Talk:Hawaii/Archive 4

message: I'm seeing a number of edits, coming from IPs without any username, that introduce the term 'kanaka maoli' and refer to 'Huna' as the Hawaiian religion. Not to mention clumsy attempts at valorizing Hawaiian oral tradition over written sources. 
Kanaka maoli means 'true human' and is an inflammatory usage. It seems to be associated mainly with Hawaiian separatist movements. The Hawaiian studies program at UH Hilo, which is much less politically polarized than the UH Manoa program, uses kanaka 'oiwi or po'e 'oiwi by preference. A political agenda (native sources over foreign) also explains the references to oral tradition. 
However, I don't understand the attempts to put Huna into the Hawai'i article. I've never even met any Hawaiian activists who would regard it as anything but a New Age scam preying on gullible hippies. Someone also put Huna into the Polynesian mythology article, from whence I uprooted it. I have written a Huna article which some of you may want to visit and perhaps edit, since I think my language may be a bit intemperate.
When I edited out a few incendiary references in the recent Hawaiian history section, I did add links to as-yet-nonexistent articles on Native Hawaiian political organizations and separatist movements. Anyone who feels VERY strongly about these issues may want to write the articles, and we can conduct internicine warfare in those talk pages :)
Zora 03:53, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I applaud your efforts. Every political subject has its radical wing, and those who live in Hawai`i are well aware of the "debate" and polarizations about which you speak.  While these people express a point of view that should certainly be heard, it is a minority view among residents and Hawaiians. Indeed, the fact that the majority of those who hold these views are not pure Hawaiian (many have no Hawaiian blood) should be a tip-off. The majority of part Hawaiians (few pure Hawaiians exist) as a group hold views every bit as diverse as those held by all other racial groups in Hawai`i.  There are Hawaiians who think hunting of introduced game takes precedence over preserving native ecosystems; there are Hawaiians involved in every economic and political stratum of our society; there are Hawaiians who want land, and there are Hawaiians that have land. Hawaiians have become a minority in their own land, and there certainly is a sadness in that fact, but of all the Pacific peoples, none is as well off as are the Hawaiians. But power is what it is always about, and everyone should simply be aware of that fact. - Marshman 05:11, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kanaka maoli -- Huna 

message: I need to edit the Hawai‘iloa article -- when I get a round tuit -- because it inaccurately elevates one of the many myths about Hawaiian origins to canonical status. I've pulled Malo, Kamakau, I‘i and Beckwith off my shelves and I'm trying to get my bearings. I think Malo (the earliest source) says it best when he says: 
"It is very surprising to hear how contradictory are the accounts given by the ancients of the origin of the land here in Hawaii." 
and earlier:
"The ancients left no records of the lands of their birth, of what people drove them out, who were their guides and leaders, of the canoes that transported them, what lands they visited in their wanderings, and what gods they worshipped."
If Malo doesn't know, who does? 
Anyway, I toned down references to Hawai‘loa in the Ancient Hawai‘i section of the main article. Also a bunch of minor edits, mostly style. 
I should add that I like what Gerald Farinas did with the oh-so-controversial Hawaiian history section, tiptoeing gently through the minefields. 
Zora 20:47, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  More on Hawai&lsquo;iloa 

message: I've been watching the debate over the ‘okina and kahako for a while now. I noticed that in the main Hawaii article, spelling switches quite frequently back and forth between "Hawaii" and "Hawai‘i".
I was wondering, when I write articles for Wikipedia, which spelling should I use? I see articles all the time written both with and without the ‘okina and am confused as to what I should do myself. Also, how should I name my articles? Should I include the ‘okina in my article titles? Should I make redirect pages using the ‘okinas to non-‘okina titled articles? Or vice versa?
I am concerned right now mainly with consistency. With different articles using different spellings, shouldn't we select a spelling and stick with it? This is just my opinion, I haven't been on Wikipedia for very long (I've only been reading articles since about January and I've only been editing them since about May) so if I'm violating some kind of Wikipedia norm here, I appologize. -Aoi
:Some debate. Conservatives vs. learners. Anyway, I'd say edit according to what you are comfortable with; but don't plan on defending your preferences to the end.  Try and learn from the changes that get made to your contributions. Consistency is an illusion with no meaning beyond this week. To "select" a spelling and stick with it is not possible or desirable. Should we select American English and stick with it? What about all the other contributors that feel their English is at least as important as American? To even strive for consistency assumes that your POV (or someone else's) is what we should follow.  Given that Wikipedia is a free and open project, consistency should not even be a consideration (following good grammer should be, but even grammer usually offers more than one option for every rule).  There is nothing consistent within a language or a culture, so why elect to support a format that is simply one point of view among many. Most readers and editors seem to accept that finding differences between American and British English constitutes a learning value provided by Wikipedia, not a battleground for consistency freaks. The same goes for this debate.  If you are from Hawai`i, you will understand the arguments; if you are not, try opening your mind to the fact that everything can be viewed a little differently from another vantage point and THAT should be your take home.  Contribute something, anything; do it how YOU like. Gain a lesson or simply broaden your mind by what others do with it. Try and protect your contribution as the "best" way, and you will only gain bitterness and align with the cadre of intellectually challenged - Marshman 04:54, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Use of &lsquo;okina in other articles 

message: See Template talk:Hawaiian. - Gilgamesh 22:22, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hawaiian dispute template dispute 

message: I hadn't been watching carefully, I guess, and some errors crept into the Hawaiian language section. 
It's misleading to say Congregationalist and Presbyterian missionaries, as that can be read as two separate efforts. They were ABCFM missionaries. THe ABCFM was ostensibly a non-denominational effort, an outgrowth of the Evangelical Revival. However, Congregationalists were the predominant force in the ABCFM and the Hawaiian church is basically, Congregationalist. 
I think I need to write an article on the missionaries ... 
It's also just WRONG to say that the missionaries used the kahak[=o] and the 'okina (excuse the shortcuts here, I'm tired). Those weren't added to Hawaiian orthography until the middle of the 20th century, I think. Which leaves a whole huge literature in Native Hawaiian, in the Hawaiian newspapers, which is printed in the old orthography and has to be UPDATED for modern readers, who often aren't native speakers. A native speaker can guess what word is meant (jst s y cn rd ths sntnc wtht vwls) but a neophyte is lost. I speak with feeling on this subject because I've just copyedited a whole #$%#$!@ book in the old orthography. (No, I don't really speak or read Hawaiian, but I was the closest Distributed Proofreaders had to an expert. My Hawaiian dictionary got a workout. DP's first Hawaiian book close to release!)
The section as it stood also suffered from a confusion of spelling and pronunciation. Understandable when Hawaiian is being revived from near-death by people who are learning from books and not immersion. 
There are some sharp editors here, so if my sleep-deprived wording is confusing, I'm sure it will be fixed. Zora 22:14, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changes to Hawaiian language section 

message: I just noticed that someone has added a link to Bumpy Kanahele's website to the external links section. Given that the other links are bland Chamber of Commerce style links, I don't think that a link to a tiny political group makes any sense. Make sure it's on the Hawaiian sovereignty page, yes; add to the main page, no. Otherwise, for fairness sake, we're going to have add links to every other political group in the islands! 
(I just did a link pruning on the Islam article, which had accumulated a page of links to various and sundry sects, imams, etc. etc. Use of Wikipedia as a tool for proselytizing is a worry.)
I'll hold off deleting the link for a day or so, so that everyone has a chance to comment. Zora 21:07, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I suppose a link would be in order on an article about that subject, but I agree with Zora, the Hawai‘i main article is NOT the place. It amounts to advertising a cause. - Marshman 02:14, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nation of Hawai'i in links? 

message: Can anyone find a map that illustrates Hawaii's position in the Pacific?  Right now all that the map conveys is that Hawaii is located in a box off the coast of Mexico, right next to Alaska.  Fishal 23:13, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map 

message: In the second paragraph, the article states that Hawaii is one of only two US States that has a non-Caucasian majority. What is the other US state? According to the other state articles on Wikipedia, no other state (as of the 2000 census) has a ethnic/racial population where whites were not the majority.
Does anyone have any definitive arguments as to why this statement shouldn't be amended?
:The other state is California.  The census data shows that California has only 46.7% non-Hispanic white.   --KeithH 07:29, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Heh, I might have guessed New Mexico. - Gilgamesh 08:06, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm...that's interesting.  Gotta check the census website.  California is the one that gets all the news.  - KeithH 07:11, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hawaii as one of two states where Caucasians are not majority? 

message: Considering the length of the article (if it reaches approximately 33 kb, some editors using older computers are locked out from editing the page), I think there needs to be serious considerations in deleting some information that might not be necessary.  For example, I question the need to list the "25 Richest Places in Hawaii" and a list of unwikified crime stories in the trivia section that even most Hawaii residents don't know about.  --Gerald Farinas 14:41, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, you are right. We need to start moving things off to their own pages. Although the two examples you give are, I agree, not much of a contribution to this article, their removal will not make enough difference towards reducing the size to make such a move worth while.  I'd suggest looking to one or more of the larger subsections and use to start another article. Also, is it necessary to have a several paragraph "summary" of say History, when there is a whole article and more on the subject elsewhere.  I'm not suggesting "History" be the first to reduce, but consider some "less popular" subjects like Media in Hawaii to expand out to a separate article leaving only a prominent link behind.  That will make progress to getting the article back under 33 kb. Chipping away at statements you do not like simply won't achieve what you are seeking - Marshman 19:00, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the housecleaning, Marshman. Zora 20:31, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

text: Thanks. We got more to go if we want to get the article size down as Gerald suggests. - Marshman 03:58, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

text: I think that was a good candidate to move as Gerald suggested.  I was really commenting on the one liner under Trivia and similar changes that are more cosmetic than size reducing.- Marshman 18:09, 3 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Length 

message: I just removed a link to a travel agency. There's another recently added link about which I'm not quite sure. Someone has added a link to the Hawai'i page of Terragalleria, a commercial photographer's website. They're nice pictures, but if we link to every commercial photographer who displays Hawai'i photos ... 
I left the link there. I am not sure what to do. Feedback? Zora 04:37, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. I think when it comes to pictures only, there is not much reason for Wikipedia to maintain a link to such sites. In general, Wikipedia discourages outside links, although many are retained because they do provide additional useful information. But we should always be working towards having that information internal. Google, Yahoo, and similar websites are set up to get people to such sites; not Wikipedia. I removed the link. - Marshman 07:20, 8 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links 

message: Is there enough of a debate over the naming conventions to have to hunker down and compile a comprehensive Wikipedia:Manual of Style for Hawaii-related articles.  I think it would be helpful if we can codify some type of fixed outline of how all Hawaii-related articles should be treated in terms of naming conventions, proper use of 'okina and kahako and what not.  Anyone agree? Disagree? -Jamie
:I would agree.  If Japanese transliteration conventions are allowed to have their way, then Hawaiian transliteration conventions should too.  Especially, the nuances of difference between the use of "Hawaii" and "Hawai‘i" should be clearly stated.  Though they have the same etymology, in Hawai‘i convention they are separate words for the contexts they are used. - Gilgamesh 00:54, 29 July 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia has its WikiProjects where standard guidelines for categories of articles are documented.  I noticed Texas has a WikiProject page.  Perhaps we should have a WikiProject Hawaii and document these guidelines and style conventions? - KeithH 07:27, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Manual of Style for Hawaii-related articles