This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Is it really a good use of "other meanings" to link to the commercial websites of companies selling anything called Kahuna? I'm thinking of removing all commercial links, and just adding a blanket entry saying that "Kahuna" has been used as a product name or brand name by many companies. Anyone else reading this? Comments? Zora 03:53, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. Apart from specific copyrighted brand names standing as intangibles asset for a notable product/company (like CocaCola, whose proncipal asset is the brand name) other brand names on product related pages will only encourage advertisers to use WP as an advertising channel. Zora, it's time for you raise the advertising debate at the village pump. I think you have at least one supporter here. If we have a specific guideline to fight advertising it would make life simpler for all editors. It's difficult to use only personal judgement to fight something as entrenched as advertising. - Aditya Kabir 15:46, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
I re-wrote the Hawaiian section to make it accurate and removed inauthentic and non-referenced statements. Makana Chai 21:11, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
This was in the body of the article:
This seems dubious to me. Can anyone confirm? Roman à clef 22:32, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Re: "most kahuna practices remained legal" - unclear whether this refers to spiritual practices or craftsmanship. From what I've read, colonisation meant that spiritual practices were outlawed as "superstition"; but I'm not aware that crafts expertise was under threat. Julia Rossi 04:58, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
Good job, Makana. It looks like you received a number of helpful replies. BTW, the "bollocks" that User:Closedmouth left in the edit summary had nothing to do with your article. That user was upset because their previous edit was a typo. You can see it, here. :-) Viriditas ( talk) 13:07, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
The image File:Beach blanket bingo333.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 18:19, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
@ Mark Miller: Is this a misspelling? It doesn't look like a Hawaiian word. Jarble ( talk) 11:30, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
I just reverted the removal of the cleanup template. As I put in the reason: Many Hawaiian words are incompletely cited, or have confusing/conflicting definitions and probably WP:OR. While some cleanup has been done, more is needed by someone who speaks/reads Hawaiian. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 00:12, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
Is it really a good use of "other meanings" to link to the commercial websites of companies selling anything called Kahuna? I'm thinking of removing all commercial links, and just adding a blanket entry saying that "Kahuna" has been used as a product name or brand name by many companies. Anyone else reading this? Comments? Zora 03:53, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. Apart from specific copyrighted brand names standing as intangibles asset for a notable product/company (like CocaCola, whose proncipal asset is the brand name) other brand names on product related pages will only encourage advertisers to use WP as an advertising channel. Zora, it's time for you raise the advertising debate at the village pump. I think you have at least one supporter here. If we have a specific guideline to fight advertising it would make life simpler for all editors. It's difficult to use only personal judgement to fight something as entrenched as advertising. - Aditya Kabir 15:46, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
I re-wrote the Hawaiian section to make it accurate and removed inauthentic and non-referenced statements. Makana Chai 21:11, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
This was in the body of the article:
This seems dubious to me. Can anyone confirm? Roman à clef 22:32, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Re: "most kahuna practices remained legal" - unclear whether this refers to spiritual practices or craftsmanship. From what I've read, colonisation meant that spiritual practices were outlawed as "superstition"; but I'm not aware that crafts expertise was under threat. Julia Rossi 04:58, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
Good job, Makana. It looks like you received a number of helpful replies. BTW, the "bollocks" that User:Closedmouth left in the edit summary had nothing to do with your article. That user was upset because their previous edit was a typo. You can see it, here. :-) Viriditas ( talk) 13:07, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
The image File:Beach blanket bingo333.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. -- 18:19, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
@ Mark Miller: Is this a misspelling? It doesn't look like a Hawaiian word. Jarble ( talk) 11:30, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
I just reverted the removal of the cleanup template. As I put in the reason: Many Hawaiian words are incompletely cited, or have confusing/conflicting definitions and probably WP:OR. While some cleanup has been done, more is needed by someone who speaks/reads Hawaiian. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 00:12, 7 August 2023 (UTC)