Talk:Native Hawaiians

This  level-5 vital article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Hawaii Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hawaii, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Hawaii on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HawaiiWikipedia:WikiProject HawaiiTemplate:WikiProject HawaiiHawaii articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Ethnic groups High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks: Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks: Meta-tasks: Place the {{Ethnic groups}} template on the talk page of articles within the scope of this project. Resolve the disparity in importance rankings among different ethnic groups Articles about ethnic groups that currently have issues needing resolution: Category:Unassessed Ethnic groups articles Category:Ethnic groups articles needing merge action Category:Ethnic groups articles needing infoboxes Category:Ethnic groups articles needing reassessment Category:Ethnic groups articles needing attention Iyer Peruvian people Start an article: Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Article requests Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks. Polynesia Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Polynesia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Polynesia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PolynesiaWikipedia:WikiProject PolynesiaTemplate:WikiProject PolynesiaPolynesia articles Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1

To the anon editor: If we must list related people there must be some logic to it. Adding the Chamorro people - just one people out of the many Micronesian peoples who are related, albeit distantly, to Polynesians and therefore to Hawaiians, is not justifiable. Why single out the Chamorro for special mention? Kahuroa (talk) 10:41, 28 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do any statistics exist on the percent of Native Hawaiians in each religious category? If so, they should be put into the Demographics section. Duoduoduo (talk) 14:49, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah it only list their religion as Roman Catholic and Protestant. I highly doubt there are any other Hawaiians of other denomination and religion. Especially some Hawaiians who still believe or reverted to believing in the old Hawaiian polytheistic religion.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 02:53, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is a reference to King Kalakaua's "Legends and Myths of Hawai'i" about Pa'ao. That work never mentions that Pa'ao was from Samoa and Pili (Piri in Tahitian) is also a well known chief from Ra'iatea. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.108.192.13 (talk) 04:19, 5 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

With at least one exception, this article does not capitalize the "n" in "N/native Hawaiian" (except of course in the name of an organization or at the start of a sentence). Maybe I missed it, but I can't find any previous discussion of this. In standard English orthography, names of ethnic groups are fully capitalized: Italian American, Inuit, American Indian, Native Hawaiian, etc. Without the capital N, it conventionally means someone who was born in a place: native South Carolinian, etc. I think it should be changed everywhere in the article to N. I'll leave it to you guys who frequent this page to consider this. Duoduoduo (talk) 17:21, 16 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't the number of figures in the infobox a bit excessive? Also there are too many royals. It downplays the role other non-royal Hawaiians played in history merely to promote people were royals but did very little. Many of the monarchs and kuhina nui (except Keoni Ana not included) shown here impact Hawaiian history in their own ways but it doesn't mean every one of them should be included. I don't think John Papa Īī should be included since compare to Malo and Kamakau his fame is minimal. And Henry Opukahaia, more notable than many here is not even included. Nor is Jonah Kūhiō Kalanianaʻole.

I think the list should balance between royal and non-royal, different areas of fame, and having equal distributions throughout history with the goal number of twelve at most (Native Americans in the United States has twelve too):

• Kamehameha I (a powerful figure, politics/war)
• Liliuokalani (iconic monarch/last queen/songwriter and composer)
• David Malo or Samuel Kamakau, not both (historian and early Hawaiian literary figure); I vote Malo
• Joseph Nawahi (non-royal Hawaiian politician with impact on history)
• Henry Opukahaia (iconic figure for Hawaii's Christian history)
• This is a toss-up
  • Either Jonah Kūhiō Kalanianaʻole (20th century political figure connected with past royal line) or someone else from the Territorial period would work too....or
  • Kalakaua (monarch who traveled around world and started the Hawaiian renaissance)...Or we can keep Kuhio and sacrifice one of the following
• Duke Kahanamoku (iconic sportsman, ambassador of Aloha, no need to even argue)
• Eddie Aikau (iconic sportsman)
• Israel Kamakawiwoʻole (iconic musician, no need to argue)
• One modern celebrity: maybe Jason Scott Lee or Nicole Scherzinger
• Daniel Akaka, modern politicians
• James Aiona, modern politicians....If we have an iconic Hawaiian sovereignty activist like Mililani Trask it could replace James Aiona.

--KAVEBEAR (talk) 03:00, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Any possible changes to the infobox can be done on Template:Native Hawaiians infobox. Please do discuss any changes to the images though.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 04:34, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed Henry Opukahaia. Only notability is being considered the first Christian Hawaiian which is not sourced strong enough at the moment to pass Wikipedia notability in my opinion. Agree that royals had too much of a presence and removed Kalakaua as I think only the first and last ruler should be represented. Added other figures but only feel strongly that Nona Beamer remain as her notability was very well established and there are many sources on her not even used in the article we have.--Mark Miller (talk) 05:00, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I readded Kalakaua because not only was he a royal and a monarch he was central figure to the first Hawaiian Renaissance in the 1880s and the revival of hula in Hawaiian culture. Henry Opukahaia is more notable than Kalaimanokahoʻowaha because his death and experience in New England catalyzed the first group of American missionaries to come to the Hawaiian Islands. The money from his biography and portraits of his Hawaiian classmates help fund the first mission. He was the only figure of Hawaiian religious significance that came to mind when I created the panel. Both Malo and Kamakau were native scholars and cultural historians, so having both made no sense. I left Malo because his works covered commoners and chiefs alike in Hawaiian culture and history while Kamakau was more invested in the history and genealogy of the chiefs; Malo was also one of the first Hawaiians educated under the Western education system at Lahainaluna ten years before Kamakau. I added Nawahi instead of reinstating Opukahaia which adds a famous non-royal political figure from the period of the Kingdom. Nawahi was a famous legislator, political minister, artist, lawyer newspaper publisher and founder and president of Hui Aloha Aina Hawaiian Patriotic League. The limits of these list on these articles lay in the fact that we can't use figures who don't have public domain images. Winona Beamer doesn't have a public domain image. Her fair use image will be remove in the near future by an administrator. I believe that figures like Iolani Luahine and Mary Kawena Pukui belongs here more but they also have no public domain images. --KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:32, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I completely disagree with the Henry Opukahaia obviously but still maintain that Kanaina is notable enough and , infact, vital to this list as the first Hawaiian to greet Cook and then participated in his death. Nawahi is an acceptable subject for the montage as is Beamer and only needs a rationale for use on this page. We may use non free images in infoboxes to illustrate the subject.--Mark Miller (talk) 06:10, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• As far as the Beamer image goes, I have no idea why you uploaded it if you feel it shouldn't be allowed. But it is acceptable use. An admin will not take action as even fair use image require review and discussion and in this case the subject is no longer living and in her lifetime, free images were unlikely due to her rare public appearances due to advanced age. In her younger days her images were with other notable family or in publications and always held a copyright.--Mark Miller (talk) 06:46, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is no consensus that I can find to limit the royals in the info box. Sorry, but the idea of such a limitation when there is something like 1500 years of history where the only notable figures are basically the aliʻi. Also, the infobox seems to give undue weight to the Kalakaua Dynasty which lasted less than twenty years compared to nearly 80 years of the Kamehamehas, so I am removing Liliuokalani. As the last monarch that is certainly note worthy but inclusion over, say Kamehameha III? He wrote the first constitution, created the Great Mahele and had the longest reign of any Hawaiian Monarch.--Mark Miller (talk) 10:30, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe a gallery elsewhere in the article is in order.

Liliuokalani looms large, not just because of being Queen & her futile attempts to restore the monarchy, but because of her contribution to Hawaiian music. Surely the creator of Aloha ʻOe deserves a place at the table ...

Peaceray (talk) 20:09, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You're preaching to the choir. My point is...what table are we setting? Writing a song is hardly more notable than giving away trillions of dollars worth of land. Being the last is notable but why claim such notability is greater just for the lack of success? This is the slippery slope we create by illustrating the info box in this manner. I would much prefer random anonymous images in the info box for Native Hawaiian but if we take this route what we need is an expanded article that touches on these subjects but doesn't attempt to place one over the other like a contest.--Mark Miller (talk) 09:16, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I mentioned Liliʻuokalani's Aloha ʻOe because it is the most famous of the body of her work. Search results for Liliʻuokalani for sheet music at WorldCat.org shows that she wrote a lot of other songs once you click past the first page where Aloha ʻOe dominated. I think she is clearly the most important Native Hawaiʻian composer of the 19th century.

I would argue for swapping out Kalākaua's picture for Liliʻuokalani for several reasons besides her musical importance:

• In any conversation involving the Monarchy that I had with anyone with Native Hawaiʻian ancestory, it was hands down that Liliʻuokalani was the most commonly mentioned. Yes, Kalākaua revived the Hula, had the Bayonet Constitution, & installed electricity & telephone in ʻIolani Palace before the White House, but the overthrow of Liliʻuokalani has had a profound and lasting effect on Hawaiʻi's politics and history and set a pattern of how Republican and Democratic administrations differ in handling the overthrow of other countries' governments. (On this later point, see Kinzer, Stephen (2006). Overthrow: America's Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq. Times Books. ISBN 0805078614.)
• Liliuokalani is a C-class article, has been featured 5 times on the Main page in the On this day... section, & is of interest to 5 WikiProjects, whereas Kalākaua is a Start-class article & of interest to 2 WikiProjects. Let's link to the more complete, longer, & better article.
• Better gender balance. Liliʻuokalani was only Queen Regent of Hawaiʻi, & currently only 2 of the dozen pictures in the infobox are of women.

Finally, an altnernate approach might be to have a template that displays different images on different page views. One such template is used in the Did you know... section on the Main page. It's a bit tricky to use, but could provide a solution of shoe-horning all the desireable images into the infobox without eliminating some of the other worthy candidates.

Peaceray (talk) 17:30, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know that I could argue against most of that. However, I would also mention that a conversation with any Native Hawaiian about the history of Hawaiian music and hula would probably also note that Liliuokalani is not even the most notable Hawaiian composer of her time, let alone the overall history of the Native Hawaiian people. That honor seems to be attributed to Helen Desha Beamer. In fact, the Beamer Family has two composers in the Hall of Fame. A look at the Hawaiian Music Hall of Fame shows that Mahi Beamer and Helen Beamer were both inducted, while Liliuokalani has yet to be. No disrespect to Her Late Majesty, Queen Liliʻuokalani. But then, Winona Beamer is already in the montage and I would argue has become very much one of the most notable Native Hawaiians in contemporary history and is a good representation of the entire Beamer family, but we could easily replace her with Helen or Mahi and still be as accurate with notability. The problem is...we can only show images and, well images only go back as far as 1779. Liloa and Umi-a-Liloa could well be represented in an image that isn't a portrait, such as one of the emblems of the aliʻI. So, I like the entire idea of some sort of rotating image. Good idea and I support it.--Mark Miller (talk) 20:07, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's a strong baseless claim that Liliuokalani was less important than Helen Desha Beamer in the scheme of Hawaiian music. Liliuokalani was experted in ancient meles writing the Kumulipo and embued traditional Hawaiian lyrics with Western melodies creating many songs still popular to this day. Understand in the Hawaiian Music Hall of Fame, Liliuokalani and her three siblings are considered the four Patrons (Na Lani Eha) [1], the foundational supporters of Hawaiian music and hula in the 19th-century during the first Hawaiian renaissance of Kalakaua's reign.

Na Lani Eha, the Patrons of Hawaiian culture, were not only giants in the field of Hawaiian music but form the very cornerstones of subsequent Hawaiian culture and arts, and as such, "preside" over the greats of Hawaiian music honored herein. They have their own prominant place in the 1995 koa traveling exhibit and share space with the first ten Hall of Fame honorees. Click on the links below to access the biographies and pictures of the Royal Four

--KAVEBEAR (talk) 23:25, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why we need a separate article for this. The other article is a stub, and everything it describes seems to concern Native Hawaiians. QVVERTYVS (hm?) 07:47, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't see this until now but no. I support inclusion here in its own section but just because it pertains to Native Hawaiians does not mean it is not a notable enough subject for a stand alone article or that it must be segregated to this article. The subject does indeed pertain to more than just Native Hawaiians. Please begin a formal AFD if you feel the article does not comply with notability guidelines for a stand alone article.--Mark Miller (talk) 21:19, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't intend to go to AfD; withdrawing merge proposal because the article has been expanded. Thank you Mark Miller! QVVERTYVS (hm?) 08:11, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Qwertyus. I appreciate your patrolling of new articles. In the future I will remember to try and publish the articles in a more fully formed fashion.--Mark Miller (talk) 16:49, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

first, i made basic editing corrections on this page without realizing that it has gone through some past issues with edits/reverts/reverts/reverts, etc. sorry about that. i try not to just go into "editor" mode on articles with that type of history. i'm fairly certain i didn't make any changes that are "controversial," but i'm just noting it here, in case someone wants to look closely. the "quick summary" i typed in was quite accurate.

however, i DID have a question on this section (as titled here). mainly, there's the section title, then the section begins with something in early 2000s, talks rather extensively about that bill, then goes to a poll done in 2003, and THEN a poll done in 2009 about who does and does not support the "Native Hawaiian Reorganization Act of 2009." (as opposed to the "Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act of 2009"??) but it doesn't say what HAPPENED to the bill? did it pass? if so, when? if so, what was the vote? if so, what has happened since then, i.e., has there been any "higher taxes to cover any loss in tax revenues," as 3/4 of people were worried about??Colbey84 (talk) 09:18, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Native Hawaiians. 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:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20101223043001/http://grassrootinstitute.org/system/attachments/32/FINAL_topline_Grassroot_Institute_of_Hawaii_11-30-2.pdf to http://grassrootinstitute.org/system/attachments/32/FINAL_topline_Grassroot_Institute_of_Hawaii_11-30-2.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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 II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 12:06, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've checked all modified links and set {{sourcecheck}} true. --ThT (talk) 09:31, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The section Emigration was deleted without discussing a possible improvement or extension of examples. Because emigration is an important fact in the intercultural relations between Hawaiʻi and other parts of the world it should be mentioned in the article. --ThT (talk) 15:39, 10 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Native Hawaiians. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120201182814/http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0056/tab26.pdf to http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0056/tab26.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120516235320/http://www.census.gov/newsroom/minority_links/hawaiian.html to http://www.census.gov/newsroom/minority_links/hawaiian.html

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

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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) 02:16, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've checked all modified links and set {{sourcecheck}} true. --ThT (talk) 09:31, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Native Hawaiians. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130524025104/http://www.census.gov/popest/data/state/asrh/2009/tables/SC-EST2009-03-15.xls to https://www.census.gov/popest/data/state/asrh/2009/tables/SC-EST2009-03-15.xls
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150501082145/http://kenconklin.org/mediawiki/index.php?title=Are_kanaka_maoli_indigenous_to_Hawai%27i%3F to http://kenconklin.org/mediawiki/index.php?title=Are_kanaka_maoli_indigenous_to_Hawai%27i%3F
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080916044123/http://www.hawaiireef.noaa.gov/heritage/welcome.html to http://hawaiireef.noaa.gov/heritage/welcome.html

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

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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) 14:30, 14 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've checked all modified links and set {{sourcecheck}} true. --ThT (talk) 09:31, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Evidence for a Tahitian conquest of the islands include the legends of Hawaiʻiloa and the navigator-priest Paʻao . . . ."

Isn't a "legend" the antithesis of "evidence"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mt98765 (talk • contribs) 02:28, 12 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article says there are 527,000, but then in the next paragraph it says there are only 371,000 people who are wholly or partly Native Hawaiian, of which 156,000 are exclusively Native Hawaiian. Adding those figures together gives 527,000, but you can't add them because one is included in the other. I don't know which is right. Richard75 (talk) 11:34, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I checked the citation. Page 15 says "There were 156,000 people who reported Native Hawaiian with no additional detailed NHPI group or race group and an additional 371,000 people who reported Native Hawaiian in combination with one or more other races and/or detailed NHPI groups (see Table 5). Thus, a total of 527,000 people reported Native Hawaiian alone or in any combination." I've corrected the article to say this. Richard75 (talk) 11:48, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This article is seemingly lacking in indigenous points of view especially about the dispossession of land by agri-business (Dole pineapple company) as well as the mass incarceration of Native Hawai'ians. Moreover, this article fails to mention any of the current anti-colonial protests of the past and present, including the most recent protest to prevent the construction of a telescope and observatory on a sacred site of Native people. There needs to be more to address both the military-industrial complex and prison industrial complex that has come to define life for many Native Hawai'ians as well as shifting the narrative to that of the Native Hawai'ians who live there. Ultimately the article seems to lack any meaningful organizational structure that makes it both logical and inviting, which is a disadvantage to the historically underrepresented NAtive Hawai'ians whose struggle and culture is often erased and/or misunderstood. Finally, more images both historic and contemporary are needed to give context to this article in order to highlight both the current existence and current struggle of Native Hawai'ians whose existence and overall survival depend on the continuation of their culture. Finally, I hope that this article can delete the comments about the Hula which seem to have a connotation of pro-assimilation which violated Wikipedia guidelines on impartiality. ^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5]}

Caquaile (talk) 16:23, 12 September 2020 (UTC)Chandler[reply]

@Caquaile, Thank you for improving this article. It did seem to miss out on a lot of historical events, most notably the 1893 overthrow of the former Hawaiian monarchy. By the way, you mentioned that comments about Hula had a pro-assimilationist attitude. Could you specify what you meant by that and which lines you were referring to? Mahalo. — Coastaline (talk) 04:43, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I think your article was very well written with a good amount of information on your topic. However, I do think that your lead section could be more robust with slightly more information added as well as a bit more information on the shorter sections within the articles as well - or even maybe joining it to a different section. Also, adding some more pictures would help as well! But, overall I don't see any other issues, a pretty good article overall! Emilyc12345678 (talk) 23:02, 17 October 2020 (UTC)emily[reply]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 August 2020 and 11 December 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Caquaile. Peer reviewers: Don'tTakeYourselfTooSeriously, Kdotlamar39, Emilyc12345678.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:59, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I never heard of Hawaiʻi Maoli. Any sources as to where this is now commonly used? Not in my decades living have I heard of such a term, and we know it does not exist in any of the Hawaiian newspapers which I'm sure someone has been at least looking through. 99.23.241.79 (talk) 02:28, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have also never heard of “Hawaiʻi Maoli”, not as a Hawaiian myself nor by cultural practictioners nor in academic circles. It is grammatically correct, but we have other autonyms for ourselves that are consistently used and recognized words for our identity. These being: kānaka maoli and kānaka ʻōiwi; these terms are plural. Anhedonia2 (talk) 04:18, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hawaiians have not lived in Hawaii remotely long enough to be considered native or indigenous. They are not an Aboriginal people that have resided in Hawaii long enough to have diverged into a unique ethnolinguistic group. They are polynesian settlers to be sure, but are not native in the same way Native Americans and Indigenous Australians are native. Nordic persons living in Iceland sould similarly be referred as Native Icelanders if we are to continue to use the term Native Hawaiian. Iceland was settled hundreds of years before the Polynesians settled Hawaii, so Icelanders probably have a greater right to claim Nativeness. I suggest a change to just Hawaiians and removal of the terms Native and Indigenous, unless referring to Taiwan, which most accept as the original homeland common to all polynesian peoples. 2600:1017:B02A:11E0:7EC9:7918:627B:5D4E (talk) 18:07, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia uses the terms that reliable sources use. Virtually every reliable source I have seen uses the term "Native Hawaiian." Aoi (青い) (talk) 18:18, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You are parroting propaganda used to delegitimize the connection of Hawaiian peoples to their land. This argument is used by people minimizing the injustice of cultural genocide, colonization, and occupation. This talking point assumes that a culture must be established “long enough” before their colonizers can consider respecting them.

The term “native Hawaiian” IS questionable, but not for this reason. It is a dubious term (that isn’t accepted by Hawaiians) because there is only one kind of Hawaiian: someone who descends from the indigenous peoples of Hawaiʻi. The term “native Hawaiian” implies that there are non-native Hawaiians, which there aren’t. People who live in Hawaiʻi and are not of Hawaiian descent are not “Hawaiian” the way people can be “Californian” or “Minnesotan”. “Hawaiian” denotes an ethnicity, not a nationality.

If the page is to be updated from “Native Hawaiians” to “Hawaiians”, it would be accurate to add a subsection explaining its incorrect use due to the issue of ethnicity, NOT due to settler-colonialist propaganda points. Anhedonia2 (talk) 04:09, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think that there are several policies & guidelines at play here.

• WP:COMMONNAME If you state native Hawaiian to anyone else outside of Hawaiʻi, they know what you mean. If I say "a Hawaiian musician" it will commonly refer to any musician from Hawaiʻi, whether they be Kamaʻāina or of native Hawaiian descent.
• It is a dubious term (that isn’t accepted by Hawaiians) seems to me to be an original research statement. Where is the verification from reliable sources for this? I lived on Oahu for nearly 14 years, & knew many & had friends who were of Hawaiian descent. While they would say that they were Hawaiian, or in some cases, Hapa, I did not hear any of them voice opposition as being identified as native Hawaiian.
• Even if verified, is the supposition that the term native Hawaiian is unacceptable by Hawaiians a position held by a minority of Hawaiians, which can be sussed out by reviewing reliable sources? If so, then it is WP:UNDUE. If not, then it still will require a consensus here for a name change.

Peaceray (talk) 04:42, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This website (ʻAina Momona; link: https://www.kaainamomona.org/post/hawaiian-vs-californian-why-there-is-a-difference) has a few articles, with sources, discussing the lack of a need for the “native” prefix. It also cites a kumu of mine, Marie Alohalani Brown, who is a PhD and cultural practitioner. The reason it seems like a “minority” of Hawaiians express this sentiment is because a majority of non-Hawaiians continue to use the term “native Hawaiian” despite hearing from us that it’s not a necessary term. Hawaiians are not really a group that people in positions of power will listen to (see: Kū Kiaʻi Mauna, petitions against annexation, legal proceedings to restore sovereignty, protests against reopening the islands in the midst of COVID). We live very much in a situation where those with power over us assume our wants and needs and turn deaf ears toward us.

I would also like to add that, perhaps, there is a differential in our experiences. I AM Hawaiian, and I’ve been around Hawaiians my whole life, and participated in Hawaiian academic circles. The term “native Hawaiian” is recognized as a term non-Hawaiians use in these circles. Anhedonia2 (talk) 20:10, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Anhedonia2: Finally getting back to this. Thank you for clarifying your perspective.

The problem with "Hawaiian vs Californian: Why there is a difference". is that it is on the "ALL BLOGS". portion of www.kaainamomona.org. As per WP:BLOGS, blogs are a self-published source & thus generally not considered a reliable resource. We need to have reliable resources to support a proposal to rename this article from Native Hawaiian to something like Hawaiians. Peaceray (talk) 18:57, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted this section. It doesn't seem like something that belongs in an encyclopedia and I can find nothing similar in the articles about other ethnic groups in Polynesia or any other part of the world.

Just the facts 808 (talk) 21:27, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Peaceray reverted this edit and asked me to discuss the proposed change on the talk page. But I already opened a discussion here. I also don't see why the default should be to keep whatever's already in the article.

Nobody has weighed in with an argument as to why this ethnic group should have this strange section in an encyclopedia article. The section itself doesn't explain why this content is here - is there evidence that Native Hawaiians have a distinct way of learning, but Samoans do not? If this section is going to remain, I think it needs to have a clear introduction that explains how we know that this particular Polynesian culture has unique ways of learning, which don't appear to be noted in the articles on any other culture.

Just the facts 808 (talk) 07:12, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Just the facts 808 it appears that the hawaian way of learning is deeply researched since there a lot of citations. some have however have been moved while a couple more are behind a paywall. However i think the biggest issue is that the Hawaian style of teaching in the classes may not have been appropriately captured in the passage. I will try to edit it to make it better suited. You may too try so. Thanks for your input LostCitrationHunter (talk) 07:22, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 10 January 2022 and 4 May 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Artfantasyland (article contribs). Peer reviewers: SamPerreira.

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 22 January 2024 and 10 May 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): AzeiahMacapagal (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Daytonaklink.

— Assignment last updated by Momlife5 (talk) 15:51, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]