now responded to all the GA review comments to this point. The article is ready for further review.Marshelec (talk) 21:25, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
