Talk:John Owen Dominis

Illegal

Aren't the references to illegal overthrow a bit redundant? Most any overthrow of a government can be called illegal.--Aaron Walden 04:12, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

factual accuracy

"was an American-born statesman" and "John Owen Dominis was born in Island of Rab, Croatia": Since I don't suppose he was born twice they can't both be right... Dutch Rongo (talk) 19:54, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes your right. Someone was have changed it because it was originally Shenectady, New York. KAVEBEAR (talk) 03:57, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

• I read this article and my first reaction (having recently read about 10-12 other Wikipedia articles as well as external materials on the history of Hawaii) was "Is any of this article based on fact?" But here I turn to the discussion page and realize others too, find it written in manner (without a single supporting external reference) and tone that put this article in the context of an 'opinion piece' without any substantiation whatsoever. But the plausibility that someone would build this guy a mansion to live in when he's growing up, prior to marrying the future Queen, lends itself to the question of "how did this come about in the first place?" How are their families affiliated, since they have to have been for her family to build his family a mansion before he has even grown up? Were they promised in marriage to each other through their parents or families? Did his family move to Hawaii from Schenectady - the article doesn't even say... It was the first inclination that based on the information provided, this story does not work at making sense... Either the article needs more information, verified with supporting references or it is a figment of someone's bunk... Stevenmitchell (talk) 02:47, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

No you got it all wrong. Washington Place was not build due to John's prospect of being marrying to a future queen. For one Washington Place was built by John's father, John Sr. for his wife, John's mother Mary, to live in while he was away on business trips. Washington Place actually was also a sort of bed and breakfast (that's not the word I'm looking for but I forgot what they were call) during John's childhood because his mother needed money to feed the family; I think John Sr. was dead by then. Second of all Liliuokalani was never a future queen until well after her marriage to John. She was never expected to marry a haole or white man but instead a Hawaiian noble or prince from her distant relation. Also, I think John's father's family were from Schenectady, New York while her mother's family were from Boston. His family arrived in Kamehameha III's reign, and he was in Honolulu when Liliuokalani was attending Chiefs' Children's School. So it might have been the 1830s. You should read Liliuokalani's autobiography. --KAVEBEAR (talk) 08:55, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

I tried to clarify the lives of the two people with the same first and last names, this time with citations to srouces. Feel free to add more. W Nowicki (talk) 19:52, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Continued as prince consort after death?

Did the subject really continue as prince consort for almost a year and a half after his death? The infobox says that he died on August 27, 1891, but that his tenure as prince consort did not end until January 17, 1893, when his wife's reign ended. I know nothing about him and practically nothing about the Kingdom of Hawaii in general, so maybe that's how the monarchy worked, but it seems unlikely.

Since the article says nothing about the prince consort's tenure extending past his death, I'm going to risk making a mistake and change his tenure to end with his death. If that's wrong, somebody who knows better can change it back and explain the Hawaiian custom or law that allowed dead people to continue in office.--Jim10701 (talk) 23:20, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Ah, yes, death is usually a "a career limiting move" :-) Source 9 in Hawaiian archives agrees he died in 1891. Thanks for catching it. W Nowicki (talk) 23:30, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree he died in 1891; he wasn't there by her side when she was overthrown that was for sure. I think the 1893 date was a typo/mistake. PS this is not really worth discussing; it's kind of obvious. --KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:44, 13 February 2011 (UTC)