Talk:Robert Hoapili Baker

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Robert Hoapili Baker. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120415124826/https://ojs.lib.byu.edu/spc/index.php/PacificStudies/article/viewFile/10216/9862 to https://ojs.lib.byu.edu/spc/index.php/PacificStudies/article/viewFile/10216/9862

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:33, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Moved from article to sort out
"Hoapili was born 1845 or 1847, in Waikapu, on the island of Maui. His parents were Ikekeleiaiku, son of Queen Kamakahelei who was Queen regnant of the island of Kauaʻi, and Malie Kaikilani Napuupahoehoe . Of high rank, he was a sixth-generation descendant of Līloa and the ancient kings of the islands of Maui and Hawaii making him a member of the House of Moana and cousin to Kings Lunalilo, Kamehameha IV and Kamehameha V. His brother was John Tamatoa Baker. Under the auspices of Anglican priests Rev. William R. Scott and Archdeacon George Mason, Hoapili was educated at the Anglican boarding schools: the Luaehu School in Lahaina, Maui and the St. Alban's College in Honolulu. He was educated alongside Samuel Nowlein and Curtis P. Iaukea." --Mark Miller (talk) 23:42, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Proposed amendment to lineage
User:Mark Miller - Thanks for your edits which have improved the robustness of the accuracy and citations. I'm a little out of practice with the editing! However I feel the latest iteration of the birth and lineage section is a little bit too long and dense with quotes. I agree the earlier version had too much puffery and that there is some dispute among internet published authors about the father. However it strikes me that all the contemporary newspapers during his life and at [death], as well as the book [Hawaiian Genealogies] by Edith Kawelohea McKinzie repeats that his mother was Malie Napuupahoehoe and that his father was Ikekelei'aiku (also spelt Kekeleeiku and Ikekeleaiku, noting the diversity of spelling that existed and persists in modern Hawaiian language nomenclature. Whereas Kealani Cooks assertion in the book Return to Kahiki involves no citation or quotation. The only other published reference to Hoapili being the biological son of Captain Adam Baker is by [this newspaper] anecdote from 1951. The family tree used in the Ka Makaainana article as well as the McKinzie books is based on the family trees collected by the Hale Naua society, appointed by Kalakaua to document the genealogies of the nobles of Hawaii. John Tamatoa Baker and his wife Ululani were on the society. So if indeed Captain Adam Baker was the father of Robert Hoapili Baker I posit that would've been reflected in the contemporary trees repeatedly published.

Can we collectively come up with something that acknowledges that the widely published family trees during and after Robert Hoapili's life list parents being Malie Napuupahoehoe of the House of Moana/Liloa and Ikekeleaiku(Ikekeleiaku, Ikekelei'aiku, Kekeleeiku), while some authors suggest that his father was Adam Baker it is more likely that he was his step-son and adopted

Robert Hoapili Baker was born sometime between 1845 and 1847, in Waikapu, on the island of Maui. Newspapers recorded conflicting dates of birth from the differing assumptions of his age at the time of death.

His mother was the ali'i chiefess Malie Kailkilani Napuupahoehoe, through whom Hoapili's lineage goes back to Liloa from the House of Moana through her father Napuupahoehoe. Most of the genealogies published during his lifetime and at his death state his father was Ikekeleiaiku (also spelt as Kekeleeiku and Ikekele'aiku ) the son of Queen Kamakahelei who was Queen regnant of the island of Kauaʻi. However, in his book; Return to Kahiki: Native Hawaiians in Oceania by Kealani Cook, the author asserts that aliʻi wahine, Malie Napuʻupahoehoe had Robert Hoapili Baker with Captain Adam Baker, making him the half brother of John Tamatoa Baker. The precise details of how Robert Hoapili Baker came to have the surname of Baker are unclear but an obituary published at the time of his death stated that "Robert Hoapili was the real name of this distinguished native, Baker being added in honor of the white man in whose family he was reared." Mrabray (talk) 12:11, 27 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately these are but a few versions and we cannot state outright that these are facts with so many differing names. Also I can find no source about Kamakahelei. --Mark Miller (talk) 21:28, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 * We cannot state as a fact that Kekeleeiku and Ikekele'aiku are the same person or that Ikekele'aiku was a son of Kamakahelei. I can find no source beyond this Wikipedia article and a Family Search page that was created with no sources. Ther is also confusion as to who Napuupahoehoe actually was but that may simply be a confusion over a similar nickname as this subjects brother's ancestor who was Tahitian. The Mahele records do show that a Kekeleeiku received land from Napuupahoehoe or more correctly (as the claim states) his wife. This Kekeleeiku seems to be from Maui.--Mark Miller (talk) 21:41, 27 February 2019 (UTC)


 * I take your points on board but still feel that the overwhelming majority of the reports of his lineage in the newspapers of the time and the Mahele records still affirm that the father is a man from Maui called Ikekeleiaiku or some variation in the spelling thereof, and the mother is Napuupahoehoe. There is no reference that I've seen yet in any of the published record of Robert Hoapili Bakers life to suggest a Tahitian parentage.
 * Here is a reference to Ikekeleaiku being the son of Kamakahelei and father of RH Baker. Again the spelling is different but as you've no doubt come across in the historic records for Hawaiians there are variations. I am confident based on what I know of Oceanic languages that these are all cognates (Ikekelei'aiku, Ikekeleaiku and Kekeleeiku) but you are right to point out that there are variations in the written sources and no summative publication I can point to that affirms this stance.
 * I believe that this sentence doesn't add any extra information and is if anything confusing and could be omitted: "which this published genealogy shows as a descendant of ʻIlikiāmoana, the mother of Moana Wahine however, the paper notes that Hoapili's genealogy used the name Hikiamoana and was corrected using the genealogy of Edward K. Lilikalani"
 * I also think that if we are going to include the Kealani Cook reference to Adam Baker, we can balance it with the following segment or some variation on it which you've deleted: "The precise details of how Robert Hoapili Baker came to have the surname of Baker are unclear but an obituary published at the time of his death stated that "Robert Hoapili was the real name of this distinguished native, Baker being added in honor of the white man in whose family he was reared." "
 * Thoughts? Mrabray (talk) 23:32, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

Arbitrary break and response

 * "..still feel that the overwhelming majority of the reports of his lineage in the newspapers of the time and the Mahele records still affirm that the father is a man from Maui called Ikekeleiaiku".
 * One, that is not affirmation, in fact the overwhelming number of sources actually use Kekeleeiku. Where sources use Ikekeleiaiku they are all referencing the 1896 article as does the Genealogies Extracted from Hawaiian Newspapers source. The Mahele records point blank uses Kekeleeiku of Maui in reference to land from Napuuahoehoe. This just needs more sourcing and research. The Mahele indices is an excellent source as it contains the genealogies as put forward by each claimant. These have been used to source facts about lineage on Wikipedia many times.--Mark Miller (talk) 23:44, 27 February 2019 (UTC)


 * "...and the mother is Napuupahoehoe. There is no reference that I've seen yet in any of the published record of Robert Hoapili Bakers life to suggest a Tahitian parentage."
 * No. The mother we are referring to is Malie, sometimes referred to in sources as Malie Napuupahoehoe. It is her father who was the Maui ali'i called Napu'upahoehoe (k). The source that Napu'upahoehoe might be Tahitian comes from the "Baker clan" as documented by Dean Kekoolani in his notes on the subject at the Kekoolani.org. However, at the moment I believe it is mixing two similar names, one Being Puipui who was a konohiki.--Mark Miller (talk) 23:53, 27 February 2019 (UTC)


 * "..which this published genealogy shows as a descendant of ʻIlikiāmoana, the mother of Moana Wahine however, the paper notes that Hoapili's genealogy used the name Hikiamoana and was corrected using the genealogy of Edward K. Lilikalani""
 * This explains that this article says this as a fact but it had to be corrected. It adds vital details from the article itself that shows the baker genealogy already had a mistake that had to be corrected.--Mark Miller (talk) 23:57, 27 February 2019 (UTC)


 * "I also think that if we are going to include the Kealani Cook reference to Adam Baker, we can balance it with the following segment or some variation on it which you've deleted: "The precise details of how Robert Hoapili Baker came to have the surname of Baker are unclear but an obituary published at the time of his death stated that "Robert Hoapili was the real name of this distinguished native, Baker being added in honor of the white man in whose family he was reared."
 * I have no idea why the inclusion of Kealani Cook reference requires balance of any kind but that statement is not a fact nor does the source even make the claim. All it says is; "Baker being added in honor of the white man in whose family he was reared." One, we have other sources that state Captain Adam Baker was his natural father so adding that bit is conflicting and written as fact when we still do not know it as fact. Since it is opinion we would have to attribute the source in text but again, it does not say "The precise details of how Robert Hoapili Baker came to have the surname of Baker are unclear". I can agree to add a line such as; "His obituary from the [whatever newspaper] states that Hoapili took the name Baker to honor the family that brought him up"...or something along those lines. But that is all we can say from that source.--Mark Miller (talk) 00:06, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, All points above accepted. Can you direct me to the genealogy of Edward Lilikalani where they correct ‘Ilikiamoana to Hikiamoana? What is your take / Wikipedia’s rules on using references from Hawaiian language newspapers? There was a series of letters published in the early 1900s after Hoapili’s death in which it’s asserted a number of times that Ikekeleiaiku son of Kamakahelei is father of Robert Hoapili Baker, but I concede that the Mahele index is a more definitive primary source, I don’t have access to it at present unfortunately. I think including a line as; "His obituary from the [whatever newspaper] states that Hoapili took the name Baker to honor the family that brought him up" as suggested is good, so long as its source is explained as described? Mahalo Mrabray (talk) 00:47, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
 * The paper does not show Lilikalani's genealogy but only states that the name they used on that particular line was taken from the Lilikalani genealogy. The Edith McKenzie source translates the entire thing. I can provide his genealogy if needed but it would come from other sources. The English Wikipedia prefers English sources but if no other source can be found, non English sources may be used. As with other sources, whether they are opinion or stating as fact must be distinguished and if opinion, then the author and or publication must be attributed in the text of the article.
 * Published personal letters are still not reliable sources for fact but might be a good way to locate needed information. I think I am very close to figuring this out. The missing piece of genuine primary sourcing seems to be the mahele listing of the wife of Kekeleeiku as what I found already seems to indicate that he was married to Napuupahoehoe's daughter. Other LCA documents seem to also indicate that Puipui was a Hawaiian land agent and a completely different person from Napuupahoehoe. The issue to clear up is the publication "The Baker Clan" which seems to state that Napuupahoehoe was Pupuhi who was called Stephen Pupuhi, who was a Tahitian Missionary. But I have great doubts to the accuracy of that claim.--Mark Miller (talk) 01:07, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Agreed, that mahele listing would be a very helpful piece of the puzzle. My take on the Baker Clan publication is that it would appear to be a small run, short family history booklet from the descendants of JT Baker who were documenting family oral histories, wherein Luka Pruvia is the daughter of Pupuhi, Tahitian missionary etc etc. The focus of same wouldn’t have been RH Baker, although I concede I haven’t read it. Again his source is not documented but I assume that’s where Kealani Cook took the story from. Have you seen obits or Mahele entries for Luka, mother of JT Baker? Imperfect though they may be as source material, it is certainly an interesting assertion (that I think is worth mentioning in the RH Baker article), that Ikekeleiaiku is stated in letters published in the papers and subsequently in Edith McKenzie Vol II to be son of Kamakahelei. Do you have a suggestion on how we might include that assertion. Perhaps something like “Kaikeoewa Palekaluhi Kamehamehanuiailuau, in a letter published in the Pacific Commercials Advertiser on December 11,1901 and subsequently reprinted in the book Hawaiian Genealogies Volume II by Edith McKenzie asserts that Robert Hoapili Baker is the son of Ikekelei’aiku, whose mother was Queen Kamakahelei”. Thoughts? Mrabray (talk) 01:30, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

I don’t see any articles stating an alternate mother than Malie Napuupahoehoe. For the sake of readability could the paragraph on parentage start as “His mother was Malie Napuupahoehoe who according to a genealogy published in Ka Makaainana on (this day) is descended from the House of Līloa via ‘Ilikiamoana, although this genealogy did need correction...” Then I think a statement signposting the varied reports of fatherhood between different sources before launching into quotes might help too. Mrabray (talk) 01:42, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Mother's information added upfront directly after the birth dating.--Mark Miller (talk) 02:04, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
 * As for the Cook source, it's size and run have no true meaning and the background of where the information comes from is pretty much the same as the other sources ~ Differing documents and oral history. As for the letter, that sounds like a decent source but I'd have to read it and the Volume II of Edith Mckenzie to know better. I did not find these when looking earlier. I will look for them now. Do you have links? Context is going to be needed if we indeed include the information such as who Kaikeoewa Palekaluhi Kamehamehanuiailuau is and why the information is considered accurate or at least authentic (meaning it comes from a source that is authentic if not accurate) such as Kamaka Stillman's letter about the birth of Kamehameha.--Mark Miller (talk) 02:13, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
 * The Edward K. Lilikalani genealogy is found in probably the best source on the Moana family line, "Rethinking the Native Hawaiian Past" on page 61 which refers to the Kanaina Probate with the claims of the descendants of Kukalohe, a husband of Moana Wahine. The book goes into great detail and lays out factual information with notes to sources, although the main source of the book is Probate #2426 where the Lilikalani claim is shown in full but page 40 of the book shows the Moana Kane and Piilani Wahine tree including siblings of Ilikiamoana and Moana Wahine. I can't seem to find a preview of it on Google books but I have it in front of me if you want any information from it looked up. The Edith Mackenzie book is out of print and the preview is limited but I can't afford $350 for a book right now. I do have volume I though. I also have most of the probate record but I believe that can be downloaded for free from the Hawaii Digital Archives.--Mark Miller (talk) 02:23, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! Here’s the link to the google books excerpt front Vol II: https://books.google.com.au/books?id=QB92bdJ8igwC&pg=PA137&lpg=PA137&dq=kamakahelei+baker&source=bl&ots=4KJpuBQXFP&sig=ACfU3U1hfYwYifq-XIQxSzLBJyAvinBZxg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiB1bGC3tvgAhVOWisKHXJKBeEQ6AEwC3oECAMQAQ#v=onepage&q=kamakahelei%20baker&f=false I’m curious to see how you might include that, though I don’t see much benefit to the readability of the article by adding an additional discussion on the accuracy or authenticity of every source. We want to keep an encyclopaedic format rather than an in text analysis of sources. For example, With respect to the Lilikalani genealogy I accept your point on the source, but still find the wording and reference to “correction” to be clunky and doesn’t add much in the way of meaning to the central point being that the mother is Malie Napu’upahoehoe. Mrabray (talk) 02:54, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Sorry; the central point being his mother is Malie Napu’upahoehoe and multiple newspaper sources describing his genealogy during his lifetime and at death state that she is descended from Līloa. Like rather that saying, “... In Ka Makaainana on this date...” couldn’t we just make the point and list the reference? Mrabray (talk) 02:58, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I'll take a look but, you don't need to attribute Edith Mckenzie's book. That's a secondary source that only verifies the claim was made. It should be added as a source along with the newspaper information.--Mark Miller (talk) 03:31, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
 * "I don’t see much benefit to the readability of the article by adding an additional discussion on the accuracy or authenticity of every source." Then we are going to have a huge problem. Seriously. Please seek a mentor. I will work with you, of course, but I am not going to have a discussion of Wikipedia policy in regards to sourcing. You should know this by now. I will answer any question you pose to me in that regard but it is up to you to understand what constitutes a reliable source, a primary source and a secondary source as well as how to handle opinion when editing Wikipedia. While you have been absent for ten years I have been working hard to understand as much about our policies and guidelines as possible and have now been editing for 12 years. I will not agree to doing anything that ignores a sources place in regards to other sources. But I do agree to listen to you and understand what you are requesting and give a straight forward explanation if possible. I steadfastly and with every understanding of the source, do not agree with removing the explanation of the correction made in the newspaper. it is important.--Mark Miller (talk) 03:40, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, of course accuracy and authenticity of sources is primary. I’m sorry if I have come across as rude, it’s certainly not my intention and I greatly appreciate your patient responses to me here. I will of course defer to your experience here, I was simply trying to convey that I felt that some of the in text citations were impacting the encyclopaedic flow of information in the article. But if it is conformation with policies and consistent with other articles then my point is moot of course. Mrabray (talk) 03:45, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh no, you are not coming across rude but the information is encyclopedic. If the article states that thre was a correction made to the family tree...it is extremely important to add that. Remember that the newspaper is printing something that is an opinion not a fact and this clearly demonstrates that. this is not fact but the tree as presented to the paper that the paper had to correct. The fact that the correction comes from the tree of Kalakaua's genealogist...makes it extremely notable.--Mark Miller (talk) 03:48, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Okay, conscious of that and all the points we’ve made so far, allow me to work on a paragraph synthesising all the above sometime today and I’ll put it here on the talk page for your critique. If you reject it outright though then we might benefit from another editor or 3rd opinion so that we end up with a better article as a result. Again Mahalo for your time and patience Mrabray (talk) 03:55, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Also, did you intend to delete all reference to his being a model for the Kamehameha statue? Mrabray (talk) 04:24, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Proposed reworking of the lineage
Mark Miller Aloha Mark I just realised I've seen your beautiful paintings and am a fan of your work! Below is my version with the inclusion of the newspaper references to some of the relevant letters in English and 'Ōlelo reporting the genealogy of Hoapili Baker, son of Ikekeleaiku/Ikekelei'aiku/Ikekeleeiku/Kekeleeiku. I remain convinced that despite the spelling variations these still refer to the same father, who in the references I've attached is reported to be the son of Kamakahelei by a man named Kini. Currently the references are in the website ref format but I will correct them to the standard newspaper format. Again, each time used I have stated that the letters only consistute "points made/claims/assertions" by the authors of the letters. If you agree though a summative statement followed by the links to the references would make for a neater shorter paragraph, such as "In the early 1900's, a number of letters to the editor of Aloha Aina were written in which it was claimed that Ikekeleaiku, father of Hoapili Baker was the son of Kamakahelei [ref][re][ref]. I will add some permutation of this with these references soon.


 * Robert Hoapili Baker was born sometime between 1845 and 1847, in Waikapu, on the island of Maui.


 * His mother is known to be Malie Napuʻupahoehoe who according to a genealogy published in the newspaper Ka Makaainana, Volume VI, Number 5, dated August 3, 1896, married Ikekeleaiku. In this article Hoapili's lineage goes back to Liloa from the House of Moana through a figure called Napuupahoehoe (K), which this published genealogy shows as the father of Malie and a descendant of ʻIlikiāmoana, the mother of Moana Wahine. However, the paper notes that Hoapili's genealogy used the name Hikiamoana and was corrected using the genealogy of Edward K. Lilikalani.
 * Discussions of Hoapili’s paternal ancestry are complicated by variations in the spelling of his name and conflicting reports. Kaikeoewa Palekaluhi Kamehamehanuiailuau, in a letter published in the Pacific Commercial Advertiser on December 11, 1901 asserts that Ikekeleeiku, father of Robert Hoapili Baker, was a son of Queen Kamakahelei, Ali’i Nui of Kaua’i, a point also made by Kawaiokahakulolahuiwahinepupukaohonopuwaiakuaihonokalani  Papaikaniau  Iaukea in Ke Aloha Aina, Volume VIII, Number 7, 15 February 1902 and by Wahamanaikapuailima in the same paper on Ke Aloha Aina, Volume VII, Number 51, 21 December 1901. This connection to Kamakahelei is also made in another letter published in Ke Aloha Aina on 15 March 1902 where it is claimed that the ahu’ula of Kamakahelei was draped on the coffin of Robert Hoapili Baker at his funeral.
 * In alternate obituaries published at the time of his death Hoapili's father’s name is spelt Kekeleeiku (k) of Maui In his book; Return to Kahiki: Native Hawaiians in Oceania by Kealani Cook, the author states that aliʻi wahine, Malie Napuʻupahoehoe had Robert Hoapili Baker with Captain Adam Baker, making him the half brother of John Tamatoa Baker. However an obituary published at the time of his death stated that the addition of the surname Baker was made “in honor of the white man in whose family he was reared.”

Mrabray (talk) 09:40, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
 * No. I'll explain in full shortly but the first thing I noticed is what we call original research. We can only summarize what the sources say, we can't add to it. I'll get back after lunch. Oh and thanks for the compliments about my art.--Mark Miller (talk) 17:57, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Part of the issue here is the undue weight given to the summary to the possible connection between one figure and another that the almost all sources do not state in any manner. The one letter I had time to read went into detail but only mentions in passing the connection. it is absolutely worth adding but with due weight. To much emphasis is pushing something that is not entirely able to be confirmed in that manner...but I think it can be in a different way. Remember these are still just opinions and not a primary record. I am almost certain there is a primary source for this that can be used but it should not have a long mention or a separated paragraph. We need to incorporate into th text with the due weight of the source. I'll explain in a bit and see if I can copy edit the above to conform better to the sources etc..--Mark Miller (talk) 18:07, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Right after I posted the above, my DNA test results came in and I got caught up with that all day! I'll get back to this this evening. Sorry for not getting back after lunch.--Mark Miller (talk) 00:26, 1 March 2019 (UTC)


 * OK, back to this. The first source from The Pacific Commercial Advertiser, dated December 11, 1901 has a lot to unpack but is very interesting. The letter is being written in response to the paper previously printing the genealogy of Mrs. Kaumana Widemann that the author believes looks like the work of Emma DeFries. What's interesting here is the genealogy he states for Mrs. Widemann seems to show her grandfather Kalawa as the father of Puipui (k) who is stated as one of the siblings of Nika, Mrs Widemann's father. He becomes a konohiki and is mentioned as the land agent over the lands of Kekeleeiku (k) of Maui when claiming lands in the Mahele through Napuʻupahoehoe.


 * The crux of the assertion the author is making is that Widemann's assertion that their line is from royalty is disputed. He states the family is using names they hold no right to. The author asserts that the "hashed up" genealogy using the name Kamakahelei can only be referring to Queen Kamakaheli, the mother of Kaumualii and Ikekeleeiku. The article in question if from December 5th of that same month and year entitled; "Proofs of Royal Lineage of Mrs. Wideman Suppressd During the Lifetime of Judge Widemann". To add the portions we need to in regard to claims being made by Kaikeoewa Palekaluhi Kamehamehanuiailuau, we have to understand what he is denying. It apears he is denying that the genealogy is theirs to posses and that these names belong to Hoapili Baker as being descended from the Kauai Queen. The author is claiming that Ikekeleeiku is one of the two sons of Kamakahelei and that demonstrates that the Widemann genealogy is wrong. The reality is, the genealogy was printed in Abraham Fornander's publications in 1877 originally and not beginning with Mrs. Widemann, so that must be added as balance to the claims being asserted by the author. The Fornander genealogies at least demonstrate the Widemann claim going back 20 years before the Baker genealogies were printed in 1896. This all has to be done with an immense amount of sensitivity.


 * Now I'll read the other sources.--Mark Miller (talk) 00:28, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I was able to find one of the articles but not the first one from Aloha Aina newspapers. I was able to read and understand enough to see they are discussing the genealogy in the article; "PANE KE ALII PALEKALUHI" but we should strive to understand what they are actually saying before adding the sources. If I'm not mistaken I'm seeing a much longer version of Baker's mother's name.--Mark Miller (talk) 02:56, 2 March 2019 (UTC)