Talk:Hawaii

For style guide information, see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Hawaii-related articles.

Summerize impact of 'first contact'

The latter part of the second paragraph here Hawaii#First recorded contact (starting "These visitors introduced diseases ...") states that one effect of the contact was the decline in native population as a consequence of imported disease. Two immediate issues:

• the source cited (brittanica.com) makes no mention depopulation or disease
• another source (from US Congress) seems a political (non neutral) publication

Based on source 'Kuykendall' and a PDF already cited elsewhere the article (Native Hawaiian Population Enumerations), I have created an alternative few sentences which, I hope, give a description of the general impact, for good or bad, though still quoting that it was "a foreign invasion" (culturally and demographically). Thus:

"The impact of foreign visitors has been described as an “invasion” which “little by little overwhelmed the old culture of the islands”.[Kuykendall pg 12]. Native Hawaiians were vulnerable to Eurasian diseases for which they had less resistance.[citation needed] During the 1850s, measles killed a fifth of Hawaiʻi's people.[same citation as now]. Forty years after Cook’s arrival, it is estimated that the native population had declined by half and continued to decline throughout the 19th century. [Native Hawaiian Population Enumerations pdf] Meanwhile, the foreign resident population slowly grew; foreigners brought iron tools, manufactured items and household utensils; they also introduced firearms, alcohol, tobacco, livestock, non-native plants, and, inadvertently, insects previously unknown to Hawaii such as mosquitos.[Kuykendall pgs 26-28]"

I am hoping some other editor can find a source for the statement about native Hawaiians being vulnerable to Eurasian diseases. Objections or other feedback? Jp2207 (talk) 00:51, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Done (slightly modified from the text I had proposed). Jp2207 (talk) 21:45, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

Please mention it being the latest state.

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.

---

On August 12, 1959, Hawaii became the 50th US state, and there hasn't been any US state since. OfficialWatchOS7 (talk) 12:41, 11 March 2025 (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.

Add in the history the Land Reform Act of 1967 and the 1984 Supreme Court decision

After extensive hearings in the mid-1960s, the Hawaii legislature discovered that while Federal and State governments owned nearly 49 percent of the land in Hawaii, another 47 percent was owned by only 72 private landowners. To combat this concentration of ownership, the legislature enacted the Land Reform Act of 1967. The Act adopted a method of redistribution in which title in real property could be taken from lessors and transferred to lessees. Frank E. Midkiff, a landholder, challenged the Act.

Ref: https://www.oyez.org/cases/1983/83-141 Wtambellini (talk) 22:52, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 24 March 2025

Please add to the history section the Land Reform Act of 1967 and the US Supreme Court decision of 1984 (see ref).

Ref: https://www.oyez.org/cases/1983/83-141

"After extensive hearings in the mid-1960s, the Hawaii legislature discovered that while Federal and State governments owned nearly 49 percent of the land in Hawaii, another 47 percent was owned by only 72 private landowners. To combat this concentration of ownership, the legislature enacted the Land Reform Act of 1967. The Act adopted a method of redistribution in which title in real property could be taken from lessors and transferred to lessees." Wtambellini (talk) 22:58, 24 March 2025 (UTC)

I'll leave it to someone else to decide whether to include mention of the act and subsequent court decision, but I'll note here that the proposed wording is an exact copy of the text at the provided oyez.org source. @Wtambellini: all edits to Wikipedia articles have to be written in your own words. You'll have a better chance of having your request implemented if you summarize reliable sources (and include something about the Supreme Court decision). DrOrinScrivello (talk) 15:54, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Tks 'DrOrinScrivello'. I m of course willing to summarize this reliable source and include something about the Supreme Court decision to be understandable by non lawyers IF I receive a green light from someone with an approval power. Best. Wtambellini (talk) 02:13, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

Have you considered adding this to History of Hawaii? CMD (talk) 02:17, 1 April 2025 (UTC)

 Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. twisted. (user | talk | contribs) 01:57, 15 April 2025 (UTC)

Problems with Economy and Tourism sections

The Economy section of this article is quite outdated, stating that pineapple and sugar are major exports, which is no longer the case. The last major sugar cane plantation closed in 2016, and large-scale pineapple growing has similarly declined, especially since the end of the pineapple industry in Lanai in 1992. A big problem with this section is that it doesn't seem to use any single high-quality source for what the breakdown of the Hawaiian GDP is, but rather, an assortment of news articles (who's information may not even be current) emphasizing the role of one or another industry rather than the overall picture. It also has only a brief statement on the role of tourism in the Hawaiian economy, even though that's probably the largest single sector.

There seems to be a separate section on tourism that seems to place WP:undue weight on far-left critics of tourism in Hawaii. It's not that it's bad to have these as part of a larger statement of views on tourism, and there's plenty of criticism of overtourism in Hawaii. But how representative are the views of Haunani-Kay Trask? Her views are quite radical even in the context of the Hawaiian sovereignty movement. I seriously doubt the idea of getting rid of tourism entirely has much sympathy beyond the far left in Hawaii, considering its overwhelming economic importance. A balanced statement of views is called for, and maybe even belongs more as a section of the Tourism in Hawaii article than it does here. Peter G Werner (talk) 21:00, 26 April 2025 (UTC)