Talk:California

This article is a candidate to be a U.S. Collaboration of the Month

Vote or comment on the nomination here!

Italy gdp comparison doesn't sound right

Italy's nominal gdp is 2.3 trillion. Canada's is 1.5 trillion. the difference would have to made up by a gdp per capita much higher than Canada's since according to population projections Canada and California only differ by about 2.5 million people. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita USA gdp per capita 46,858 Canada gdp per capita 45,428

California nominal gdp would be about 1.7 trillion more similar to Russia (in 2009 Russia's gdp falls a lot though).

Are White Hispanics "minorities"?

As stated above, Hispanic is not an option for race on the census. It's an additional category for ethnicity. There are Hispanics of all races. Combining all Hispanics into one group, excluding White Hispanics from inclusion among all Whites, and then declaring them "minorities" is not only inaccurate, it is insulting and racist. Were Italians, Greeks or Jews "non-white" 100 years ago? What are they now? How are White Hispanics different, and why are they being called "non-white"? What is the agenda here? It seems some sort of distortion is being done intentionally. Based on the ACS already cited in the article it should read:

According to the 2006–2008 American Community Survey, California's population is:[41]

   * 76.4% White
   * 12.5% Asian
   * 6.7% Black or African American
   * 2.6% Multiracial
   * 1.2% Native American

   * 36.6% are Hispanic or Latino (of any race)

Language

The current language information is misleading. Since the Census data cited uses English Only as a category, bilingual speakers of Spanish and English are automatically lumped into the Spanish category. The same goes for the other minority languages of Californians. The article makes it seem as though over 40 percent of Californians don't speak English, when clearly this isn't the case. I wonder if there is a better source that counts the total number of speakers--including bilingual speakers--of each language. Subsurd (talk) 20:55, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Wyoming

In the inital history paragraph it describes the original make-up of the then called California, there is no verification on the listing which normally I would understand but in this case is needed as Wyoming was never a part of that area. So a footnote ref or removal Wyoming from they listed land area would help the veracity of the article. Thanks all — Preceding unsigned comment added by BespokeFM (talk • contribs)

lack of substance in artice

Firstly, I couldn't find the miles of coastline in California, in this stub. I haven't had time to read the entire article. But, after glancing over it, it appeared to be one sided and imbalanced. I'm not highly familiar with the article, nor any of the US states articles. But, maybe someone whom is, should make a checklist of California facts, and fill in the blanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NickWSV (talk • contribs) 06:25, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

OK, writing as a California native who has made about 25k edits on WP, I would say the article is balanced. In fact, I cant imagine how an article on a major state could be imbalanced. too many notes, perchance? Miles of coastline may not be considered the most notable fact, but if added, it would probably stay. Why not research the fact and add it, which would bring your contributing edits to 1?(mercurywoodrose)75.61.129.100 (talk) 09:21, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

state fish - two not one.

The list of state insignia is not complete. I was struck by the absence of the state marine fish (the Garibaldi) but a number of other official state whatsits (bands, both ghost towns, folk dance, and others) seems desirable and easy. But I'm new to this so opted to comment rather than edit directly.204.47.199.132 (talk) 21:50, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

out of date demographic data

The (deleted) USAToday citation did not give racial makeup of the demographics. The breakdown seen comes from 2005-2007 Factfinder data, but a more recent (2007-2009) version is available. See: [1]. A more enterprising editor (than I) needs to plug in this data. --S. Rich (talk) 15:18, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

Country vs. State

There is this sentence in the introduction that reads "If California were a country, it would be the eighth-largest economy in the world and the 35th most populous nation." I think this sentence, while intelligible and in accordance to a common, popular use of the word "country" among Americans, would be much more accurate and appropriate if it read "If California were an independent state". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.126.7.69 (talk) 02:55, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Stikes me as a bit nit-picking. 'Country' genrally does mean 'Sovereign state' in English usage. Nobody would find it ambiguous. 64.180.40.75 (talk) 03:16, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

I agree that it should say "sovereign state". The term "country" refers to a geographical area - which a state defines. But country is also used for, in California, such as "valley country", "Sierra country", etc.... It makes sense to use a political term. -DevinCook (talk) 01:30, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

"Immigrants Rights" vs. "Illegal Aliens Rights"

The caption for the photo of the immigrants rights rally in LA states "illegal aliens rights march" rather than "Immigrants' rights march". "Illegal aliens rights" is a dehumanizing, offensive term, and should be replaced with "Immigrants' rights". Also, under the "Population" section, it states "illegal aliens constituted an estimated...". This should be replaced with "..undocumented immigrants constituted an estimated..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bkrazee (talk • contribs) 01:09, 8 January 2012 (UTC)