Talk:Kalakaua

Template:Move

or

Template:Move

or

Template:Move

as per Wiki convention re article titles for sovereign monarchs; I disagree that the country names should not be used; country names are used for even the most tiny, minor principality in Mitteleuropa ... Hawaii should be given its proper designation (as should Japan) Mowens35 22:37, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Great work on expanding this and other Hawaiian history articles, especially by Gerald Farinas!

I'm putting a copy of the earlier illustration used in this article here in talk. I'm glad Wikipedia now has a better image of him here (in addition to the photograph at Republic of Hawaii), but since I scanned the below from an original 19th century source, I'm putting it here in case someone might find some other use for it sometime, rather than leaving the image apparently orphaned. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 22:54, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

---

I reverted anon taking the text to the name "Kalakaua" by cut & paste. Do not attempt to "move" pages to new titles this way; use the "move page" feature, otherwise article history and atribution is lost. It may also be a good idea to discuss on the talk page first if you think a page should be at another title. -- Infrogmation 21:31, 9 Jul 2004 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles) about conventions for listing monarchs. -- Infrogmation

---

I think the Hawaiian monarchy should use the names they adopted upon assuming the crown (i.e., Kalakaua instead of his legal name David Kalakaua). And based on what I've read from the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles) article, at the very bottom there is a provision for non-European and non-Western names. As the Hawaiian monarchy is a non-European and non-Western royal family with names unique only to Hawai'i, I don't think they need the "of Hawaii" designation at the end of their Wikipedia titles. It should be titled just as the Chinese and Japanese royal names are titled on Wikipedia, without the country designation at the end. Again, see Hirohito and Akihito as examples. Sure, it makes sense for the European names to be labeled in that manner because their names are used in numerous countries. But the Hawaiian names, like the Chinese and Japanese royal names, are unique and have no need for the "of Hawaii" designation in the title. Anyway, that's what I think. --James Easton 20:51, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Discussion was posted at the talk page of the naming conventions article: Hawaiian Monarchy Names Discussion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_%28names_and_titles%29#Monarchy_of_Hawaii)

I think I kinda agree. --Keev

For the record I have no objection to moving the names. I reverted anon's moves mostly because they were done improperly by copy & paste rather than proper use of "move article" feature. A secondary objection of mine was because it seemed to have been done unilaterally without proper discussion. If consensus is to move and an admin is needed to delete any redirects during the moving process, I'll be happy to help if asked. -- Infrogmation 21:38, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

• agree it´s disrespectful (and incorrect actually, even per Wikipedia rules) to just simply call him Kalakaua. it should either be King Kalakaua of Hawai'i, or Kalakaua, King of Hawai'i. Antares911 14:36, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Royal consorts and monarchs

hi there. i´m trying to get a discussion going to change the rules on naming consorts, monarchs, etc.. it´s a bit of mess at the moment. maybe you wanna join in and give your opinion? feel free [1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_%28names_and_titles%29#Royal_consorts_and_monarchs) cheers Antares911 23:50, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)