Jump to content

Talk:Hawaii/Archive 10

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5←Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10

Missionaries on Hawaii

"Ezra T. Benson appeared to have been the earliest Mormon missionary to the islands." Appears in the article with no apparent basis or relevance. The article mentions several denominations sending missionaries to Hawaii; then goes on to mention a random tidbit that Ezra T. Benson appeared to be the first Mormon missionary. I don't see any reason for this to be included, especially considering the wording casts some doubt as to whether or not the fact is even true or sourced, and the fact that the other denominations' first missionaries are ignored. TooManyWombats (talk) 18:07, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

@TooManyWombats: your instincts should lead you to remove the unsourced material and place it here in this section. My instincts make me wonder if the editor who added it confused Benson with Walter M. Gibson. Viriditas (talk) 21:59, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
I had some free time, so I removed it.[1] Viriditas (talk) 23:13, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

OK thanks, sorry for the confusion I caused I am new to Wikipedia editing and was unsure of the exact procedure. TooManyWombats (talk) 01:01, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

No worries. You did good. Viriditas (talk) 01:06, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Official Languages

I may be mistaken but English and Hawaiian are the only official languages. Can the others listed be removed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.65.9.154 (talk) 04:24, 19 September 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 October 2014

In the Gallery 4 island photo captions are misspelled: Kauaʻi, Molokaʻi, Lānaʻi and Hawaiʻi. 2605:E000:EFC0:78:6490:B5C0:D8E3:6A (talk) 01:22, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Done! Peaceray (talk) 02:55, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 October 2014

In the Gallery 4 island name captions are misspelled with the last letter dropped from Kaua'i, Moloka'i, Lana'i and Hawai'i so please change:

Done! Peaceray (talk) 02:55, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

2605:E000:EFC0:78:6490:B5C0:D8E3:6A (talk) 01:54, 23 October 2014 (UTC) Thank you and Aloha!

Done! Peaceray (talk) 02:55, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Pre-History

Is there any evidence of the prehistory of hawaii dating back to mayan times? It would be interesting to see if it truly did belong to the japanese before it was annexed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:A:3E01:A560:89B6:E805:3586:F1 (talk) 13:17, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

The UN have been very clear that the military coup and occupation and subsequent misdirection and implied duress make the application for statehood questionable and that Hawaii has been denied self determination. Why is this not discussed on a page about Hawaii? Is the US concete that everyone is fine about this or is this another example of misleading to rule? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.30.132.216 (talk) 15:07, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

This is not an issue I've seen taken seriously in the US, and there has been little acknowledgement of it or attempts to redress it from Hawaii or the US. It's not something that needs more than a brief sentence or two. Scarlettail (talk) 17:06, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
More should be said about this and other related issues, such as the Akaka Bill. A paragraph should cover the topic nicely. Viriditas (talk) 07:14, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
If there isn't any mainstream news coverage of the issue, than unfortunately it would be considered WP:SYNTHESIS

Comments on the article

This article is interesting to read but it could be improved and expanded. I made several corrections to punctuation, major layout improvements and here are my comments:

1. "In contrast, the National and State Parks Services, the University of Hawaiʻi, and some private entities, including a local newspaper". I see somebody is also wondering which one.

2. "Historical records indicated that the earliest Chinese immigrants came from Guangdong province, beginning with a few sailors in 1778 with Captain Cook's journey, followed by more in 1788 with Kaina". I see somebody is also wondering who Kaina is.

3. "In the 1950s, the power of the plantation owners was finally broken by the descendants of immigrant laborers". I think a better explanation of what broken means wound be acceptable.

4. The comparison with New Jersey in the "Population" section is to say the least unnecessary.

5. "The Hawaiian population changed dramatically after Europeans arrived". This could really be used to expand and create a paragraph on the topic. On its own it's not very informative.

6. "In 1970, the Census Bureau reported Hawaii's population as 38.8% white and 57.7% Asian and Pacific Islander". The table above contradicts the information in the table above.

7. "The third group of foreigners to arrive upon Hawaii's shores, after those from Polynesia and Europe, was from China". This is only true if Italy and France are not being considered part of Europe (which they are).

8. "Food exports include coffee (see coffee production in Hawaii), macadamia nuts, pineapple, livestock, sugarcane, and both honey and honey bees". Honey bees are not food!

9. Why is that the idiotic Merchant Marine Act of 1920 is still in place? If it makes life more expensive why doesn't the government of Hawai'i pass some legislation to eliminate it?

10. The "Cuisine of Hawaii" section really needs some work. It should be improved with more explanations and descriptions.

11. "Local folklore on the island of Oahu says that one should never carry pork over the Pali Highway connecting Honolulu and Windward Oahu". What's the reason?

12. The "Hawaiian mythology" section could be expanded with more information and a better description.

13. "Latest research puts the settlement of New Zealand at about 1300 AD. The various Polynesian languages are all part of the Austronesian language family. Many are close enough in terms of vocabulary and grammar to permit communication between some other language speakers". Is that true? What specific languages would those be?

14. The "Public schools" section says "more rural Neighbor Islands". Is capitalization necessary? I don't think so.

15. "The state government of Hawaii is modeled after the federal government with adaptations originating from the kingdom era of Hawaiian history". What are the adaptations?

ICE77 (talk) 04:45, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi ICE77, all of your points are so valid and on point. I'm going to take the time in the next few days to address these points and make the changes you desire. I was the one who added many of the inline clarification templates because I wondered the same things you were while reading it, and I myself was born and raised in Hawaii. If you have more feedback, I'm happy to read it! The Obento Musubi (talk · contribs) 23:58, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

Race and ethnicity

The table under this heading in the article lists white ethnicity on top. While white neither alphabetically nor numerically is in order. The rest of the ethnicities appear to be in numerical order. Any particular reason for this? I am relatively inexperiences on wikipedia that is why instead of changing it right away I have decided to ask. Rafiullah (talk) 17:19, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

I'm willing to do the requested peer review

I was just looking at the Wikipedia Peer Review project and see that this article has a pending peer review request. I'll take it on. I'll gather some sources, read through the article from top to bottom, and then make some suggestions. Best wishes on bringing this article up to good article status and then to featured article status. The high number of page views for this article shows the importance of the topic. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 15:31, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Okay, I've been gathering sources, and reviewing the good article criteria, so I will try to honor the work that has already been put into this article by making constructive suggestions and doing some of the direct editing of the article text that is needed as I go along. I can see now that we will have to figure out how to find and describe many of the cited sources more exactly. That's an issue I'm especially fussy about in any article I edit--how to point future readers to the sources so that they can find them in libraries or bookstores or online. But this is quite an interesting article already, and well deserves (on the basis of its topic importance) to gain a promotion to good article status after some more revision. I will keep watching it until long after it eventually reaches the Wikipedia main page as a featured article, which I hope is sooner rather than later. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 15:39, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 April 2015

In the History section of this page there is the following paragraph: Historical records indicated that the earliest Chinese immigrants came from Guangdong province, beginning with a few sailors in 1778 with Captain Cook's journey and followed by some in 1789 with an American trader[who?] who settled in Hawaii in the late 18th century.[citation needed] I have found the "who" requested in the edit parenthesis but not the support of the information that is the subject of the sentence. Captain Robert Gray of the Columbia landed at Hawaii on August 24th, 1789 which is found on page 167 of Boston Traders in Hawaiian Islands by S.E.Morrison. Mr Morrison himself cites the Boston Columbian Centinel newspaper, August 11, 1790 as his source for the information. There is no mention of Chinese crew. Mr Morrison does discuss how this is the first landing of an American at the Hawaiian Islands so perhaps this should be removed from the discussion of the first Chinese to settle in Hawaii and added as separate information elsewhere. Also, there is no information that Capt. Gray settled in Hawaii.

Montylu (talk) 02:59, 22 April 2015 (UTC)Montylu

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 14:10, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

High tempo of recent changes--good work

I see that a couple of very active editors are making a lot of changes to this article. I also see that the previous brief peer review has been archived, and the recent edits are responding to that peer review. The goal mentioned by one editor was for this article to pass good article review after changes have updated it to a stable, well edited version. I was originally interested in doing the requested peer review (taken up by another editor, in the end) and I've been looking for sources that give an overview of the article topic. Since I have not made many changes to the article yet, I'd be willing either to do (1) a second peer review after the last round of edits is complete, or (2) a good article review if the article is submitted for good article review by agreement of active editors here. But before I did either, I'd like to make sure I have access to some good reliable sources about the state of Hawaii and the main subtopics touched on in this article to check the article thoroughly. What sources do all of you recommend that are either available online (not a Wikipedia source requirement, at all, but a convenience for checking the article) or in major public or academic libraries on the United States mainland, where I am based? I'm happy to use interlibrary loan requests, visits to huge local libraries, or specialized online databases to check sources to make sure that this article passes GA review and is well prepared to eventually become a featured article. Please suggest sources in replies here, and I will pursue them. Keep up the good work. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 15:46, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

Ah, wonderful! Thank you for your interest in contributing, WeijiBaikeBianji. Personally, as someone who lives in Hawaii and have been from the islands, I've been wanting more of an emphasis on sociopolitical, socioeconomic, and historical context. I find it makes the article much more interesting and multidisciplinary. One resource that may prove to be valuable to you would be The Value of Hawaii and its successor, The Value of Hawaii 2. Both books are anthologies of works written by very knowledgeable and thoughtful people, and both books are published by the University of Hawaii Press. I think most books published by the UH Press would be great with regard to Hawaii, and if we can make that perspective and information more accessible to the public, that would be awesome. Thanks again! The Obento Musubi (t · c) 06:22, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Okay, I see how I can get those two volumes electronically, and that should lead me to some other sources. Thanks for the suggestion. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk, how I edit) 12:21, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 May 2015

I have more info. on Hawaii that I would like to share. Zaq123007 (talk) 18:38, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Not done: Hi Zaq123007! Wikipedia would always be glad to have more volunteers, but unfortunately this article has been a frequent target of vandalism, so editing by newly registered users has been disabled. If you have a specific fact you'd like to add, write it down here in the format "change XXX to YYY" or "after the text ZZZ add new text WWW", reactivate this request, and we will be happy to make the change for you–just be sure to be specific, or otherwise we may not be able to understand your requested edit. If you would like the ability to edit this article yourself, please make at least nine more edits over four days and you'll be able to edit semi-protected articles like this one. Best, Altamel (talk) 19:05, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 June 2015

I would like to contribute to add the following External Link, which provides information about the islands in multiple languages (available in English, Japanese, Chinese, Korean, Filipino, German, French, Portuguese, Spanish ...)

Alskol1 (talk) 15:58, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

 Not done that is a promotional site selling tours etc. - Arjayay (talk) 18:22, 30 June 2015 (UTC)

Race and ethnic groups and national origin groups in Hawaii

I see there is active editing on this article related to race, ethnicity, and national origin of inhabitants of Hawaii. All official statistics on this issue are constrained by official definitions and procedures imposed on the United States Census by regulations that originated in other agencies. I'll check the edits after all of you have looked over that section of this article and may link to some of the Census publications for the official definitions. Keep up the good work; this article should be well on its way to becoming a good article here on Wikipedia. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (Watch my talk, How I edit) 21:06, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Hawaii. 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 07:07, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Decrease of population before colonialism?

Whence? --Hellsepp (talk) 00:20, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Japanese Immigration to Hawaii

How about adding this to your Article:

"Information about the first Japanese immigrants in Hawaii including where they came from and why they moved to Hawaii.

In 1868 a group of approximately 150 Japanese contract laborers arrived in Hawaii. The immigration was not considered a success, because Japan was unhappy about their treatment. Two years later an agreement was reached for those workers to return to Japan, but in actuality, only about 40 returned to their homeland and the rest chose to remain in Hawaii.

In 1885 Hawaii and Japan resolved issues related to the treatment of Japanese workers in Hawaii, and that year The first major immigration from Japan began. (It's interesting to note that the 100th anniversary of Japanese immigration was celebrated in Hawaii 1985.)

By 1902 there were more then 30,000 Japanese plantation workers in Hawaii.

By 1893, nearly 70% of the plantation workers in Hawaii were Japanese.

The "Bayonet Constitution" of 1887 denied Hawaiian citizenship to all Asians.

In 1894 private companies were allowed to take over recruiting Japanese laborers for Hawaii and 57,000 more Japanese arrived in Hawaii between 1894 and 1900.

When contract labor in Hawaii was prohibited after Hawaii became a U.S. territory, many of Hawaii's Japanese immigrants immigrated to the U.S. mainland where wages were twice what they were in Hawaii.

Executive Order stops migration of Japanese laborers from Hawaii, Mexico and Canada to the United States on March 14, 1907.

In 1908 a "Gentlemen's Agreement" restricted Japanese immigration to the United States.

In 1909 the Japanese laborers went on strike but they lost.

In 1920 the Japanese and Filipinos organized a strike for higher wages. They lost that strike, but they learned to work together for the common good.

Between 1885 and 1924 approximately 200,000 Japanese immigrated to Hawaii, most of them to work on Hawaii's sugar plantations.

In 1924 the United States prohibited further immigration from Japan.

In 1935 the Onomea (Plantation) Camps were segregated into Japanese, Filipino,and Portuguese camps"

[1]

98.155.233.1 (talk) 00:22, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Hawaii. 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 10:02, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Renewable Alternative Energy

Renewable Alternative Energy Sugarcane Mills

Since the start of the Kingdom and or Territory of Hawaii's Sugar Industry of 1802, the Hawaii Sugar Mills provided some form of Renewable Alternative Energy, as the burning of sugarcane refuse to power the steam boiler Railroads of Hawaii.[2]

Later on the Hawaii Sugar Mills provided Electricity to the Plantation Towns that sprang up around the Hawaii Sugar Mills; clean Burning Biomasse instead of very expensive to transport dirty Coal; Biogasse instead of toxic poisonous explosive Methane aka "Natural Gas"; a form of Bio Diesel; 100% Ethanol aka E-100 as liguid Fuel for Motor Vehicles; purified water from the steam boilers; and of course sugar with lots of jobs (employment, work).[3]

During World War One, most Oil and Coal were diverted to the War Effort at Europe, with the Hawaii Sugar Mills providing Electricity to Honolulu, Oahu Hawaii's Mass Transit of Electric "Street Cars"; liquid fuel as 100% Ethanol for Hawaii's Cars and Trucks. Hawaii's Railroads used compressed sugarcane fiber bricks instead of Coal.

World War Two, once again most Oil and Coal were diverted to the War Effort both at the Pacific including U.S. Navy Pearl Harbor, and the War Effort at Europe. Again the Hawaii Sugar Mills provided Electricity, fuel of 100% Ethanol for Hawaii's Cars and Trucks and even U.S. Military Vehicles.

At one time the Oil Corporations got involved with Hawaii, 1831, resulting in the installation of Oil Burning Electric Generators being installed; as the start of the Hawaii Electric Corporations.[4]

In 1959 the Nation of Brazil adopted the Hawaii Alternative Energy Solution, as the "Brazil Solution" to provide the Nation of Brazil with Renewable Electrictiy, Renewable liquid fuel for vehicles. With the Export of Sugar to the U.S. becoming one of the Nation of Brazil's main Economies; as later replaced by Brazil's Exports of Oil to the U.S.. [5]

Once the For Profit Electric Corporations got involved, they would lobby the Hawaii Politicians to end the Hawaii Sugar Mills being the primary source of the U.S. Island State of Hawaii's Electricity.[6]

In 1937 as Pacific City Lines (PCL) and also 1938 National City Lines (NCL) would buy up most Renewable Energy Powered Mass Transit at the U.S. Cities Nationwide, and then tore all of these down, and replaced these Renewable Alternative Energy Mass Transit Systems with General Motors Buses, on Firestone Tires, and Standard Oil of California Fuel, as lubricated by Phillips Petroleum oils and greases. The Renewable Alternative Energy Sugar Mill powered Honolulu Electric Mass Transit Street Cars were scraped. [7]

Renewable Alternative Energy Horizontal Axis Wind Turbines (HAWT)

During the 1970s Oil Crisis, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration built an Experimental Horizontal Axis Wind Turbine (HAWT) Farm at the "North Shore" of Kahuku Oahu Hawaii.[8]

After the NASA Experiment 1988 the NASA HAWT Farm was turned over to the HECO and the State of Hawaii, the State of Hawaii allowed the NASA HAWT Farm to go into disrepair from until failure. Eventually, costing the State of Hawaii lots of money to completely remove all the debris as an "eye sore".[9]

Later on this Kahuku HAWT Farm was rebuilt by First Wind using the same HAWT Technology at a very high cost to Hawaii Taxpayers of $117 MillionCite error: A <ref> tag is missing the closing </ref> (see the help page).

Renewable Alternative Energy Solar Photovoltaic (PV)

Since the 1970s many "Survivalists", "Hunters with Hunting Lodges", etc. built "Off the Grid" Solar Photovoltaic Systems for their cabins, Hunting Lodges, that were not connected to the Local Electric Corporation's "Grid". As using common Deep Cycle Marine type wet cell Batteries and later on Electric Golf Cart Batteries for Electrical Storage. As modern Solar Photovolatic originally developed by NASA [10]

This would later catch on at the U.S. Island State of Hawaii. As Residential Solar Photovoltaic.

The Monopoly Hawaiian Electric Corporation admits why they are defeating Residential Solar Photovoltaic as a significant loss of Profits as "Increased use of EVs gives electrical utilities a new market and could help replace lost demand (Lost HECO Profits) due to rooftop solar and greater energy efficiency." HECO’s Oshima said [11]. While Monopoly HECO (For Profit Corporation) demands the Hawaii Public Utilites Commission (PUC) approvals for HECO Solar Photovoltaic Farms at the same areas that HECO Claims has "Grid Saturation" to deny the installation of more Residential Solar Photovoltaic at the same areas of Waipio (next door to Mililani, HECO claimed "Grid Staturation"), Lanikuhana (HECO Claimed "Grid Saturation" at Mililani). [12] Nakamuradavid (talk) 01:17, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Additions to European Arrival Section

Under European Arrival

Captain Cook arrived during the festival of the Hawaiian goddess of fertility named Lono[13]. To the Hawaiians, seeing such strange ships and people convinced them to believe that these people could have been gods. The British used this advantage to possibly gain valuables that normally wouldn’t be accessible to the average person. It wasn’t until one of the British crewmen died that that the Hawaiians had seen that these people were no greater than them[14].

Cook and the Missionaries interactions with the Hawaiian people have done significant damage to the population. A census of done in 1853 showed a population count of 71,019 native Hawaiians[15]. Compared to the initial population of 300,000 during Cooks arrival, this is a decrease in nearly three quarts of the population within 75 years. There was no previous immunity to the diseases which included small pox, measles, and many others. According to the census of 1900, foreigners made up 59 percent of the total population [16].

Under Languages

Since the Arrival of Missionaries, the English language was being taught to the local Hawaiians. American schools have been built to teach everyone the language which in turn standardized the learning among all people[17]. English then became the primary language and was regularly used for business, government, and diplomacy[18]. Missionaries didn’t initially intend for this to happen. At first, they preferred to use Hawaiian to preserver the native culture[19]. But with the construction of new schools and a law requiring children to attend, Missionaries changed their goal to support English teaching within schools[20]. Literacy for the Hawaiian population improved, but varied differently between other ethnicities[21]. Of the other groups, Portuguese and Puerto Ricans were more likely to speak English than to write it while vice versa was seen with Chinese, Japanese and Koreans who were able to write it better than speak it[22].

Pjfreedom (talk) 11:57, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Jones Act

The Jones Act section of Cost of Living does not adhere to neutral point of view. There are facts counter to the assertions made in this section. See below for articles providing an alternative view. Since this subject is unsettled, the Jones Act section should be removed or at least rewritten to reflect a balanced point of view. http://www.americanmaritimepartnership.com/2015/04/27/myth-and-conjecture-the-cost-of-the-jones-act/ http://www.americanmaritimepartnership.com/2014/07/07/heritage-foundation-missed-boat-recent-jones-act-report/ http://www.americanmaritimepartnership.com/2015/08/24/amp-issues-letter-to-house-on-the-jones-act-in-puerto-rico/ http://www.maritime-executive.com/article/marad-and-uscg-defend-jones-act-in-congressional-hearing http://www.bizjournals.com/pacific/blog/2015/12/howsen-daniel-inouye-answered-the-hawaii-shippers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohm monster (talk • contribs) 08:00, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

No these are press releases or blogs issued by interested parties. that = POV Wikipedia instead relies on independent reliable secondary sources. Rjensen (talk) 08:16, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

See also the GAO reports, which also calls into question the assertions made in this section. Besides the references linked in support of the assertions are broken or reporting opinions. http://www.gao.gov/products/RCED-88-107 http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-13-260 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohm monster (talk • contribs) 18:50, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Etymology

In several of the Polynesian accounts of ancient Hawaiki/Savai'i, etc. they all refer to this place as an ancient homeland of our ancestors. Someone erroneously wrote that the meaning means homeland. Had anyone done a simple search for home or reference to homeland that they would have found cognates all referring to the same thing, and "Hawaii" is not on there at all. It simply refers to it as the homeland, not that the word itself actually means that.

Is there anyone else other than myself who actually speaks the language here? It would be nice to get someone with actual knowledge of the language and other Polynesian languages (My Maori & Tahitian is low beginner level) to provide insight on these wiki pages pertaining to our ancestors' language. Naeakanae (talk) 14:20, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 August 2016

Incorrect formatting of bulleted list under "List of state parks"

PeterNem (talk) 20:35, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Done Topher385 (talk) 20:58, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Hawaii. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 22:12, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Article Evaluation

1. Some source seems to be out of date because I cannot access to the website when I click on the link. 2. The rest of the source are mainly from reliable website. 3. I think the article is neutral. Even though it talks about democratic and republican in the section of politics but it doesn't include any bias here. It just gave me a historical introduction about how is the politics in Hawaii in these years.JIAFU (talk) 10:29, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 15 March 2017

The column width or margins are incorrect on the Hawaii page. It overlaps on the left side and when you print it is cut off because of this. Thank you. 174.255.219.192 (talk) 16:53, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

When you printed, did you try adjusting the scale from 100% to, say, 75%? This option might be available in a print preview area. Or, if you're printing from Chrome, you might try adjusting the margins in the print preview section. CityOfSilver 16:57, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
I've tried both the printable version and the PDF - both print fine for me - albeit the PDF is missing the tables and graphs, but this is a known problem.
174.255.219.192 are you trying to print direct from the screen? or are you using the "printable version" or "Download as PDF" from the Left hand column? (I admit I don't know if IPs get the "Download as PDF" option) - Arjayay (talk) 13:09, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

You can grow coffee in Florida

This article says that coffee is only cutivable in hawaii. Florida has a warm climate and can produce coffee too. Please delete that or give some citation and change it. Maybe its commercially grown only in hawaii but cultivable certainly in florida. thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.57.157.218 (talk) 06:32, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Would you provide a citation from a reliable source verifying that farmers, not just gardeners, are growing coffee in Florida? Peaceray (talk) 06:52, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Hawaii vs. Hawai'i

It appears that at least some state actors are using Hawai'i nowadays. I'm not sure of the extent of it but see State v Curtis at http://www.courts.state.hi.us/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/SCWC-12-0000133.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.87.143.34 (talk) 13:04, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Hawaii. 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) 13:59, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Cost of living

The Jones Act paragraphs under the Cost of Living section is opinion and analysis and is in any event wrong. One of the citation links is dead and others are news articles that report someone's opinion in opposition to the Jones Act, but, also provide counterpoints that would refute the analysis contained in this Wikipedia article (but are conveniently ignored). The analysis, regarding what is permissible under the Jones Act, arguably should not be in an encyclopedia article unless a citation can be found that supports the conclusion and not just someone's opinion. The current citations do not. In fact, it is entirely permissible for a foreign ship to transport cargo, originating from a foreign port, to Hawaii. For example a ship transporting cargo from Hong Kong to Los Angeles can stop in Hawaii on the way and discharge some cargo; this is allowed under the Jones Act! However, what is not allowed is the foreign ship taking cargo from Los Angeles and delivering it to Hawaii. The real reason foreign ships do not typically stop in Hawaii, on the way to the West Coast, is because Hawaii is not located on major shipping routes from Asia to the US west coast; you see a map of shipping routes here: https://www.shipmap.org/. Because of the geometry of the earth, taking a route that veers north or south of the the equator tends to shorten the overall distance; see great circle route article for details: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great-circle_navigation.

Hawaii is not a very large market, therefore, the economics of shipping to Hawaii, especially if a ships has to go out of the way are not good (i.e. fuel costs, port and pilot fees, etc.). A stop in Hawaii would also increase the overall shipment time which would be discouraged by freight forwarders who would penalize shipping companies that took this route (by not consigning freight to a slower route unless the rate was discounted which means the shipping company would have to gain back the loss by charging a higher rate to the Hawaiian bound shipments, negating some of the lower costs underlying the anti-Jones Act arguments)

What is also not discussed in the Coast of Living Section is that removing the Jones Act, or at least exempting Hawaii, would not necessarily encourage foreign ships to delivery cargo on a consistent or cheaper basis, for the reasons stated above. Instead US shipping to Hawaii would become inconsistent under foreign pressure and market uncertainties leaving Hawaii at the complete mercy of international trade patterns and market conditions; since Hawaii is not a large market or a higher value exporter it is likely Hawaii would suffer periods of disruptions and price volatility (sometime shipments would be cheaper but mostly more expensive).

A good explanation of what the Jones Act actually permits can be found here: http://www.hawaiifreepress.com/ArticlesMain/tabid/56/ID/10736/Jones-Act-Does-Not-Bar-International-Trade-From-Hawaii.aspx — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.100.21.107 (talk) 22:24, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

I took a look at the section mentioned and I do agree that it doesn't seem to be written with a NPOV. I agree the section should rewritten with better citations (definitely not with a legislative resolution). 青い(Aoi) (talk) 01:00, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Hawaii. 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) 10:21, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Neutrality tag on "Overthrow of 1893"

This section had a neutrality tag on it starting 2015. The tag said that relevant discussion and statement of issues could be found on this page. I don't see any discussion at all, and no issues have been brought up, two years later. I think we should be fair here. I saw nothing whatever non-neutral in this section. I can only presume there was something and it was taken out. It struck me someone might object to "overthrow." It is a perfectly good word and seems to fit. The lawful queen was removed from her rule against her will. Moreover, the form of government was changed, against her will. I cannot see how that is anything else but an overthrow in English. So, in the absence of discussion and issues and after checking it myself I conclude that whatever the problem was is solved. I therefore am removing the tag.Botteville (talk) 22:47, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Request for citations on the "Culture" section

As far as I can see, no citations are needed here. There is nothing to cite. This is only a sentence or two introducing the main article, as it should be. It there are any citations, they should be in the "main." In addition to that there are some blue links, which typically stand in place of a citation. The only thing actually said in this intro is that two Hawaian customs are known also in the mainland US, luau and hula. We don't need a citation to tell us that! It is common knowledge. This useless citation request has been on there since 2013. I think maybe the section must have been longer but was moved to a "main." I am taking this opportunity to remove this obsolete request.Botteville (talk) 00:44, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Intro

Currently, the intro makes the following statements:

  • Hawaii is the newest U.S. state
  • Hawaii is the only U.S. state located in Oceania
  • Hawaii is the only U.S. state located outside North America
  • Hawaii is the only U.S. state composed entirely of islands
  • Hawaii is the only U.S. state with an Asian plurality

How about mentioning two more distinctive and distinguishing features:

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Hawaii. 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) 10:00, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Hawaii correct size

All countries and territories have their size defined by the total of their land mass. For Hawaii, the data here is including water area, which is incorrect.

"Hawaii is a chain of 132 islands, eight of which are considered principal islands. These include Hawaii (4028 square miles), Maui (727 square miles), Oahu (597 square miles), Kauai (562 square miles), Molokai (260 square miles), Lanai (140 square miles), Niihau (69 square miles), and Kahoolawe (45 square miles)."

Total: 6,423 square miles = 16,635 square kilometers

https://www.thoughtco.com/smallest-states-in-the-united-states-4071971

http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/namerica/usstates/hilandst.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.104.101.245 (talk) 11:27, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Apology resolution

The article states "In 1993, the US Congress passed a joint Apology Resolution regarding the overthrow; it was signed by President Bill Clinton. The resolution did not apologize and did not say the overthrow was illegal."

However, the purpose of the resolution (https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Public_Law_103-150) as stated in the resolution's subtitle, was "To acknowledge the 100th anniversary of the January 17, 1893 overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii, and to offer an apology to Native Hawaiians on behalf of the United States for the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii."

It also states in Section 1 that the Congress "apologizes to Native Hawaiians on behalf of the people of the United States for the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii..."

The resolution also makes several references to the illegality of the overthrow, e.g., "President Grover Cleveland reported fully and accurately on the illegal acts of the conspirators", "the Provisional Government was able to obscure the role of the United States in the illegal overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy", and "on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of the illegal overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii". It also states that the event was "in violation of treaties between the two nations and of international law".

Therefore I propose that the article be changed to say something like "The resolution declared the overthrow to have been illegal and a violation of both treaties between the U.S. and the Kingdom of Hawaii and of international law. It also offered an apology "on behalf of the people of the United States for the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii".

Sfsiegel (talk) 01:20, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 April 2018

Delete the paragraph about the Jones Act. There can be a legitimate debate about the affects of the Jones Act especially in regards to islands and other non-contiguous places in the United States. I believe there probably is an negative affect (i.e. higher prices) but pinning down the actual affect is difficult and probably a fool's errand. Therefore, the first sentence should arguably be left alone (even though it is written like opinion): "The situation is compounded even further by what could possibly be the single largest contributor to the high costs of living in Hawaii, a U.S. trade law known as the Jones Act, or the Merchant Marine Act of 1920." However, the remaining paragraph is absolutely false: there is no prohibition against a foreign vessel transiting to Hawaii, offloading cargo, and then proceeding to a west coast port and offloading the remaining cargo; this is completely 100% legal and very common. There are plenty of other reasons ships may not transit to Hawaii before heading to the west coast very often; including, that Hawaii is out of the way and adds to the expense of shipping for a very tiny market (despite the assertions that Hawaii is in the middle of shipping lanes, which it is not exactly: https://www.shipmap.org/). It is only illegal to load a foreign vessel with goods from Hawaii and then offload the cargo in another US port. For a cite see the following: http://www.hawaiifreepress.com/ArticlesMain/tabid/56/ID/10736/Jones-Act-Does-Not-Bar-International-Trade-From-Hawaii.aspx. Finally, the cites listed for the Jones Act paragraph are dead; therefore I believe it is justified in deleting even the first sentence as it is no longer verified, but, at least everything below it as it is patently false. WJF3 (talk) 10:12, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

 Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:18, 22 April 2018 (UTC)

Merger proposal

Two months and a strong and irrefutable consensus against merger. Ribbet32 (talk) 14:37, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

The following discussion 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.

Formal request has been received to merge the article Hawaiian Islands into Hawaii; dated: February 2018. Proposer's Rationale: Hawaii is a set of islands – both places are the same thing. Discuss here. Richard3120 (talk) 23:36, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

  • Strongly oppose The Hawaiian Islands article is essentially the geography of Hawaii, & it is listed as the main article under Hawaii#Geography and environment. It would make more sense to offload some of the geography to the Hawaiian Islands article. Furthermore, there is a longstanding consensus by edit that this is a separate article, since the Hawaiian Islands article has existed since 2002-12-15, when Wikipedia was less than a year old. Merging the de facto Geography of Hawaii article into Hawaii makes as much sense as merging the History of Hawaii. Also, we have Midway Atoll an unorganized, unincorporated territory of the US, which is not part of the State of Hawaii but geographically part of the Hawaiian archipelago. That factoid is in the Hawaiian Islands article but not in the Hawaii article. Please, let's not overburden the Hawaii article with merging this. We would do much to move more of the physical geography information into the Hawaiian Islands article. Peaceray (talk) 06:51, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose. As Peaceray said, the Hawaiian Islands article essentially serves as the "geography of Hawaii article. In fact, for most of the page's existence, Geography of Hawaii redirected to Hawaiian Islands (and I think that redirect should be restored). I'm generally a mergist, but I do not believe this particular merger is a good idea. 青い(Aoi) (talk) 19:34, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose The islands as a geographic entity and the state should not be merged. This is an unusual case since they consist of the same area. If one small island was part of another state or nation, the difference would be clear. Fettlemap (talk) 21:04, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose The political entity of the state of Hawaii and the geological formation of the Hawaiian islands are as separate in concept as the island of Great Britain is from the United Kingdom. The two overlap, but are not the same thing.SweetNeo85 (talk) 21:06, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose The island chain is a geographic feature that continues underwater for thousands of miles. This is not part of the US state. The Hawaiian Islands page certainly needs more work than state page, but it needs its own article. I would argue that the Hawaiian Islands page be moved to Hawaiian archipelago; however, 'island' is likely the more common usage. Andrew Z. Colvin • Talk 20:59, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
  • In addition to my previous comment, moving Hawaiian Islands to Hawaiian archipelago would help distinguish it from the Hawaii (island) article. Andrew Z. Colvin • Talk 21:47, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
Support this additional change. Fettlemap (talk) 00:26, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
Hawaiian Islands is more common usage than Hawaiian archipelago.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 03:25, 26 March 2018 (UTC)
Oppose Differentiating island groups from governments is common practice on wikipedia. See Japanese archipelago -SpanishSnake (talk) 13:27, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
@Roger 8 Roger: As I mentioned earlier, "The Hawaiian Islands article is essentially the geography of Hawaii, & it is listed as the main article under Hawaii#Geography and environment." Every state that I have looked at has an article for the geography of the state. For Hawaii, Geography of Hawaii is a redirect to Hawaiian Islands. IMHO, the snowball clause applies to the probability that we are going to eliminate the geography article for a US state. Peaceray (talk) 05:40, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
Forgot to mention that Midway Atoll is not part of the State of Hawaii, but is rather "an unorganized, unincorporated territory of the United States". It is considered one of the Hawaiian Islands, however. Peaceray (talk) 05:54, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
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.

Physical Forces of Hawaii

Hawaii was formed by physical forces of earth; tectonic plates, volcanic eruptions, erosion, and glaciation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Waan Choi (talk • contribs) 07:42, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Glaciation, really? We learn something new every day. —Tamfang (talk) 02:47, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Contradiction with James Cook and Kidnapping of Kalaniʻōpuʻu by Captain James Cook

Here it says Cook took the king for ransom to his boat. In the other articles it says Cook was killed when trying to abduct the king. Omikroergosum (talk) 03:45, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Having just visited the relevant area, I was surprised how many different versions of the story exist today. Some clearly try to shed the best light on one or more of the parties involved. I doubt we can ever know for sure what happened. HiLo48 (talk) 03:00, 22 June 2018 (UTC)

Problems with 'Spelling of state name' section

Can the problems with this section be fixed? It states "Diacritics were not used because the document, drafted in 1949,[19] predates the use of the ʻokina (ʻ) and the kahakō in modern Hawaiian orthography..."

But all I can find out is that the reverse is true, so it would better read, "Diacritics were not used although the document, drafted in 1949,[19] is predated by the use of the ʻokina (ʻ) and the kahakō in modern Hawaiian orthography."

Second, if there is no macron at stake either way, much of the discussion involving macrons is confusing because we cannot see one.

Finally the last two sentences about precedents for changing state names are an interesting argument, but since there is no citation to whose argument it is, it seems original and superfluous, like something that has never come up before and premiered here. There are plenty of other examples of 'territories' changing to states as well, but per WP:SYNTH etc. we need a source to tie that in with any arguments made previously in print about this specific topic. Regards, 71.246.153.195 (talk) 17:28, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

If anyone is interested, a detailed discussion is taking place here: Wikipedia:New Zealand Wikipedians' notice board#Appeal to revert the revert that changed Paekākāriki back to Paekakariki, and/or to clarify rules around Māori place names, involving the use of diacritics in the spelling of Maori words in New Zealand. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 22:12, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Please make more wiki links (using double-square brackets) to other related wiki pages. e.g. for pidgin and pidgin English. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.30.225.38 (talk) 08:16, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Request consensus to edit Jones Act section

The paragraph, under the Cost of Living heading, regarding the affects of the Jones Act on Hawaii is incorrect and not supported by the refernces. Specifically, the analysis contained in the paragraph argues that a foreign vessel from Asia cannot stop first in Hawaii land goods and then proceed to the U.S. west coast. This is an incorrect interpretation of the Jones Act. In actuality the Jones Act only prohibits goods, originating in Hawaii, from being transported to the U.S. west coast on foreign owned, flagged or built vessels (or vice versa). See the following for a good explanation of what the Jones Act actually prohibits or doesn't prohibit: http://www.hawaiifreepress.com/ArticlesMain/tabid/56/ID/10736/Jones-Act-Does-Not-Bar-International-Trade-From-Hawaii.aspx.

The sentences that needs change are: "This trade regulation prohibits any foreign-flagged ships from carrying cargo between two American ports—a practice known as cabotage. Most consumer goods in the United States are manufactured by outsourced labor in East Asia, then transported by container ships to ports on the U.S. mainland, and Hawaii also receives the same goods."

Further the rest of the paragraph is NPOV and an opinion, not supported adequately by references, and at least two that do exist are dead. This whole section should be edited to be NPOV. I suggest the following in substitute:

"Cost of living in Hawaii can be high relative to many other locations located on the U.S. mainland. Contributing to the relativity higher cost of living includes shipping goods across an ocean, which may further be compounded by the requirements of the Jones Act. The Jones Act generally prohibits a foreign built, owned, crewed, or flagged vessels from transporting goods between places within the U.S. including the U.S. west coast and Hawaii. Jones Act compliant vessels are generally more expensiveness to build and operate than are many foreign equivalents which can drive up shipping costs. While the Jones Act does not prohibit transportation of goods to Hawaii from Asia on non-Jones Act qualified vessels that will then proceed to the U.S. west coast, this type of trade is nonetheless not common primarily do to economic reasons. Therefore, Hawaii relies on receiving most inbound goods on Jones Act qualified vessels originating from the U.S. west coast which likely contributes to the increased cost of some consumer goods and therefore the overall cost of living."

Update: made changes using above paragraph to make Jones Act section NPOV, corrected nonfactual statements (i.e. foreign ships from Asian cannot stop in Hawaii en route to U.S. west coast-Jones Act does not prohibit this in any way), and updated citation (Bloomberg Article link is dead and updated with another link that correctly discusses what can and cannot be done vis-a-vis the Jones Act). — Preceding unsigned comment added by WJF3 (talk • contribs) 01:08, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 August 2018

Please change "The state's coastline is about 750 miles (1,210 km) long..." To "The state's OCEANIC coastline is about 750 miles (1,210 km) long..."

The point being, that the state of Michigan has the country's 2nd longest coastline at 3,288 mi. (of any type, ocean or freshwater), second only to Alaska. https://www.michigan.gov/som/0,4669,7-192-26847-103397--,00.html The reason why the article is misleading is because Michigan's "coastline" is over four times longer than Hawaii's, the difference being that it is freshwater coastline.

This may prompt changes to the coastlines of all the states; because one can have rankings for freshwater, ocean, or both. 68.40.241.101 (talk) 03:18, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

 Done L293D (☎ • ✎) 12:26, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Hawaii size

All countries and territories have their size defined by the total of their land mass. For Hawaii, the data here is including water area, which is incorrect.

"Hawaii is a chain of 132 islands, eight of which are considered principal islands. These include Hawaii (4028 square miles), Maui (727 square miles), Oahu (597 square miles), Kauai (562 square miles), Molokai (260 square miles), Lanai (140 square miles), Niihau (69 square miles), and Kahoolawe (45 square miles)."

Total: 6,423 square miles = 16,635 square kilometers

https://www.thoughtco.com/smallest-states-in-the-united-states-4071971

http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/namerica/usstates/hilandst.htm — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.106.113.157 (talk) 00:52, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Templates

The two templates in the politics section make it unreadable. Suggest clear mode for the templates, putting them above or below the section text. =Inowen (nlfte) 03:28, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 November 2018

In the first paragraph of the article, it says Hawaii is the only U.S. state located in Oceania, the only U.S. state located outside North America, and the only one composed entirely of islands. It should say Hawaii is the only U.S. state geographically located in Oceania, although it is politically in North America, and the only one composed entirely of islands. Here is my source that supports this: WorldAtlas.com 192.107.120.90 (talk) 18:15, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

 Not done It is much more important to note that Hawaii is "the only U.S. state located outside North America" than the (what I find to be) confusing "although it is politically in North America". The latter statement is also incorrect as Central America, Mexico, & Canada are all part of North America, & Hawaii politics have little to do with those countries. Hawaii's being politically aligned with the U.S. is obvious anyway (see ipso facto ) since it is a U.S. state. Peaceray (talk) 19:10, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Flora and fauna

There is actually not much about flora and fauna of Hawaii but there are lots about pesticide use in Hawaii which should be under some other headline.--2001:708:110:1820:7646:A0FF:FEA0:4B5B (talk) 11:09, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

I've removed the two paragraphs in question. I didn't move them to a different heading because there was no other heading that seemed appropriate. In my opinion, the first paragraph, which describes what are relatively minor one-time events in the vast scheme of things, probably isn't necessary to include in this article. However, I would not object if someone wanted to integrate the second paragraph into another section or a new section--I'm not sure where would be best. Aoi (青い) (talk) 19:33, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
Good. A more detailed treatment of flora and fauna would be welcome.--2001:708:110:1820:7646:A0FF:FEA0:4B5B (talk) 10:54, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Some proposed changes

Information to be added or removed: I propose adding the below text in quotes to the education section of the page:

"Hawaii ranked 23rd in the nation for educational performance, according to Education Week’s Quality Counts 2018 report. It earned an overall score of 75.0 out of 100 points and a grade of C. By comparison, the nation received a score of 75.2 or a C.

Hawaii posted a C-plus in the Chance-for-Success category, ranking 30th on factors that contribute to a person’s success both within and outside the K-12 education system. Hawaii received a mark of NA and finished N/A for School Finance. It ranked 27th with a grade of C-minus on the K-12 Achievement Index."

Explanation of issue: I believe this text would enhance the page, adding information on the quality of the state's K-12 education which is not currently available on the page. I'm asking your consideration because I work for Education Week. I apologize if I've misformatted this or left out information you need to make a decision - I'm rather new at this.

References supporting change: this is the source I'd cite: [23] Csmithepe (talk) 17:24, 11 February 2019 (UTC)Csmithepe

yes, good idea. Rjensen (talk) 17:42, 11 February 2019 (UTC)
 Not done: Please provide a source unconnected to Education Week for this claim.  Spintendo  20:55, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Reference: http://www.hawaiiforvisitors.com/about/japanese-immigration.htm
  2. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugar_plantations_in_Hawaii
  3. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy_in_Brazil,
  4. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawaiian_Electric_Industries
  5. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethanol_fuel_in_Brazil
  6. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawaiian_Electric_Industries
  7. ^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_City_Lines
  8. ^ http://www.boeing.com/history/products/mod-2-mod-5b-wind-turbine.page
  9. ^ http://www.boeing.com/history/products/mod-2-mod-5b-wind-turbine.page
  10. ^ http://inventors.about.com/od/timelines/a/Photovoltaics_2.htm
  11. ^ http://www.staradvertiser.com/hawaii-news/heco-boosts-electric-vehicles/
  12. ^ http://www.staradvertiser.com/business/heco-may-restart-3-solar-farms/
  13. ^ "Captain Cook killed in Hawaii - Feb 14, 1779 - HISTORY.com". HISTORY.com. Retrieved 23 April 2016.
  14. ^ "Captain Cook killed in Hawaii - Feb 14, 1779 - HISTORY.com". HISTORY.com. Retrieved 23 April 2016.
  15. ^ Lind, Andrew W. (1974). Hawaii's people (3. ed ed.). Honolulu: Univ. of Hawaii Pr. p. 16. ISBN 0-87022-466-2. {{cite book}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help); |edition= has extra text (help)
  16. ^ Lind, Andrew W. (1974). Hawaii's people (3. ed ed.). Honolulu: Univ. of Hawaii Pr. p. 86. ISBN 0-87022-466-2. {{cite book}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help); |edition= has extra text (help)
  17. ^ Lind, Andrew W. (1974). Hawaii's people (3. ed ed.). Honolulu: Univ. of Hawaii Pr. p. 87. ISBN 0-87022-466-2. {{cite book}}: |edition= has extra text (help)
  18. ^ Lind, Andrew W. (1974). Hawaii's people (3. ed ed.). Honolulu: Univ. of Hawaii Pr. p. 87. ISBN 0-87022-466-2. {{cite book}}: |edition= has extra text (help)
  19. ^ Lind, Andrew W. (1974). Hawaii's people (3. ed ed.). Honolulu: Univ. of Hawaii Pr. p. 90. ISBN 0-87022-466-2. {{cite book}}: |edition= has extra text (help)
  20. ^ Lind, Andrew W. (1974). Hawaii's people (3. ed ed.). Honolulu: Univ. of Hawaii Pr. p. 90. ISBN 0-87022-466-2. {{cite book}}: |edition= has extra text (help)
  21. ^ Lind, Andrew W. (1974). Hawaii's people (3. ed ed.). Honolulu: Univ. of Hawaii Pr. p. 88. ISBN 0-87022-466-2. {{cite book}}: |edition= has extra text (help)
  22. ^ Lind, Andrew W. (1974). Hawaii's people (3. ed ed.). Honolulu: Univ. of Hawaii Pr. p. 90. ISBN 0-87022-466-2. {{cite book}}: |edition= has extra text (help)
  23. ^ "Hawaii Earns a C on State Report Card, Ranks 23rd in Nation - Quality Counts". Education Week. 37 (17). Editorial Projects in Education. 17 January 2018. Retrieved 11 February 2019.

New para.

Text following "No precedent for changes ..." should be a new para. —DIV (120.17.57.45 (talk) 11:43, 23 February 2019 (UTC))

Why? The whole paragraph is Spelling of state name, and the text indicated is about difficulty of changing a state's name. --A D Monroe III(talk) 19:55, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Image and table work

Hi there, I made some large cuts here earlier today, and just felt I should leave a longer explanation on the talk page. The tables of Presidential and Gubernatorial elections were part of a Request for Comment at WikiProject United States, and the decision was to move these to subarticles when relevant. There's also a more detailed chart I've linked to on this article. I also noticed a ton of duplication in the images here, particularly in galleries under Governance, Geography, and in a separate Gallery section. Gallery sections are strongly discouraged per WP:GALLERY, and so I've moved most images into individual sections, while removing several similar ʻIolani Palace photos, satellite images, and maps. I also combined the two Historical Population tables, which removed some of the notes, though these were largely repeating what was in the paragraphs above. Did editors see any issue with these image/table changes?-- Patrick, oѺ∞ 21:27, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Citation Under Education SubHeading

In the subsection about education, the following line appeared in the Citation Hunt tool: "Hawaii has the only school system within the U.S. that is unified statewide. Policy decisions are made by the fourteen-member state Board of Education, which sets policy and hires the superintendent of schools, who oversees the state Department of Education. The Department of Education is divided into seven districts; four on Oʻahu and one for each of the other three counties. The main rationale for centralization is to combat inequalities between highly populated Oʻahu and the more rural Neighbor Islands, and between lower-income and more affluent areas."

This is from source #88 - US: Hawaii Investment and Business Guide, Volume 1 Strategic and Practical By IBP USA. This quote appears on page 34.

Here is a link to the page in Google Books: https://books.google.com/books?id=aGndCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA34&lpg=PA34&dq=hawaii+has+the+only+school+system+within+the+U.S.+that+is+unified+statewide.+Policy+decisions+are+made+by+the+fourteen-member+state+Board+of+Education,+which+sets+policy+and+hires+the+superintendent+of+schools,+who+oversees+the+state+Department+of+Education&source=bl&ots=486JB-y1tx&sig=ACfU3U37kGNsWXXgfprAFZPr8NrnkSR9wg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiM2MTj9PXhAhVRTt8KHZWlB1kQ6AEwAHoECAkQAQ#v=onepage&q=hawaii%20has%20the%20only%20school%20system%20within%20the%20U.S.%20that%20is%20unified%20statewide.%20Policy%20decisions%20are%20made%20by%20the%20fourteen-member%20state%20Board%20of%20Education%2C%20which%20sets%20policy%20and%20hires%20the%20superintendent%20of%20schools%2C%20who%20oversees%20the%20state%20Department%20of%20Education&f=false

(Mjohns69 (talk) 18:53, 29 April 2019 (UTC))

Looking through the book (or what's available of it) on Google Books, it looks like a large chunk of the publication was taken from Wikipedia without attribution (WP:BACKWARDSCOPY). I don't think we can use this as a source. I'm going to remove the other use of this source from the article for the same reason. Aoi (青い) (talk) 22:03, 29 April 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 14 May 2019

In the topic demonym please change "Hawaiians" to "Hawaii residents" - the former term refers to the indigenous people of Hawaii, as your reference cites. Ck808 (talk) 05:29, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Is that the common usage in English? The note just mentions that it is the local preference. – Þjarkur (talk) 09:53, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
 Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. Personally, I've always heard "Hawaiians" DannyS712 (talk) 22:13, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Geographic Data in Error

Though I do not have the complete factual data for corrections, the entry: 

• Latitude	18° 55′ N to 28° 27′ N
• Longitude	154° 48′ W to 178° 22′ W

can not possibly be correct. Hawaii's spread of islands is between ~19 and ~20 degrees North. To be between 18 and 28 it would have to be nearly 700 miles north to south and 154° 48′ W to 178° 22′ W is almost 1700 miles east to west. Even with including territorial wares to 200 miles from the high tide line it is too large an area.

Wrong. The Northwestern Hawaiian Islands spread to far greater than what you assert. The state is not just the main islands.--Jasper Deng (talk) 06:40, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 August 2019

Please change "It is the only state where Asian Americans identify as the largest ethnic group" to "It is the only state where people who identify as Asian Americans are the largest ethnic group" You don't "identify as" the largest group, it's a matter of fact.

 Done Peaceray (talk) 22:20, 3 August 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 3 September 2019

Dancing in Hawaii 

Hawaii is well-known for their traditional dance the “Hula”. The history behind this Hawaiian dance established in (1894) the story of colonialism and the true meaning behind the culture. The traditional name for the dance was called the “Hula Kahiko”, which was formed from “Ai Kahiko” meaning “in the ancient style”, and it was used to honor, praise, and entertain chiefs. The story-telling dance is told through gentle hand movements. The different hand movements indicate different meanings from appreciating the elements of nature to praising their leaders’ fertility. 209.129.33.201 (talk) 17:29, 3 September 2019 (UTC)
 Not done: This is already mentioned in the article, with a link to the more in-depth article Hula RudolfRed (talk) 17:53, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Indigenous

The word indigenous is used several times in reference to certain peoples of Hawaii yet none are indigenous, they're the descendants of settlers.

indigenous should be removed. HardeeHar (talk) 14:34, 5 August 2019 (UTC)


Aren’t we all descendants of settlers, going back to Lucy or Adam and Eve?
See wikipedia List_of_indigenous_peoples#Polynesia (Kanaka Maoli) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.151.137.84 (talk) 22:24, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
As per wiktionary:indigenous, I think that the term is relevant, applicable, & correct here. Peaceray (talk) 23:41, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

"Haiwaii" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Haiwaii. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 22:21, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

"Haiwii" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Haiwii. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 22:22, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

"Haway" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Haway. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 22:22, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

"Hawii" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Hawii. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 22:22, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

"Hawwaii" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Hawwaii. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 22:23, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

"Owhyhee" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Owhyhee. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. Steel1943 (talk) 22:23, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Slightly confusing wording

"History" section reads:

Hawaiʻi is one of four U.S. states—apart from the original thirteen, along with the Vermont Republic (1791), the Republic of Texas (1845), and the California Republic (1846)—that were independent nations prior to statehood.

This reads as if Vermont, Texas and California are also governed by "apart from", which I assume cannot be the actual intention. 2A00:23C5:4B91:AB00:FDED:6D64:2E48:7FDF (talk) 18:37, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Biased/propaganda page

It's biased and is propaganda to refer to native Hawaiians as indigenous yet call persons of Asians, European, Hispanic, and African decent as settlers as no group is indigenous to the island; natives were also settlers. HardeeHar (talk) 23:54, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

@HardeeHar: An indigenous people has the connotation of referring to the first people who settled the land. Therefore the use of the word indigenous to refer to the people of Marquesan & Polynesian descent who settled in Hawaiʻi a millennia ago is correct and appropriate. In other words, the people who got someplace first & lived hundreds or thousands of years there before anyone else arrived, get to be called indigenous, based upon the common understanding of the word. Peaceray (talk) 15:51, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Lead sentence

It says:

Hawaii (/həˈwaɪi/ ⓘ hə-WY-ee; Hawaiian: Hawaiʻi [həˈvɐjʔi]), alternatively spelled Hawai’i, is a state of the United States of America.

The link on the first word, though it converts to bold in the article, should be removed and coded as bold. The link "Hawai’i" only redirects back here, so should be removed. Also, isn't that "apostrophe" the wrong way round? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a00:23c5:4b91:ab00:8ad:3401:79d7:c607 (talk) 1:01, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Good points; I edited the lede accordingly. Aoi (青い) (talk) 01:08, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

The W in the name Hawaii is pronounced as a V and not a W. Nancy DeLucrezia (talk) 03:40, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that pronunciation is the 2nd one offered in the article: "Hawaiian: Hawaiʻi [həˈvɐjʔi])". Although mainlanders pronounce it with a W, and that is considered incorrect by Hawaiians, it's still by far the most common pronunciation in the English-speaking world, so both pronunciations are detailed in that first line. JimKaatFan (talk) 03:58, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 21 June 2020

Supporting my previous additions to the ancient Hawaiian history and the influance of the acient Greeks, I provide the conclusions of Dr. LePlongeon (1877), Doctor Le Plongeon in Yucatan, Proceedings of the American Antiquarian Society, Salisbury 1877:99  : These inner edifices belong to a very ancient period, and among the debris I have found the head of a bear exquisitely sculptured out of a block of marble. It is in an unfinished state. When did bears inhabit the peninsula? Strange to say, the Maya does not furnish the name for bear. Yet one-third of this tongue is pure Greek. Who brought the dialect of Homer to America? Or who took to Greece that of the Mayas? Greek is the offspring of Sanscrit. Is Maya? Or are they coeval? A clue for ethnologists is to follow the migrations of the human family on this old continent. Did the bearded men whose portraits are carved on the massive pillars of the fortress at Chichen Itza, belong to the Mayan nation? The Maya language is not devoid of words from the Assyrian.

https://www.gutenberg.org/files/29723/29723-h/29723-h.htm?fbclid=IwAR3CE7wUQcw9KhnbEHDj8YuSKb1l9-1yEAopg0ei6tJh1IVq-Ry-UBxLeMY

So it is clear that the ancient Mayan, Inkas and other kingdoms were influenced by the greek language and civilisation, as von Humbolt also supports: 1. Lyle Campbell, (1997), Oxford Studies in Anthropological Linguistics: American Indian Languages: The Historical Linguistics of Native America https://books.google.gr/booksid=h36tPYqAZPwC&pg=PA9&lpg=PA9&dq=von+Humboldt+the+mayan+language+is+greek&source=bl&ots=evrrysnpnK&sig=ACfU3U27pPgvB3vmJgJAbjbM2VOybPD3CQ&hl=el&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiz0Yuh85LqAhV8A2MBHcSOAoMQ6AEwAXoECAsQAQ#v=onepage&q=von%20Humboldt%20the%20mayan%20language%20is%20greek&f=false 2. Daniel G. Brinton, (2019), The Philosophic Grammar of American Languages, as Set Forth by Wilhelm von Humbolt, https://books.google.gr/books?id=M-zEDwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&hl=el#v=onepage&q&f=false

Regards

Dr. Nikolaos Loukeris https://www.aueb.gr/el/faculty_page/loykeris-nikolaos https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Nikolaos_Loukeris 79.166.241.244 (talk) 12:37, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

 Not done. It's not clear what changes you want to make. Moreover, none of this appears to reflect mainstream, reliable sources anyway. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 00:03, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
There's also a competence issue here. Lyle Campbell gives a number of examples of attempts to match American Indian languages to other languages as an example of false equivalence. Augustus Le Plongeon claimed that the Maya were the cradle of civilization, which radiated outwards to Atlantis and then to Egypt. Doug Weller talk 14:46, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Hawaii or Hawai'i?

Is the state supposed to be spelled as "Hawaii" or "Hawai'i" throughout the article? I usually see it spelled as Hawaii but maybe Hawaiians spell it as Hawai'i. We should probably decide on which one to go with and stick with it. --Roastedturkey (talk) 15:35, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

@Roastedturkey: Hi, first of all it is not but Hawai'i but Hawaiʻi. It uses the ʻOkina, which "is a unicameral consonant letter used within the Latin script to mark the phonemic glottal stop, in many Polynesian languages." If you go to hawaii.gov & start clicking around, you will see Hawai'i, Oʻahu, Kauaʻi, Lānaʻi, & Molokaʻi. The State of Hawai'i has been shifting to this spelling. As Kamana’o Mills, a member of the Hawai’i Board on Geographic Names put it: “Technically it’s not a name change. It’s a spelling correction.”[ʻOkina 1]
The problem is exasperated by the lack of an easy way of inputting an ʻokina using a western keyboard. That is why we have the {{ʻokina}} template.
We need to have a through discussion involving WikiProject Hawaii before we decide to excise the use of the ʻokina from articles.
Peaceray (talk) 15:35, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
  • MOS Hawaii-related articles As long as we have "anybody can edit", who is going to monitor every Hawaii-related article to make sure anything stays in place? It's nice to be uniform in anything, but the very structure of Wikipedia makes it impossible to keep anything uniform. Because I was initially asked several times to insert the okina, or move a set of articles to titles with the okina, I've been using it myself on what I create. And sometimes I either forget, or don't know a word should have the okina. We don't have enough regular users, much less admins, to pull off adhering to this rule, either direction. It will never be perfect. — Maile (talk) 16:19, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Personally, I would follow usage of the USGS, which uses ʻokina and macrons for the islands and other features but not for the state. Just grabbing the first things I saw under 'Hawaii', 

Kīlauea - Hawaiian Volcano Observatory. 
Kīlauea is the youngest and southeastern most volcano on the Island of Hawaiʻi.
Geologic map of the southern flank of Mauna Loa Volcano, Island of Hawaiʻi, Hawaii.

So IMO we should move the island pages to Kauaʻi, Oʻahu and Hawaiʻi (island). But the University of Hawaiʻi uses the ʻokina, so IMO we should too, whereas the Hawaii State Department of Health does not, so IMO we shouldn't either. But IMO this page should stay where it is, since in general the ʻokina is not used. — kwami (talk) 23:05, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

What about leaving the name of the article as just Hawaii so it’s easier to search for, but everywhere else using Hawaiʻi? The one with the Okina is more correct etymologically. Besides, I don’t think anyone is going to be bothered by it. If anything people are familiar with the Okina since it’s used in so many islands and places in Hawaiʻi. I know there are not many Hawaiian speakers around here but I don’t think it should be too difficult to add a couple of Okinas 5.100.192.99 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 17:28, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

It's not "a couple". The letters "Hawaii" currently occur in the article 594 times. I agree with previous opinions that for the state, we should continue to omit the okina, since that's the most common usage in the English-speaking world, but with individual agencies within, like University of Hawaiʻi, that use the okina themselves, we should follow suit. JimKaatFan (talk) 17:52, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Hawaii or Hawaiʻi? references

  1. ^ "Hawaii or Hawai'i: What's the official spelling?". Honolulu, Hawaii news, sports & weather. 2016-03-10. Retrieved 2020-03-17.

indigenous

The page mentions "indigenous" numerous times in reference to native Hawaiians times yet Native Hawaiians are not indigenous to the island, they were settlers. I've mentioned this before but it seems that have been disregarded. If the admins insist on continuing to use the word indigenous to describe natives then please explain on the page what they evolved from, was it lava? HardeeHar (talk) 23:48, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

See indigenous peoples. --Khajidha (talk) 19:30, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
@HardeeHar, your definition of "indigenous" seems to differ greatly from general consensus. Your argument is that because they entered Hawaii from an outside source, they cannot be native. But aren't most areas settled by migrants? Humans originated in East Africa and had to move elsewhere to inhabit places such as West Africa, the Middle East, Europe, Asia, etc. Is no one native? - Coastaline (talk) 18:44, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Agriculture

In the topography section, the article mentions Hawaii is the only state that coffee is grown. However could this article be improved by adding a section about agriculture? Bdshelley (talk) 20:24, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

Probably. There's a couple of sentences that mention agriculture in the Economy section, but those could easily be expanded; there's a wealth of material out there. I'd be happy to help if you want to get it started. It's always a daunting task to write (or re-write) an entire topic. I've done it once and it exhausted me. Good to have multiple people on it. JimKaatFan (talk) 23:48, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

"comprising" vs. "comprised of"

I'm not trying to join or encourage User:Giraffedata's quixotic quest, but "comprised of" is deprecated by a sizable number of sources, and we would be better off avoiding it in this and other articles. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 23:57, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Can we perhaps settle on a phrasing here that is acceptable to all (or at least most) English speakers? If the text were changed, for example, to use "composed of" or "consisting of", would that work? I fear there are lots of people who simply will not accept "comprised of" as being proper usage (and who consider it no better than widely used abominations like "irregardless" or "I could care less") — no matter what the Wikipedia article on this phrase may say — and that as long as this article uses "comprised of", we are doomed to see an ongoing edit war. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 18:22, 10 September 2020 (UTC)

I'm really not worried about theoretical people that won't accept "comprised of". In reality, it's perfectly fine usage, and there's one Wikipedia editor who won't accept it. I fail to see how any policy-based decision on this article would result in it being deemed necessary to remove the phrase. JimKaatFan (talk) 18:45, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
I know there are in fact at least two Wikipedians who object to "comprised of", because I also consider this phrase unacceptable — but I'm not going to get involved in edit wars over it because I don't consider the cause worth the risk of getting blocked for disruptive editing (and yes, I know Giraffedata has never been blocked). I still think it would be better to avoid the possibility of future problems by choosing a different phrasing not involving any form of the word "comprise". I also want to preemptively make it clear that I don't know Giraffedata and have, as far as I can currently recall, never interacted with him, on this or any other topic, either on- or off-wiki. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 19:30, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Okay, two. I'll concede that there are two. JimKaatFan (talk) 20:56, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Three. HiLo48 (talk) 22:53, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Fantastic. All three of you should write a letter to the editors of Merriam Webster's Concise Dictionary of English Usage, and let them know their book has been wrong for over a century. Let me know how that works out for you. JimKaatFan (talk) 23:46, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
I'm not American. I have other preferences for dictionaries. HiLo48 (talk) 02:45, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Irrelevant to this particular discussion. Hawaii is an American state. See MOS:ENGVAR. Thank you. JimKaatFan (talk) 14:19, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
True, but the Hawaiians probably learnt their first English from British speakers of the language. HiLo48 (talk) 00:15, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
I can't believe I have to correct people who think that I made up the idea that "comprise" a poor choice of word to mean "compose", because it's so easy to find people who were taught the same, but this isn't the first time this has come up. If you want to see more than 3 Wikipedians who believe a Wikipedia article is better without that use of comprise, go to the talk page for my essay on the subject, and my personal talk page, and you'll find no fewer than 100. And many barnstars. And then go to the "other commentators" section of that essay to see references to lots of high quality English usage sources that recommend against using it, often stating that there are lots of people who object to it. Just pick any major English style guide.
Even the dictionaries, though they all tell us there are lots of people using comprise to mean compose, warn us that plenty of other people don't accept it. AIR, Merriam Webster is the one that points out that opposition to the secondary "compose or constitute" meaning is surprisingly tenacious; most language corruptions like this would have found their way to universal acceptedness by now. I mean, it's been hundreds of years that people have been writing this, and correcting it.
Frankly, I don't know why it's even an issue. Let's say only three people consider "comprised of" less than perfectly fine. There are half a dozen really good alternatives that are acceptable to those three people and also all the people who accept "comprised of". Why wouldn't you use one of those? Spite? Bryan Henderson (giraffedata) (talk) 01:59, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Reworded to avoid the disputed wording.Vsmith (talk) 01:24, 12 September 2020 (UTC)

Removal of Citation Needed Span

@Telsho: Hello- can you explain your removal of the citation needed span on this page? Wikipedia policy does not allow unsourced information to remain both unsourced and written with Wikipedia's voice. Thanks. Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:15, 21 September 2020 (UTC) (modified)

It's pretty much common knowledge, you don't need a source for that. Please read WP:CITENEED. Telsho (talk) 11:24, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
@Telsho: I'm sorry, but I don't agree. What's the common knowledge that doesn't need citation? Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:26, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
In regards to the U.S. Constitution, the text pretty much said there has been no precedent, and there isn't. How exactly are you going to acquire citations for something that doesn't exist? In the second sentence, one only has to access the Constitution of Massachusetts, Province of Massachusetts Bay, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Territory of Arkansaw and State of Arkansas articles to confirm its accuracy. You don't need secondary sources for chronological history. Telsho (talk) 11:34, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
@Telsho: Let me explain how I see what you said. "How exactly are you going to acquire citations for something that doesn't exist?" In my mind, in this sentence, you are directly saying that you put an unsourcable claim that was in a 'citation needed span' back into the voice of Wikipedia. That's not what Wikipedia is for. Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:37, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
As I've reiterated, adding a citation needed tag for information that doesn't exist wouldn't make any sense. The U.S. Constitution made no mention that a states name can be changed. Why would you need a source for that? If one decides to be really pedantic, the source is the constitution itself. Telsho (talk) 11:51, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
@Telsho: "Why would you need a source for that?" Wikipedia is based on secondary sources, not bald speculation. Geographyinitiative (talk) 11:55, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
You're cherry-picking my words. I'm aware of what Wikipedia is about, Geographyinitiative. But you're going to wait a very long time before someone actually has a secondary source for that, if ever. Telsho (talk) 12:00, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
@Telsho: In my mind, you have just proven my point. Why not restore the 'citation needed span' then? Either 1) source the claim, 2) remove the material, or 3) put it in a 'citation needed' tag. Geographyinitiative (talk) 12:02, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
The point is there wouldn't be any such secondary source. You could assume that your point was proven in your mind but facts precede opinions on Wikipedia. I don't agree on restoring the tag but you're more than welcome to wait or ask for a third opinion. Telsho (talk) 12:09, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
@Telsho: "All content must be verifiable. The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material, and it is satisfied by providing an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the contribution." Wikipedia:UNSOURCED I have listed this discussion on the third opinion page as you requested. Geographyinitiative (talk) 12:13, 21 September 2020 (UTC) (modified)
Concur with User:Geographyinitiative on this one. The question "How exactly are you going to acquire citations for something that doesn't exist" says it all. If something doesn't exist, then Wikipedia isn't the place to talk about it. That's called original research and that's a violation of WP:NOR. --Coolcaesar (talk) 16:42, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
If that's the case, I would suggest it's for the best to remove that paragraph on the article entirely. Thoughts @Geographyinitiative:? Telsho (talk) 17:47, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
I wouldn't think it should be that hard to find sourced examples substantiating the first sentence (starting with "In contrast"). The rest of the paragraph (starting with "No precedent") is likely to be harder (along the lines of trying to prove a negative), and I would oppose including this info without sources. In any case, though, I don't believe there is any need to talk here at all about Massachusetts or Arkansas having had their names changed; it simply isn't relevant to Hawaii IMO. As for the "common knowledge" exception to WP:NOR and WP:V, there is an informational page on this issue (WP:CK) — not a binding policy in and of itself, but intended as a useful guide to deciding when this sort of argument is OK and when it is not. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 18:28, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Sounds good to me. Telsho (talk) 19:21, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
Partial disagreement with your change — I think the "No precedent" sentence should be removed too, because it's unsourced, and in any event not really relevant IMO (an opinion which I might possibly change depending on whatever a source or sources might say). — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 20:43, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
I have come to the conclusion that the fact that was restored here is not actually demonstrated. I originally thought it was "probably true", but now I'm thinking that I just don't know for sure. Who knows? Maybe one of the colonies changed its name slightly- a spelling or something- in a way that we don't really pay attention to these days. Maybe a state had multiple spellings for its name and settled on one later. I really can't be 100% certain that the fact is true and since it is not sourced, I think it really can't be sustained, even in the citation needed box. Seems like original research if there is no source given. If there's a source, then that's different of course. Geographyinitiative (talk) 12:01, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 October 2020

hawaii isn't the only american state outside of the country north america, alaska is also a state outside of america, so the information The only US state outside of the country is entirely false Kapolata (talk) 16:37, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:42 24 October 2020 (UTC)
@Kapolata: You have misquoted the article. The exact quote is It is the only U.S. state located outside North America. I am a former kamaʻāina (resident) of Hawaiʻi. I can assure you from many five-hour plane rides from the closest mainland airports that Hawaiʻi is not part of the North American continent. Alaska, however, seems firmly attached to the North American continent. Peaceray (talk) 18:39, 24 October 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:58, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 January 2021

Remove the sentence: “Hawaii is also one of a handful of U.S. states to have once been an independent nation.[11]” because it is not supported by the listed source and because it is not true considering all of the United States have at one point been part of other independent nations of Native Americans. Febufaerie23 (talk) 02:31, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

 Not done Prominent examples are the Republic of Hawaii, the Republic of California, the Republic of Texas, and the Republic of Vermont were independent nations that became states. Two of them, Hawaii & Vermont, had borders nearly identical to the present day. All four carried their identities from being independent nations into statehood. Any other republic that became part of a state or divided into states essentially lost their idenity.
I have added a citation that specifically places Hawaii among the independent republics that became a state. Peaceray (talk) 06:12, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

"locals of hawaii"

>> recommend that one refer to non-Hawaiians as "locals of Hawaii" or "people of Hawaii".

This text seems to have an error. Instead of "non-Hawaiians", shouldn't it say "Native Hawaiians"? Dma aus (talk) 14:02, 10 March 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dma aus (talk • contribs) 19:42, 9 March 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 6 July 2021

Hello, I suggest in the History section, 1st paragraph changing "capitalists and landowners" to "landowners seeking greater control" 2600:1013:B01B:FE4D:50B7:1C5E:7302:5515 (talk) 22:22, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

 Not done as I feel like this sentence makes it a bit less neutral and I don't think that was said as a reasoning elsewhere in the article.   melecie   t 08:16, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Table of Elevations, Populations, etc. Not Formatted Correctly.

I noticed that the table at the beginning of the 'Geography and Environment' subsection is not formatted correctly. 'Island', 'Nickname', 'Population', 'Highest Point', 'Age', and 'Location' are all correct. However, 'Area' and 'Density' are ordered bottom to top (such that the data appears descending when meant to be ascending), and 'Elevation' is just chaos, with seemingly no structure or order.

If somebody could correct this, that would be great, I had to make a new account this evening and don't have clearance to this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sippin' Some Coffee (talk • contribs) 23:16, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Inconsistent spelling

This article varies between the spellings "Hawaii" and "Hawai'i" - this should be consistent. My vote would be to use the English "Hawaii" throughout rather than the Hawaiian (as defined in the first sentence). --Quark1005 (talk) 01:47, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

Throughout the state, government entities are moving towards using the ʻokina. Note that it is not an apostrophe, but a Hawaiian letter. You can tell the difference because the ʻokina looks like a "high six" or superscript digit six with a filled-in solid glyph. Nevertheless, certain official historical documents admitting Hawaii as a state predate the ʻokina. In light of that it may be practical to leave out the ʻokina when specifically referring to the state, and to use the ʻokina when using it in any other context, such as the land irrespective of its connection to the US, and also referring to the Big Island of Hawaiʻi / County of Hawaiʻi. 72.234.107.33 (talk) 01:09, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Local linguist here, the ʻokina is consistently used and really should be used throughout the article, including the name (with a redirect from "Hawaii"). It's a consonant and it's used. You wouldn't call the USA "Aerica". "In light of that it may be practical to leave out the ʻokina when specifically referring to the state, and to use the ʻokina when using it in any other context" doesn't make as much sense to me, since there isn't actually a convention around doing that. 66.8.254.66 (talk) 17:57, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Reference to Obama in lead

I think Rjensen's revert of my edit is not a good one. The re-added sentence has a number of problems that cannot reasonably be fixed. The first part of the sentence is a banal and essentially empty observation that has no place here. Of course some American celebrities come from Hawaii. That is true for every state. The second part calls President Obama the "most notable" person to come out of Hawaii. This is a POV observation -- who is to say he is the most notable? It is also an example of systemic bias, in that he is the only person other than James Cook mentioned in the lead (and frankly that's pretty bad too). Consider the absence from the lead of hugely important figures in Hawaii's history like Kamehameha I and Liliʻuokalani, who may well be more notable than Obama, depending on your -- wait for it -- point of view. Finally, the word "native" has a specific meaning in the context of Hawaii, and it's not correctly applied to Obama. There's no saving this sentence. agtx 23:25, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

I will attempt to fix it. Rjensen is in IDHT territory at this point. Viriditas (talk) 23:34, 20 August 2021 (UTC)
Obama as very notable is common knowledge for hundreds of millions of people. Actually Trump made the issue famous by suggesting otherwise for years. The reserved term is "Native Hawaiian" --and the article does not call Obama that. See "Barack Obama a native son to Hawaii" Chicago Tribune which states: "HONOLULU — Locals here sometimes call Barack Obama a kamaaina, the Hawaiian word for native born or one who has lived here for some time." Rjensen (talk) 02:03, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
Two issues: one, "kamaaina" isn't normally referred to someone who is "native" born, so that's either an issue with the journalist or an unusual use of the term out of a particular context, and two, "native born" here means local, not native as in Native Hawaiian, which is why we avoid the ambiguity. Viriditas (talk) 03:00, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
Just looked it up, and it turns out kamaaina was once used to refer to people as native born perhaps a century ago or so, but that definition isn't used anymore. It's now used to refer to long-term residents. The closest synonym I could find for modern usage is citizen, which is listed as a definition. This would be in terms of one being an inhabitant of Hawaii, not a native, but possibly a local, but more accurately a long term resident in modern parlance. So yes, kamaaina originally meant children of the land, the natives, morphed into "old timers", and now is used more generally to refer to residents who have lived in Hawaii for an extended period. However, it appears the Native Hawaiian usage for Obama was intended to reach back in homage and respect to its original meaning. It still doesn't change the issue. Viriditas (talk) 03:19, 21 August 2021 (UTC)
Obama is indeed a very notable person. That doesn't mean he should be identified after the words "most notably" in the lead of the article about the state where he was born. The word "native" is sometimes used outside Hawaii (like in Chicago, for example) to describe people who are from Hawaii but not Native Hawaiian. That doesn't mean we should use that word in this article to describe such a person (MOS:TIES). Drafting a lead section requires us to apply some editorial judgment beyond asking whether a sentence is, or can be interpreted as, technically accurate. This is a case where the sentence doesn't belong. agtx 15:23, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 September 2021

Citation 11 links to an article which does not mention Hawaii. Please remove it. 199.191.87.253 (talk) 16:38, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

 Done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:46, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 November 2021

The statement that Hawaii is the fourth smallest state in the US by area is incorrect. That distinction goes to NJ behind RI, DE, and CT, per the source already cited. As per that source, HI is eigth-smallest in the US. Drinagh1261 (talk) 14:18, 23 November 2021 (UTC)  Done - PianoDan (talk) 17:42, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Why is this article protected in ongoing fashion, so that obvious issues cannot be addressed?

This sort of decision should be as short term as possible, with periodic review to ensure it remains necessary as time passes. Meanwhile:

The "First human settlement..." subsection of the "History" section opens with a sentence that is tagged "dubious-discuss". That tag has been in place since MAY 2018. This is a single point that can be rectified, with either a narrowing of the issue, or its resolution. Moreover, the same statement appears in the lede, and it is not tagged as dubious there—so that until it is addressed, the matter of first colonisation is a matter of inconsistency within the article.

The citation appearing is a reliable source, though apparently primary. If used for its introductory material, where the author's primary research conjecture is framed by other alternative perspectives, the one source might be sufficient to fairly present the content intended by this sentence, allowing removal of the tag. Specifically, while finding further secondary historical sources is ideal, a fair presentation of the scholarly ideas about early history might be derivable from that one source. Here is the abstract of that appearing source:

The question of when Polynesians first discovered the Hawaiian Islands—the most remote archipelago in the world—has engaged scholars for two centuries., and others proposed theories and projected dates of first settlement based on oral traditions, genealogies, and linguistic comparisons. With the advent of stratigraphic archaeology and radiocarbon dating, new models of Polynesian settlement emerged, seeming to push back the date of Polynesian settlement in Eastern Polynesia. Until recently, orthodox opinion put initial Polynesian discovery of Hawai'i between ca. AD 300–750. In the past two decades, significant advances in radiocarbon dating and the targeted re-dating of key Eastern Polynesian and Hawaiian sites has strongly supported a "short chronology" model of Eastern Polynesian settlement. It is suggested here that initial Polynesian discovery and colonization of the Hawaiian Islands occurred between approximately AD 1000 and 1200. The only habitation site in the archipelago which has been securely dated to this time frame is the O18 Bellows Beach site at Waimānalo, O'ahu Island.

I would propose that the editor's maintaining the restricted control of this article review this abstract—or the cited research article as a whole, if they have academic library privileges (for a decent history and archaeology collection)—and that they present a modified opening sentence for this subsection presenting the ca. 1000-1200 CE dating of the discovery and early colonisation of the islands with a broadened statement indicating that as one of the available, research-justified positions. If that is done, from this one source, or otherwise, the "dubious..." tag can likely be removed, or exchanged for "better source". In any case, some progress (from 2018) can be made. Again, ideally, some broader work could be done. The reserachgate URL is a poor one to use, and that article was published in 2011. Hence, by now, that author's perspective may be more widely held—a review source might be found stating so—or other material might be found so this and the lede sentence might be best presented and accurate.

Note, I am an academic, retired, and would have made the edit without fuss, had it been possible. I am an experienced editor with experience as long as most here (and with as many or more edits than most). But I will not log, a right given to be by Jimmy Wales et al at the founding of the encyclopedia. It was and is our right to remain fully unknown here. So in addition to the foregoing, I propose that the restrictions here be lifted as soon as possible, so other good editors less devoted to the place than I, who would not take the time to come here and write petitions, can make scholarly changes as their limited time permits. The quality of the encyclopedia is not helped by overly restraining involvement. Cheers.

98.253.16.20 (talk) 03:29, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Diff of addition of doubtful tag. Discussion of this not found in talk archives. Edit summary: this is doubtful, considering that the article on Marquesas Islands states these were only settled in the 11th century CE. Courtesy ping: @TadejM:, discuss? I'm not familiar with Hawaii history. Thank you Adakiko (talk) 04:23, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 30 October 2018 and 11 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Peer reviewers: Bunny233.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:08, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:30, 1 March 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 December 2021

change the last sentence in the opening paragraphs to say "by far the highest cost of living" or just "the highest cost of living" not "one of the higehst" -- 193 vs. 158 (DC) is not even close, easy to say with certainty that it is the highest. people are too unwilling to commit to things like this when they're so clear — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.120.7.207 (talk) 16:15, 4 April 2022 (UTC)


Change: Climates vary considerably on each island; they can be divided into windward and leeward (koʻolau and kona, respectively) areas based upon location relative to the higher mountains. Windward sides face cloud cover.[citation needed]

To:

Climates vary considerably on each island; they can be divided into windward and leeward (koʻolau and kona, respectively) areas based upon location relative to the higher mountains. Leeward side is hotter and drier because the moisture is blocked as the trade winds pass the mountain, while the windward side is wetter and cooler. See "Best Places to Visit in Hawaii". LUXURY under BUDGET. May 15, 2021. Retrieved December 5, 2021. Hawaiipride (talk) 22:14, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. That is not a reliable source. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:38, 6 December 2021 (UTC)
Please review this decision. The above correspondent is correct about the windward and leeward description, etc. And if substantively correct, source or no, those controlling the article should take the time to check the scholarly argument, and make the edit. (A check of the corresponding Britannica article, among other easily accessed sources—Britannica being mentioned because it is already cited here, albeit in improper format—shows the windward and leeward matter being discussed in relation to the weather of the islands.)
Note, however—someone with expertise in climatology or meteorology should be consulted whether the windward/leward discussion is germane to the latter and not the former. (The matter is certainly relevant to weather, but if the changes from the windward and leeward sides elevate to the level of contributing to distinctives in climate are a separate matter, for an expert to decide.) Otherwise, please consider lifting the restrictions here. Then you can tag the poor source after the earlier editor adds it, and someone like me can come and edit the sentence to a better scholarly source. That is the way this place is supposed to function, is it not? In any case, don't just dismiss valid scholarly objections, thus limiting any forward progress. Please. Cheers. 98.253.16.20 (talk) 03:36, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 20 April 2022

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. Garnarblarnar (talk) 23:03, 26 April 2022 (UTC) (non-admin closure) Garnarblarnar (talk) 23:03, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Hawaii → Hawaiʻi – This proposal has been discussed twice in this page's history, as far as I can tell, but the last time was nine years ago. The question is: should this page be moved to Hawaiʻi? In previous discussions WP:COMMONNAME was cited as the reason to leave the page as it is. This isn't a persuasive rationale anymore. Per WP:TIES, we use the appropriate form of English when an article has a strong national tie. Hawaiʻi's history and relationship with the rest of the United States is complicated, and the idea that we would apply Ties and Common Name to allow what is commonly used in the mainland United States to trample over the common usage in Hawaiʻi smacks of systemic bias. The spelling with the Okina appears predominant in Hawaiʻi. It's used by the state government, the state courts, the state university, magazines, news outlets, and road signs. It's time to catch up. agtx 13:53, 20 April 2022 (UTC) agtx 19:02, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Discussion

  • (leaving here for continuity, but repeated in RM template) Support. In previous discussions WP:COMMONNAME was cited as the reason to leave the page as it is. This isn't a persuasive rationale anymore. Per WP:TIES, we use the appropriate form of English when an article has a strong national tie. Hawaiʻi's history and relationship with the rest of the United States is complicated, and the idea that we would apply Ties and Common Name to allow what is commonly used in the mainland United States to trample over the common usage in Hawaiʻi smacks of systemic bias. The spelling with the Okina appears predominant in Hawaiʻi. It's used by the state government, the state courts, the state university, magazines, news outlets, and road signs. It's time to catch up. agtx 19:15, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
    Just a comment. Dismissing the US connection like that is actually, in itself, an example of US-centrism. This is a global encyclopaedia.(Note my spelling there.) Its audience is the whole world, not just the USA. Obviously the Hawaii spelling is used throughout the world. Your argument needs to be that the local spelling should override that used by everyone EVERYWHERE else. HiLo48 (talk) 00:16, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
    I mentioned the US connection only because the MOS refers to "national" varieties of English, and this is a sub-national variety of English. Otherwise, correct, in articles that hace a strong national tie, the local spelling of English words (or choice of words) can override that used everywhere else, even for small island countries (Jamaica is written in that country's national variety of English). This is a feature, not a bug. agtx 15:52, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
    WP:TIES is to determine what nation's dialect of English should be used in the article, which in this case would be American English. It does not mean that the local non-English language should be used (otherwise we'd be writing the whole article in the Hawaiian language). WP:COMMONNAME applies to determine what the title of the article should be, and English language reliable sources overwhelmingly refer to the state as Hawaii. This article is not titled Hawaiʻi for the same reason that the article Germany is not titled Deutschland. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:35, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
    This is flawed reasoning. None of the sources I provided were written in the Hawaiian language. They were written in English. While the okina originates in written Hawaiian, it is commonly used in reliable English-language sources with a close national connection to the topic. German sources written in English refer to the country as Germany. agtx 15:44, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Hawai'i, the spelling does not seem to be the common one in American english usage. It has been mentioned already in the name, which should suffice.Captain Jack Sparrow (talk) 05:33, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose As an American who loves Hawaii and has had wonderful visits there, I am sympathetic to Hawaiian nationalism, and would be happy if the "Hawai'i" spelling becomes dominant over time. But that time has not yet come. "Hawaii", overwhelmingly, is still the most common usage in English language sources worldwide. We do not favor local English sources over worldwide English language sources on a matter like this. Quite the opposite. This is a worldwide encyclopedia, after all. Cullen328 (talk) 05:45, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
    • @Cullen328: A genuine question: do you have a Wikipedia policy/guideline source for not favoring local English sources on a matter like this? I haven't seen one, but I want to know about it if I've missed it. agtx 13:47, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
      • Agtx, Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Spelling says we should use the appropriate national variant and does not mention any state or provincial or regional variants. Hawaii is part of the United States so the common American English spelling should be used. Cullen328 (talk) 16:03, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
        • Understood, but that's not what you said above. You said we don't favor local English sources above worldwide ones, but what you cited says the opposite. That just brings us back to the question of how we're going to understand "national" in this context, and whether, given the history of Hawaiʻi, we're going to let mainland US usage dictate the name of this article. I'm not sure that's right here. agtx 16:09, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
  • Comment. This should be done as a WP:Requested move or at least a properly filed RFC. Calidum 05:49, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
    @Calidum: WP:RFCNOT, as noted in this edit. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 20:19, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose with regrets - I'm sympathetic to the nomination but it's still used without the okina in official state usage/seals/et cetera, which I think is outcome determinative here. (I wouldn't mind a discussion for changing some of the island names, though.) SportingFlyer T·C 17:10, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I mean, I don't really care, but Hawaii is still pretty obviously the WP:COMMONNAME by a massive margin. And I'm not terribly convinced by the links in the request. There are still lots of scattered "Hawaii"s in them. If it isn't concerete enough on the sites, we surely shouldn't move the page for now. --Quiz shows 22:50, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose Per WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. The name without the apostrophe is WP:COMMONNAME by a tremendous margin. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:45, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose move. Both names are equally recognizable, but the ʻokina-less spelling is more common. O.N.R. (talk) 05:55, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Exceptionally clear common name throughout the world. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:27, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The current title is the common English name, both inside the U.S. and outside the U.S. Hawaii is not an independent nation, and we do not have a policy of local usage superseding national usage. And even if there were, "Hawaiʻi" is the name in the Hawaiian language, not the English language. Rreagan007 (talk) 18:28, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
  • Support It's the correct name not just in 'Ōlelo Hawai'i, but for the people of the islands and their culture. It should be changed.--Aubernas (talk) 03:01, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose The official state name is in English which does not use an Okina. I dont know why this is so difficult for people to grasp. Anon0098 (talk) 06:58, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Even if the native name is Hawaiʻi, the established common name in English is Hawaii without the ʻokina. Other languages also use translated names of the state. Using the native name in an English-language context is even harder because the punctuation mark in Hawaiʻi is not an apostrophe despite look like one but instead an ʻokina. We don't have Finland at Suomi or Sweden at Sverige either although those are the official native names, so why should Hawaii be any different? JIP | Talk 16:51, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose I've always that I can remember seen it this way, Britannica also uses "Hawaii". Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:17, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
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.

No secession yet!

Why are so many paragraphs describing current conditions written in past tense? I was about to fix it when I realized it is more changes than I have time to do. 伟思礼 (talk) 16:17, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 17 June 2022

change Hawaii to Hawai’i 2601:603:1480:9150:8D7B:EA99:1F1F:9704 (talk) 05:58, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

 Not done: see above Cannolis (talk) 06:41, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Template:Flag

I've added an okina alias to Template:Flag for Hawaiʻi. {{flag|Hawai{{okina}}i}} now produces  Hawaiʻi and links to this article. Yours aye,  Buaidh  talk e-mail 01:59, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Inappropriate reference

Reference no. 11 is to an article on the site ammo.com, which sells ammunition. Surely there has to be a better source? 2A00:23C7:7225:1E01:3C2C:6BFF:FEEA:AC58 (talk) 12:24, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Agreed. Also the language in the lede should be changed with the reference. Hawaii didn’t “join” the U.S., per the article’s body. The Kingdom of Hawaii was overthrown. Per WP:LEAD, that sentence needs to reflect the body. —Hobomok (talk) 15:18, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
Also agree. I've removed the sentence. How many other states were truly independent before statehood is debatable; in the body we say there was only one other. Even if the source wasn't problematical, "one of several" would not be an important enough factoid for the first paragraph of the lead. Station1 (talk) 18:00, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Northern border

Does Hawaii really go all the way north to 28° 27′ as the infobox says? The northenmost point of land seems to be Kilauea Light, which is at 22° 13′. GA-RT-22 (talk) 19:12, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Yes. The territory of Hawaii includes the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands, the northernmost extent of which is Kure Atoll (Mokupāpapa), which is located at 28°25′N 178°20′W. Arjuna (talk) 19:47, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Never mind, I found it. Kure Atoll is the northernmost part of the state, at 28° 25′. I was confused because Midway Atoll, at 28° 12′, is not part of the state. GA-RT-22 (talk) 19:44, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Yes, it was a mistake. My apologies. Arjuna (talk) 21:43, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 November 2022

In the summary, change "The uninhabited Northwestern Hawaiian Islands make up most of the Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument, the United States' largest protected area and the third largest in the world. " to "The uninhabited Northwestern Hawaiian Islands make up most of the Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument, the United States' largest protected area and the fourth largest in the world. " because the page linked to indicates that Papahanumokuakea Marine National Monument is now fourth, not third largest. Tllado (talk) 02:08, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

 Done 3mi1y (talk) 10:28, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Human settlement of the Hawaiian Islands

From the outset of the History section of the article, several things are conflated.

There is a body of scholarship positing that the Hawaiian Islands were first settled by Polynesian seafarers from the Marquesas between 300-600 CE, who brought domesticated animals and various agricultural systems and products to Hawaii. Evidence includes aquaculture sites dated to as early as the fourth century.

In addition, and not necessarily contradictory, there is scholarship (including radiocarbon dating) that suggests Hawaiian civilization as it is generally understood began with a second wave of colonization. This pulse of migration was also of Polynesian origin, but this time from Tahiti, and taking place between 1,000 and 1200 CE - at least 400 years after the initial wave, and possibly almost a millennium later (though very likely somewhere in between). 138.207.197.50 (talk) 05:00, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

What sources posit that the first settlement is between 300-600 CE? Not challenging, just asking so I may review. TarkusABtalk/contrib 00:47, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:25, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:40, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Please accommodate my dating system AD/BC

I am having trouble understanding the odd dating system used in this article. Please add AD/BC dates in brackets. 174.247.236.93 (talk) 01:52, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Which part of the text are you referring to? CMD (talk) 02:49, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
I would like AD/BC dates throughout the whole text in a similar way to how Wikipedia accommodates Fahrenheit 0°c (32°F). 174.247.224.208 (talk) 10:37, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
Wikipedia does that because those are actually different systems. Nothing in this article needs to be translated to AD/BC, as those dates are the same. CMD (talk) 11:51, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

"See Irish American" doesn't link to the Irish American Wikipedia page

In the "Population of Hawaii (2008)" table, the text "See Irish American" doesn't link to the Irish American Wikipedia page, but all the other links are correct to the other American populations. Prob could do with a quick fix. Kerbdog (talk) 21:09, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

This has been fixed and there is a link to "Irish American" in the table. Jurisdicta (talk) 16:36, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Suggestion 1

In the Info-Box, the income rank says "4th" ... it should say "6th" ... per List of U.S. states and territories by income. 32.209.69.132 (talk) 03:16, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Wikipedia is not a reliable source see WP:USERGENERATED Lightoil (talk) 12:29, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
Yeah. I am not interested in playing the "Wikipedia bureaucracy" game. But, thanks for the offer. The other page that I cited (List of U.S. states and territories by income) says "6th". So, I assume we need to delete that entry from that other page, correct? As there is no reliable source. Or we can keep the two pages with contradictory information. Your approach makes great sense! Plus, thanks for the, um, "help" ... ? 32.209.69.132 (talk) 03:13, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
The problem is mostly with the List of U.S. states and territories by income, which is probably using annual estimates rather than the once-per-decade census information, and doesn't include the 2020 census data which (I believe) shows Hawaii as 4th per-capita. There is no quick-fix here. Walt Yoder (talk) 14:32, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
So, we have a singular statement: Hawaii is ranked 6th in income. We can include that statement in Article "A", even though it is not sourced. But, we cannot include that statement in Article "B", because it is not sourced. Did I get that straight? Yep, makes sense. Wikipedia sense, that is. So, if the data in the other article is incorrect / not sourced ... why is it allowed to "stay" there? I am quite sure, in Wiki-speak, the answer will be something like this: blah, blah, blah ... mumbo, jumbo ... blah, blah, blah ... mumbo, jumbo. I'm wrong? 32.209.69.132 (talk) 00:37, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Suggestion 2

In the Info-Box, the map is misleading and should be revised. It should show the 48 states (USA) ... and the relative position of Hawaii, some 2,000 miles south-west (i.e., "down to the left") in the Pacific Ocean. Right now, it looks like Hawaii is quite far north, almost on the same latitude as Texas or so. The map is probably "technically" accurate .... but the image is very misleading, for the reasons mentioned. 32.209.69.132 (talk) 03:33, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Lightoil (talk) 12:29, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
What, exactly, is unclear? How about reading my previous posting? It's very clear. One does not have to regurgitate "exact words" ... such as "please change X to Y". As I said, my post was quite clear. Any (semi-) intelligent person could parse my words and figure out what my suggestion is. Any (semi-) intelligent person could parse my words and figure out what the "X" is, and what the "Y" is (i.e., what the requested change is). I had assumed a basic level of reading comprehension on this site. My bad. As I said above: "Yeah. I am not interested in playing the 'Wikipedia bureaucracy' game. But, thanks for the offer". As I also said above: "Thanks for the, um, 'help' ". 32.209.69.132 (talk) 03:57, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
I've switched the map to one that I feel is better, but still not perfect. Walt Yoder (talk) 14:38, 20 August 2023 (UTC)
Thank you. But, procedurally, how was this done? Since I never used the magic "change X to Y" language? This question is more for that other poster (User:Lightoil), than it is for you. Thanks again. 32.209.69.132 (talk) 00:45, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Location "in" the US

Is it really accurate to describe Hawaii as in the Western United States? it's the ultimate survival crafting adventure! Discover wide-open brickscapes where creativity and mischief click. Collect resources, battle creatures and power. That terminology kind of implies the US owns a huge chunk of the Pacific Ocean, which even I as a devotedly patriotic American know is decidedly not true (though the US Navy might disagree, but I digress). So wouldn't it be better to just say it's a US state in the Pacific? Spartan198 (talk) 19:16, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

It is accurate by convention and custom. The appropriate term is "North Pacific Ocean" (previously referred to as "Mid-Pacific"), although it is often accurately characterized as part of the Western United States. So to answer your question, yes it is accurate, but probably deserves a footnote explaining it. It can be described in many ways, for example, Hawaii is also a Pacific state (or is in the Pacific region) of the West Coast of the United States. Viriditas (talk) 00:53, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
Custom by who? Californians? This is not, at all how it is ever referred to in the islands. Hawai'i is an island in Polynesia, that is part of the United States. This is a disturbing, and grossly misappropriated statement. 72.253.147.200 (talk) 18:17, 9 August 2023 (UTC)
Yep. Technically Hawaii is not a western state. I have heard it called one, but you are right when you say it is not actually in the western USA. It is in the Pacific ocean. Bucky winter soldier (talk) 12:37, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
"The U.S. Census Bureau's definition of the 13 westernmost states includes the Rocky Mountains and the Great Basin to the Pacific Coast, and the mid-Pacific islands state, Hawaii." Linked above. Viriditas (talk) 14:17, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
Alright. I trust the census Bureau Bucky winter soldier (talk) 14:18, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 October 2023

i am trying to fix some spelling mistakes 156.146.200.223 (talk) 15:34, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: this is not the right page to request additional user rights. You may reopen this request with the specific changes to be made and someone may add them for you, or if you have an account, you can wait until you are autoconfirmed and edit the page yourself. Cannolis (talk) 15:39, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 October 2023

The top countries of origin for Hawaii’s immigrants were the Philippines (45%), China (9%), Japan (8%), Korea (6%) and the Marshall Islands (4%) in 2018. Add this to demographics section.

Source: https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/sites/default/files/research/immigrants_in_hawaii.pdf 170.80.111.10 (talk) 06:13, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

@170.80.111.10 Add to where? -Lemonaka‎ 12:11, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
 Not done: Not specific enough and the user is blocked so they cannot give further information. WanderingMorpheme 01:32, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Asterisk in reconstructed name

In this unexplained edit from 2020 the asterisk preceding Sawaiki was removed and it has not been reinserted despite the fact that the footnote next to it still explains its existence. Is there a reason for this or is it an oversight? Tesolc (talk) 22:17, 13 December 2023 (UTC)

Missing part of the History section

The following is a quote from the page "Belgian Colonial Empire":

During the 1840s and 50s, King Leopold I tentatively supported several proposals to acquire territories overseas. In 1843, he signed a contract with Ladd & Co. to colonize the Kingdom of Hawaii, but the deal fell apart when Ladd & Co. ran into financial difficulties. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belgian_colonial_empire#Background_in_the_early_19th_century)

I'm not sure if this is something that should be part of the history section (to indicate that - shortly after the signing of the constitution and during the time of conflicts between the monarchy and the american missionaries - the monarchy was in talks with belgium (mostly neutral at the time but with close ties to the UK, Germany, Russia, and France) to become part of its domain. While the quoted bit above is documented and sourced in the article I copied it from, I seem to recall reading a few more in detail sources indicating that Hawaii was being purchased with the Belgian monarchy as a silent partner and intended to not become a Belgian colony but a province with the region becoming a principality or somehting of the sort but I can't recall where I read it so the entire story may need more research before it gets added onto the page. 2A02:A03F:8A27:1600:4EB:5F11:3EAF:6320 (talk) 16:29, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

I feel that we will need to see the reliable sources that talk about this and see if they show the effects of that have enough due weight and impact on the history of Hawaii. KittyHawkFlyer (talk) 22:51, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
Leopold is briefly mentioned at Hawaiian Kingdom, and more can be added to History of Hawaii. Viriditas (talk) 22:55, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 April 2024

Etymology The definition of the Hawaii name may be derived from oral transmission of first nation's language as it's used in Odjibwe language with meaning "In the middle"

From Odjibwe language "Nawaii, in the middle ; pron. na-wa-i-i."

Source : A Grammar and Dictionary of the Otchipwe Language", Beauchemin & Valois Publisher, Montreal, 1879.

Reference: https://www.canadiana.ca/view/oocihm.60172/1 p. 5 Montgrand (talk) 21:16, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. - FlightTime (open channel) 21:18, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Strongly opposed to this original research. There are many words that can be found in multiple languages yet have different etymologies. The Hawaiians, a Polynesian culture, have indicated that Hawaiʻi is named after Hawaiʻiloa, the mythical fisherman who was the legendary discover of the islands. Let's trust the people indigenous to the area & not a word that comes from a different region & ethnicity that is almost certainly a coincidence. Peaceray (talk) 00:29, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
The relevant section is on p. 274.[2] It says nothing about Hawaii. Viriditas (talk) 00:38, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hawaii/Archive_10&oldid=1254383343"