Talk:Iao Valley

Move to "Iao Valley"

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was PAGE MOVED per discussion below. While it seems that the rendering with diacritics is more correct in the Hawaiian language, it is in keeping with our naming conventions to base our titles on the most common rendering in English language sources. There seems to be broad consensus for such naming; even our main article on Hawaiʻi lacks diacritics in the title. -GTBacchus^(talk) 01:23, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

---

I'd like to move this article to Iao Valley, where it resided until recently moved. The reason for this proposal is that "Iao Valley" arguably the rendering most commonly used by the general English speaking community--texts aimed at this broad community usually use Iao instead of ʻIao.

For instance:

• A New York Times travel article from 2006 used the Iao Valley instead of ‘Īao Valley
• Encyclopedia Britannica uses Iao Valley instead of ‘Īao Valley
• Press releases for Daniel Inouye, current US Senator from Hawaii, use Iao Valley , ,
• An expansive scientific report (availible at hi.water.usgs.gov/publications/pubs/wri/wri00-4223.pdf) for the USGS on the "Iao Aquifer" does not use the ʻ while Iao Valley is used in recent EPA accounting documents as well

The chief argument against all this is that for the local community, a stylized rendering is sometimes used. Thus some variant of ʻIao Valley or 'Iao Valley does appear in local media and, most importantly, in the government state parks site. (It might be noted that ‘Īao Valley, which is the current title of this article, appears almost nowhere). However, even locally, this usage is by no means monolithic, as other locally-based government documents (such as a definition of precinct boundaries , local civil defense plans , and acts of legislation etc.) use the non-ornamented version. In addition, local media also uses "Iao Valley" ,

In sum, I would argue that Iao Valley is the most common usage for the general community, and that ʻIao Valley is a local, Hawaiian language variant (which of course should be noted in the body of the article). For the sake of readability and intelligibilty, which really add up to openness, I think this article should be moved. Erudy 12:21, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• Support, with qualifications. I agree that the article should be titled "Iao Valley" (even though I was the one who put it in the current spelling), but mainly because I think titles should avoid accents or diacritical marks that create nonsense in a web browser's address bar and can't be entered in the search window. This is what I've done for other Hawaiian articles that I've worked on. However, your argument that this is a "local stylized rendering" is nonsense. Macrons and okinas are considered to be an integral part of the spelling of Hawaiian, just as é and á are in French. ʻĪao is the proper rendering of the name (see ), and that's how it should be throughout the text of the article. Many references leave out diacritical marks because they can't print them (or can't be bothered to look words up to get them right), which is somewhat acceptable. However, since Wikipedia can do it right, I think it should. FWIW, using ʻIao is worse, because with no diacritics it's clear that they're left out; when only okinas are included it makes it look like the words are properly rendered when they're not (ʻiao is a fish). Just because the state park people do things wrong doesn't mean Wikipedia should too. Also, please sign your comments. KarlM 15:42, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
• Oppose Hawaiian okina and macrons are perfectly acceptable to include in English usage of Hawaiian words. Avoidance of diacritics because they "create nonsense in a web browser's address bar and can't be entered in the search window" is totally unreasonable (we have redirects operating for a any search not including diacritics) and promotes inaccuracy. Húsönd 16:59, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
• Support. Iao Valley is clearly the most common name used. Vegaswikian 18:57, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
• Support per ample evidence above. Okinas and macrons may be "appropriate" but are not English or common. There are many similar cases that should be addressed at a more macro level, maybe at the discussion here. — AjaxSmack 02:16, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
• Support. WP:NAME and WP:UE emphasize using the most commonly used English version of the name, which is demonstrated to be "Iao," while noting alternatives, like the current spelling, in the first paragraph of the article. Mac OS X 19:35, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

File:Japanese sugarcane workers 1.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Japanese sugarcane workers 1.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests November 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 05:11, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified 3 external links on Iao Valley. 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.nature.nps.gov/nnl/site.cfm?Site=IAVA-HI
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090524222822/http://www.hawaiistateparks.org/parks/maui/Index.cfm?park_id=36 to http://www.hawaiistateparks.org/parks/maui/Index.cfm?park_id=36
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130513125228/http://hawaiimuseums.org/mc/ismaui_Hnature.htm to http://www.hawaiimuseums.org/mc/ismaui_Hnature.htm

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) 02:22, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

There was an undiscussed move to ʻĪao Valley

I see nothing changed since the last move discussion. Britannica still uses Iao Valley. And as far as common English usage, in google search we have:

Iao Valley -ʻĪao, at 5.3 million hits

ʻĪao Valley -Iao at 95 hits.

So not even close as far as what's common. I moved it back. Fyunck(click) (talk) 07:07, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Requested move 24 July 2025

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. Weak consensus not to move. This discussion is predominantly based on the interpretation of the guidelines MOS:HAWAII and the policy WP:COMMONNAME. Despite the strong support for this guideline in the related RM last month, this is far from the case in this discussion. Oppose !votes focus on the common naming policy overriding the more specific guidelines for such titles, in this case as a reflection of broadly established consensus over local consensus; along with suggestions that the MOS contradicts this long standing consensus and limited counter-arguments to the contrary. From a closing perspective editors would do well to create an RfC that is publicised appropriately in order to resolve the conflicting discussions that have occurred. The contrast of participants and thus the results between this RM and the last appears to be part of the problem. (non-admin closure) CNC (talk) 16:28, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

---

• Iao Valley → ʻĪao ValleyʻĪao Valley
• Keahole Point → Keāhole PointKeāhole Point
• Nahienaena → NāhiʻenaʻenaNāhiʻenaʻena
• House of Keoua → House of KeōuaHouse of Keōua

– Per MOS:HAWAII. Wikipedian ^{Talk to me!} _{or not…} 07:58, 24 July 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. TarnishedPath^talk 10:58, 31 July 2025 (UTC) — Relisting. CoconutOctopus talk 20:48, 7 August 2025 (UTC)

• Note: This was a contested technical request. See July 20–23, 2025 discussion here.--MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 19:06, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
• Support per MOS:HAWAII and consistency with growing number of Hawaii articles. Consensus to follow the current MOS guidance was recently affirmed at Talk:Hawaiʻi (island)#Requested move 3 July 2025 (multiple pages moved). --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 19:10, 24 July 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:ENGLISHTITLE and WP:COMMONNAME and MOS:HAWAII as it existed for many years. Kahakōs and ʻokinas are meaningless to the vast majority of English speakers. For years MOS:HAWAII said, "In general, follow the orthography of use for the kahakō and ʻokina wherever possible when using Hawaiian words and phrases, except in article titles [emphasis added]." It also said "Article titles can be contentious". These were removed by at best a WP:LOCALCONSENSUS of a few editors at a relatively obscure guideline, no RfC. Hundreds of articles, written by numerous editors over the years, were all moved in the past few months mostly or entirely by one editor, without RMs. Previous RMs, such as the one at the top of this page and others at Talk:Hawaii (3 times), Talk:Oahu (twice), Talk:Kauai, Talk:Lihue, Hawaii, and Talk:Kawaihae, Hawaii, all resulted in no move to Hawaiian names. Station1 (talk) 07:46, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

  We don't make decisions based on former iterations of guidelines. As for the examples you've given, other than the state itself (whose name still aligns with MOS:HAWAII) and Kawaihae (which doesn't have any move request proposing the inclusion of ʻokina or macrons in its history), all of those articles now include macrons and ʻokina - times have changed. Turnagra (talk) 19:56, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

• Reluctant support per MOS:HAWAII. Regardless of whether one likes it or not, the local guideline was changed to support this move and backed in other moves. The native original and official Hawaiian names now override the more common anglicizations per the project. (an exceptional case of official name over common name, where WP:LOCALCONSENSUS overrides site-wide) If there are concerns or speculations on the new guidelines, then they must be raised there. DankJae 19:52, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Note: WikiProject Hawaii has been notified of this discussion. TarnishedPath^talk 10:57, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

Note: Wikipedia talk:Article titles and Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style have been notified of this discussion. Station1 (talk) 16:54, 31 July 2025 (UTC)

The "Project" does not override Wikipedia Policy or Guidelines. The Project is dead wrong on this and needs to be fixed. Fyunck(click) (talk) 04:13, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

I agree, but the guideline must be sorted/invalidated first with a new consensus. In the meantime, the guideline supports this and the other moves. DankJae 18:31, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

I don't feel that's the case. If that guideline is against standard policy and MOS that's an issue for that guideline. We don't follow something that is obviously wrong and compound the issue. We just went though all this at the Denali/McKinley issue. It was not moved back to McKinley for one reason only... it could not be shown per policy that McKinley was more popular than Denali throughout the entire US. So the move to McKinley failed. And McKinley may actually be the more common name but it was difficult to interpret the data. That may change in the future but for right now Denali stayed per Wikipedia policy and MOS. Why would that be different for these names? We do one thing for one project and do the exact opposite for another project? That would be hypocritical and difficult to explain to new editors. "Oh we use different criteria for Alabama and California then we do for Vermont and Colorado." That's unfair as well as against the rules here. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:06, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

The difference being that those are fundamentally different names. If the common name is different (eg. with Pearl Harbour), the guidance still says to go with the common name. All the guidance is saying is to use the orthography from the source for when the common name is of Hawaiian origin. Nothing is saying to ignore the common name at all, so it's a completely different situation. Turnagra (talk) 20:28, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

It is the exact same thing here. We are being presented with two different spelling of the same place. So what is Wikipedia supposed to do per massively greater consensus we go with the most common variation for the title. Sure we mention that it has other spellings or that locally it is is handled a certain way, but the title that everyone in the US will be searching for and is by far the most common in press, media, books, nightly news, etc is what we go by. Not the Alabama or Hawaii common name... the common English name for this English Wikipedia. This is not a dictionary of Hawaiian culture. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:58, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

It's not though. Denali and Mount McKinley are fundamentally different names, and there's absolutely a chance that someone could not realise they're the same place. Nobody is going to look at "ʻĪao Valley" and go "where the hell is that, I'm looking for Iao Valley". Redirects, famously, are cheap, and anyone who is somehow genuinely confused will quickly find the right spot. What we have here is an authoritative and extremely reliable source saying that this is the correct spelling of the common name, and you're proposing to do the internet equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and talking loudly to pretend it doesn't exist because you don't like it. Nothing here goes against PAG, no matter how much you want it to. Turnagra (talk) 21:09, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

Well we see this 100% differently. The redirects are cheap argument was also used at McKinley and shot down. There are more reliable sources that spell it Iao Valley and you are sticking your fingers in your own ears to drown them out. We do not use official names or spellings no matter how subtle. That was drilled into my head at McKinley/Denali. We wait until the English world uses one spelling over another and then change at that time. We do not become a self-fulfilling prophesy at Wikipedia and go against policy and MOS at the whim of a wikiproject. And this is also a multi-move request. We are also looking at Nahienaena being moved to Nāhiʻenaʻena. They barely look like the same word with all the changes. Fyunck(click) (talk) 21:29, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

• Support per MOS:HAWAII and the GNIS data from which that guidance is derived. The recent RM at Talk:Hawaiʻi (island) covers what I believe to be several of the highest-profile articles affected by MOS:HAWAII's guidance, and based on the widespread support for the move there, I'm inclined to think that the new language of MOS:HAWAII is appropriately reflective of community consensus. If these articles are moved, redirects from the anglicized titles will nevertheless continue to exist, so navigation shouldn't be an issue. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 18:22, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• Support per MOS:HAWAII and other users. We have authoritative sources which state that the use of ʻokina and macrons is the correct orthography for use in English, and so the WP:ENGLISHTITLE argument is irrelevant. The titles are all clearly still recognisable, and redirects can solve any remaining issues. The Hawaiian naming conventions are pretty clear here. Turnagra (talk) 19:56, 31 July 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose per Station1. English language does not use accents or diacritics, thus the addition of such marks is not helpful to users. Unlike languages, such as Spanish or Polish, that do have accents and / or diacritics as part of their orthography, these place names continue to use English terms (Iao Valley, Keahole Point, House of Keoua), etc, making the use of non-English othography counterintuitive. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 02:00, 1 August 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose - Seems like I most commonly see Iao or sometimes 'Iao. Like at Hawaii State Parks or even Trip Advisor. We aren't supposed make policy here as many have been told over and over again at the Denali/Mt McKinley article. Otherwise that would be at McKinley instead of Denali. It is commonly Iao Valley so that's where it must be placed. We do not go by official anything or local incarnations... we go by common name whether we like it or not. And who the heck changed the Hawaii guidelines to go against Policy and Wikipedia Guidelines? Fyunck(click) (talk) 04:11, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

  And who the heck changed the Hawaii guidelines to go against Policy and Wikipedia Guidelines? They were decided and developed by consensus, as per usual wikipedia process. Naming conventions differ from standard practice all the time, and don't disappear solely because you just don't like it. Deferring to an authoritative database is common practice in many naming conventions, and I would note here that it's solely being used for orthography - see the example of Pearl Harbour rather than Puʻuloa. So we are still using common name, we're just ensuring that the spelling of it is accurate by relying on authoritative sources. Turnagra (talk) 10:40, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose – we use the COMMONNAME, not the official name. That's what we do. MOS:HAWAII goes against our core article titles policy. It's a LOCALCONSENSUS that has no bearing when there's an overwhelming common name. What is "correct" isn't ours to decide. It's the sources, and they consistently favor the English name. 🐔 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 11:58, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

  I agree that a LOCALCONSENSUS [...] has no bearing when there's an overwhelming common name—but I'm not seeing that there is an "overwhelming common name" under debate here. From the (admittedly pretty cursory) searches I've done, usages of the two spellings seem to be split fairly evenly, in which case it seems reasonable to choose the one that aligns with our house style. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 15:10, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

  For what it's worth, here are the Ngrams for Iao Valley vs all uses of ʻĪao. - Station1 (talk) 17:30, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

  Interesting that per English sources I see Iao is the overwhelming consensus. Only in Hawaii would it be close. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:52, 1 August 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose. After re-reading the discussion a couple more times, I've gone back and forth twice on this...first leaning support, then uncertain, but now am opposed. What swayed me most was what User:Fyunck(click) said: "Sure we mention that it has other spellings or that locally it is is handled a certain way, but the title that everyone in the US will be searching for and is by far the most common in press, media, books, nightly news, etc is what we go by. Not the Alabama or Hawaii common name... the common English name for this English Wikipedia." And the English Wikipedia is referenced by people across the world, not just the US. It just hits on the practicality of Wikipedia as a broad resource. Petermgrund (talk) 18:06, 4 August 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME, the NGram Viewer results are clear. All opposes so far rest on MOS:HAWAII, which has been pointed out to violate WP:COMMONNAME. Article titles exist to support searching, so there is no good reason not to use the title most likely to be searched for. Otherwise, we could just use MediaWiki pageids and save ourselves a lot of work, including discussions like this. Paradoctor (talk) 10:03, 18 August 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.

• Note: I notified Hawaii WikiProject of section rewrite needed - Per this closure and others like Denali, I let the Hawaii Project know they need a complete rewrite of their naming section so it complies with Wikipedia Policy and MOS and not some local version of English for this English Wikipedia. Best they do it rather than the entire Wikipedia editing base sticking their fingers in the pie (which gets a bit messier at times). Fyunck(click) (talk) 18:33, 20 August 2025 (UTC)