Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Hawaii

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

To-do list for Wikipedia:WikiProject Hawaii: edit · history · watch · refresh
WikiProject Hawaii Worklist
Polynesia
Oceania Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Polynesia, which collaborates on articles related to Polynesia. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
NA This page is not an article and does not require a rating on the quality scale.
NA This page is not an article and does not require a rating on the importance scale.
Archive
Archives
1


Contents

[edit] Stubs and topics

I note that there are relatively few stub categories within the general Hawaiʻi stub space. I'm thinking of creating a history related stub, as I think that might help to identify where some of the history buffs could help contribute. There's already categories for geography, politicians, and radio stations. Perhaps we could add a few more categories of stubs, just to help organize them a bit. (Better yet, let's all expand them...but one thing at a time, yes?) I'll create the history stub, once I recall how that works. I'm going to first use it as a section stub on the Kauaʻi page, since it's history section is really just one paragraph. Feedback, as always, welcome. (By the way, would this be better placed here, or on the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Hawaii/General page?) Davidlwilliamson (talk) 08:12, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi. IMO, the stub project should have been disbanded a long time ago, as the WikiProject assessment and category system have all but replaced it with "Stub-Class" categories. I think you have made a good argument for beginning the process of splitting articles into work groups (also called "task forces"), in this case, a Hawaii history work group. This is easy to setup and makes a lot of sense. IIRC, by modifying the project template to allow for this option, we can place the articles in both a WikiProject Hawaii history work group and a WikiProject History work group category. Other projects can be added to the mix, such as the United States history work group. This is ideal, and allows us to collaborate across projects by coordinating a separate collaboration/work group page. Stub categories in the mainspace may have once been useful years ago, but at this point they are not very helpful. The first step would be to create Category:WikiProject Hawaii task forces, and then add Wikipedia:WikiProject Hawaii/Hawaii history task force or something similar. After we tag all of the articles with the history task force flag, we can create separate assessment statistics that lists the articles by quality and importance. We can make a bot request to start us off, merely by tagging all articles within Hawaii history-related categories. —Viriditas | Talk 08:32, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
So many standards to choose from. :-) I went ahead and created the relevant stub category and template, and then discovered there's a procedure for such things, which I entirely violated. I just finished proposing such a stub category, but you're arguments about the utility (or lack of) of stubs makes sense to me, and using the Wikiproject framework to help coordinate this sort of thing seems ideal. So...I think we should get started on organizing the task force bits, and I'll go ask for speedy deletion of the cruft I created this evening. (On a sad note, it's cold and rainy here in San José, which sucks compared to the beautiful weather I experienced this morning in Līhuʻe. Bummer.) Davidlwilliamson (talk) 08:43, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
No worries. One thing we have to do is get a rough estimate of how many history-related articles we are dealing with. I see 97 articles in Category:History of Hawaii and 11 subcategories. These articles represent an informal criteria for inclusion, but I suggest you come up with a rough one based on what we already have, or a modification that you think works better. Your criteria will then be used to sift through what we already have and to add new articles. As for creating the task force, that's the easy part. Do you have the time and the energy to take a leadership role here? I can help set it up, but somebody is going to have to maintain it. —Viriditas | Talk 08:50, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
I might be up for that, as long as no one expects a lot of progress too quickly - my day job generally keeps me pretty busy. In terms of number of articles - the history category seems to have a nice start, but the individual island entries could certainly use some work and aren't in that category. I suspect that something like 150-200 articles are history related in some way. Hawaiʻi seems to also be one of those places where history and geogrpahy are intimately related, so many geographical pages may be relevant to history, too, which may increase the total article count. I'll make a point of thinking about inclusion criteria and see if I can some up with something useful. Davidlwilliamson (talk) 09:10, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Great. Why don't you take some time to think about this? Check out Category:History_WikiProjects to see how some projects use task forces while others use separate WikiProjects. My preference would be to start with a task force, and if you can recruit enough people and interest in improving articles, then split it off into its own project. But please, make note of the inactive projects. One reason for keeping this as a task force for the time being, is to prevent the project from collapsing. —Viriditas | Talk 09:19, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thrum's Hawaiian Annual

Okay, I finally wrote a stub for this, please help! Mahalo, Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 07:06, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Kanaka and Owyhee

Hi; not part of this WikiProject but I've worked on these two articles; I'm wondering if they should be part of your WP; Kanaka certainly I'd think, but in Owyhee's case it's to do with the legacy of Hawaiian workers/settlers in North America; it's currently a disambig but I think it shouldn't be, although it's still mostly only a list page, just one needing some discussion as to how the name came about. The particular Hawaiian the HBC mappers/explorers named the river for can probably be determined, by the way, from company logs; or the specific incident as to how it gots its name anyway.Skookum1 (talk) 18:53, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Award template

I've been meaning to do this forever, but I've created an award template for WikiProject Hawaiʻi at Wikipedia:WikiProject Hawaii/The Aloha Plumeria. Thoughts and comments are welcome. Mahalo! --jonny-mt 09:12, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] More streamlined design?

I have a design in mind (feel free to modify the colors). Check it out at User:Cuyler91093/Sandbox/WP:HAWAII. It resembles the main page, but I believe it's way more organized than the current design. Cuyler91093 (Contribs) 08:21, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Do it. —Viriditas | Talk 10:03, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Seconded. --jonny-mt 02:24, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. The reason why I wanted to ask you guys first was because I didn't want to appear "reckless", so the bold page says. I'm glad that you like it! Cuyler91093 (Contribs) 00:45, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Don't stop now, we can use an entire project redesign. The only problem is with the "Articles" subsection; as a project, we aren't responsible for bringing all of these articles to their present assessment; in many cases the project tag is simply on the talk page. In others, project participants have actively worked on the article. So we should think about highlighting only the articles the project has actively worked on; I don't like taking credit for the hard work of other editors. BTW, there are quite a number of articles tagged by this project that are either very close to GA, or could use a little tender loving care to reach FA. We should talk about those as well. —Viriditas | Talk 01:52, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
Hear, hear! I think we should start something like a collaboration of the week to focus on bringing B-class articles up to GA status and GA-class articles up to FA status. First, though, we should probably have a reassessment drive to make sure we know where everything stands--this could easily be set up by using AWB to tag all articles of a certain class for reassessment. Thoughts? --jonny-mt 01:23, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
I support Jonny's ideas and look forward to helping out, but I have some helpful suggestions for further discussion: 1) The project is already informally collaborating with a number of WikiProjects; efforts should be made to formalize this relationship by establishing the collaboration department. I can help out with this as well. 2) Although I support the reassessment drive effort, I suggest that we focus on bringing B-Class articles to spec first. That is to say, the project is using the B-Class assessment far too loosely at this point. So rather than going all out on a reassessment, let's tighten up the standards first; I'll try to modify the template tomorrow. 3) At the minimum, a reassessment drive of the stub category should and could proceed immediately, so if anyone wants to start crawling that category with AWB, please have at it! 4) New article assessment should be performed on a daily basis using the bot feed on the project page. We are really behind on this, so AWB comes in handy here, too. But, beware of the false positives. 5) We also need to keep working on a project redesign, portal redesign, and a newsletter. 6) If anyone wants to coordinate with User:MPerel on any AWB work, please contact her. She is thinking about using regex to italicize Hawaiian words, but it seems like a lot of work. We should probably update the assessment subpage to keep everyone aware of who is doing what. 7) Ingrid hasn't run User:WatchlistBot since August 2007, so our watchlist needs a serious update. We can either run the bot ourselves or make a bot request for it to be run by another user. —Viriditas | Talk 10:41, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Yay! Things are actually getting done! Just leave a message on my talk page for things that you want me to do. おべんとう むすび (Contributions) 07:22, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
Just keep doing what you are doing. But, what should I call you now? Obento, Musubi, or Obento Musubi? Can I just call you OM? :) Wait, I have a better idea! You can be like the artist formerly known as Prince, and go by the name of . —Viriditas | Talk 08:01, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Help updating Portal:Hawaii

Actually, as long as we're on the subject of revitalization, I've taken over the maintenance tasks on P:HI. Most of this work involved creating templates to ensure consistent formatting throughout the portal, particularly on the pictures and "on this date" features.

I was hoping to have another couple of standardized items in place before asking for help, but now seems as good a time as any to expand the content. So, to that end, I'd be greatly appreciative if people could help flesh out the following areas:

The formatting has been set for the selected anniversaries, and the biography/ʻŌlelo/quotes content should be fairly self-explanatory. I think we're more or less all right on pictures and articles, although it never hurts to add any good content that you may know of.

Mahalo! --jonny-mt 01:38, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

How do you feel about going for a more tropical color and floral scheme? —Viriditas | Talk 10:46, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
Is there a good way to handle floating holidays like Malasada Day on the Selected anniversary page? —Viriditas | Talk 10:53, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
I actually don't mind the current color scheme that much--it seems to be based on the Hawaiian flag--but if you want to try something out, feel free to go nuts! As far as floating holidays go, I don't think there's a good way to handle those using the magic word-based system that's currently in place, but I can check it out. --jonny-mt 08:39, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
I would like to see a more tropical/floral scheme. The page looks great, and I realize they are colors of the Hawaiian flag, but it has more of a British feel than a Hawaiian feel, imo. If no one minds, I'd like to take a crack at it a few days yonder... : ) --MPerel 23:49, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
BE BOLD!!! I just thought this was a better start for the design, because I didn't like that ghastly black bordered box. No offense to anybody involved in creating that, of course... – The Obento Musubi (Contributions) 08:54, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] CfD notice

Just wanted to let everyone know that I've nominated Category:Endemic flora of Hawaii (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) for renaming to Category:Flora of Hawaii (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs). The discussion is at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2008 March 12#Category:Endemic flora of Hawaii if anyone would like to comment. Mahalo! --jonny-mt 02:10, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

People are moving and deleting categories too much, and there is no centralized log to follow the history. I am fairly certain that the category you are requesting previously existed, but was deleted. The move log in the history only shows the bot edit, presumably from the last CfD, which moved the category on 17:02, 4 June 2007 to its current name. Please help track down the history of page moves and deletions in regards to this category, as there has been discussion about this before, if I am not mistaken. The old Flora cat contained the native flora cat, which was moved. We're going around in circles with this again. Flora of Hawaii does not necessarily mean native or endemic. If you could also investigate exactly what it does mean, that would help. It is my understanding that some of the editors involved in categorization are not using it appropriately, hence the confusion. I have serious disagreements with a particular active editor on CfD, who I feel has done a huge disservice to the entire project, so I will not be getting involved in any discussion outside this project page. —Viriditas | Talk 02:34, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
I'll do my best. Frankly, I thought it was simply a spelling and convenience issue, but it's turning into a fairly interesting discussion. If the bot moved the category on June 4, 2007, that means there should be a discussion in the CfD log around that date that we can reference; I'll take a look later and see if I can't dig it up. --jonny-mt 05:04, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. —Viriditas | Talk 05:26, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
I found the CfD at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 May 24#Category:Hawaii native flora. Cydebot also made this edit reclassifying Category:Trees of Hawaii under the new category.
Incidentally, if you haven't been watching the discussion, there's actually a fairly robust proposal now. The suggestion has been made to withdraw the nomination and move forward with the discussed changes, but I'm partial to letting it run for about 24 hours or so in order to make sure that we get a well-rounded opinion from contributors around the globe. --jonny-mt 06:04, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Have you been able to find a deletion log for Category:Flora of Hawaii? —Viriditas | Talk 06:10, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
Not for Category:Flora of Hawaii--from what I can tell, this category never existed. However, Category:Hawaii native flora was deleted by User:Cyde following the move by User:Cydebot. --jonny-mt 06:27, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Organization of project

I don't mean to be offensive or anything, but this page is really unorganized. I hope to do a makeover of where things are located. Anyone interested in helping? See WP:ITALY for a model. I would like to put thumbs and get rid of that HUGE part with "Requested articles to be reviewed" or something. – The Obento Musubi (Contributions) 08:51, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

You're not offensive; criticism is good-it's how we improve. However, you removed some very important links, such as deletion sorting and a few others. No matter, we'll get it all worked out.  :) —Viriditas | Talk 10:00, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Official Newsletter

I think that once we get this project running, it would be great to have a WikiProject Hawaii Newsletter. – The Obento Musubi (Contributions) 09:13, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I have started the official newsletter page, which I expect should be up and running at the earliest by mid-April to early-May, and, at the most, early- to mid-June. You can see it here. If you don't like the logo, please send me a message on my talk page and tell me how I can make it better. All feedback is greatly appreciated! If you wish to participate, just put your name on the page with three tildes and write what you believe you will do. – The Obento Musubi (Contributions) 06:09, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Hawaii

I modified Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Hawaii to make it easier for photographers in Hawaii to find requested photograph articles about subjects near where they live so that they may be more likely to fill the request. Thanks. GregManninLB (talk) 16:56, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

And I'm reverting all your changes. Next time you do this to a project, you come here first to discuss it. You've depopulated our image categories which has led to their deletion, and their removal from our active worklist. Please discuss major changes before implementing them. We welcome photographers to work with us, but do not appreciate you forcing your system on us. —Viriditas | Talk 11:52, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Collaboration with the Hawaiian Wikipedia?

We should collaborate with the Hawaiian Wikipedia to improve the design of that encyclopedia, because I, for one, am not satisfied with the main page. – Obento Musubi (C • G • S) 04:54, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm up for giving the main page a facelift as well, but it's protected and there are no active administrators available. As far as I know, Singularity, haw:User:Kamehameha, and myself are the only active editors. Kal (talk) 05:42, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
I must have not been logged in last time, because I can now edit the main page. Odd. Kal (talk) 01:25, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Small help needed maybe - words 'chiefess' and 'chiefly'

Was fixing spelling errors and came across article Kahikikala. It like several (~45) Hawaiian-topic articles use the word 'chiefess', and sometimes 'chiefly', in ways I now believe are unique or most closely associated with Hawaiian history. Among other places I looked up the word at Wiktionary but was dissatisfied with what I found there. I left comments to that affect on the wikt page's talk page, mentioning a nice reference for the unique usages. There is no article here at en:WP for the word, and I don't suppose there should be (entry should be expanded at wikt). Is there some page here which talks about Hawaiian terms, including 'chiefess' and 'chiefly'? Shenme (talk) 03:39, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

"Chiefly" should be unproblematic: it's just a normal English word meaning "of or pertaining a chief or to to the office of chief", analogous to "presidential".
"Chiefess" seems weird to me. We don't use "authoress" or "aviatrix"; why not just use "chief" even when the chief is a woman? - Jmabel | Talk 18:42, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Akahi Nui

I'm way outside of my areas of expertise here and seeking help. Seems to me like the article Akahi Nui is hostile to its subject (which reminds me of an old joke: "But the King is not a 'subject'!"). I made a few edits to tone that down, but I don't know enough about the topic to do much more. For an example of an article bringing a much more neutral tone to a similar topic, see Quentin Kawānanakoa.

I left a note several days ago at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard‎ but it doesn't seem to have produced any response.

Any help would be appreciated. - Jmabel | Talk 18:32, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reexamination of old disputes

At the urging of Viriditas, I've followed-up on a question posed in the first issue of the WPHawaiʻi newsletter and reexamined some old disputes related to eight significant articles. I've put my comments below in the hopes of getting some wider feedback.

  1. Talk:Apology Resolution#Dispute - Resolved with this edit; accepted as a resolution here.
  2. Talk:Evan Dobelle#Dispute - Resolved with a semi-protect that was lifted here. User:FisherQueen's advice to properly source the claims was taken to heart, and it seems to be standing today.
  3. Talk:Hawaii#Dispute - Don't see any indication that the dispute over okina and other diacritics is still ongoing, but I don't think this will ever be fully solved until MOS:HAWAII reaches a solid consensus.
  4. Talk:Kingdom of Hawaii#Dispute - Although the dispute is no longer ongoing in User:JereKrischel's absence, I don't think the NPOV issues are smoothed out enough in the section on the overthrow to warrant removing the tag. Specifically, a number of claims in the section are written for the other party in the dispute rather than for a general audience--claims are led with "Russ says" or "Kizner wrote" which, while not bad in and of itself, serves to place more of an emphasis on presenting specific, verifiable points of view about rather than creating a neutrally-toned encyclopedic overview. I'd leave this one on for the time being.
  5. Talk:Legal status of Hawaii#Dispute - Doesn't seem to be ongoing; the article has remained in place since the initial dispute.
  6. Talk:Liliuokalani#Dispute - Although the initial dispute seems to have more or less died down, it seems that some of the issues related to the overthrow are still percolating in this article. While it could probably do without the dispute tag, it might be a good idea to get some more eyeballs on it.
  7. Talk:Morgan Report#Dispute - This one also seems more or less settled, and the POV tag has been removed.
  8. Talk:Overthrow of the Hawaiian monarchy#Dispute - Although the original dispute has more or less died down, given the events of recent months I think more work is needed here to obtain a neutral balance.

Mahalo! --jonny-mt 14:58, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Re 3: This is effectively resolved at the MOS, at least for the text, in favor of using diacritics. WP:UE says diacritics are neither encouraged nor discouraged, while WP:MOS cites the Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Ireland-related articles) as a good example of diacritic guidelines, which would mean they should be used for all Hawaiian language words. The remaining debate is with WP:NAME. In this case, diacritics are expressly discouraged, but 1) they're already widely used, and 2) the Irish MOS uses them in titles. Anybody who would like to weigh in on this, please do so on the, because I'd like to see the MOS finalized; I think doing so would prevent individual page disputes like those at Hawaii and Iao Valley from repeatedly breaking out. Personally I prefer to leave them out because I dislike having garbage characters in the address bar, but I think it's far less important than the general usage issue. KarlM (talk) 20:46, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cities

Can someone please find for me, in the Hawaii Revised Statutes, a citation for local government format (i.e. counties have all the power, no cities except Honolulu) that's used in Hawaii? Nyttend (talk) 01:34, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Isn't all that information online? Try here. See also: archives. Note, there's a phone number. Viriditas (talk) 02:10, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hawaiian on Wikibooks

For those who want to learn the Hawaiian language, I've started a textbook at Wikibooks. It may take several months, but I'll try to finish it ASAP. Singularity 08:18, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, Singularity! I'm very much looking forward to this! Here's an interwiki link: Hawaiian WikiBook. – Obento Musubi (C • G • S) 01:53, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
How about linking to a new lesson or tip in every newsletter? A regular column would be nice, as long as it links to current Wikipedia articles. Viriditas (talk) 03:22, 26 May 2008 (UTC)