Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California/Archive 5

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_November_7#Category:Medical_schools_in_California

I don't know if anyone cares, but i've been fighting a one-man battle to keep this category from being deleted. Please sound off if you have an opinion. Ameriquedialectics 22:06, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Template:Public Transportation in Greater San Diego

User:Cooljuno411 and I seem to have a bit of a disagreement about how {{Public Transportation in Greater San Diego}} should be formatted. Since the template talk page states the template is part of this WikiProject, I thought I'd bring the discussion here to get a few more opinions. Cooljuno feels that the template is similar to the infoboxes and should be left-aligned (but, for some reason, in the See Also section, which not all of the appropriate articles would otherwise have, such as McClellan-Palomar Airport), while I feel it belongs at the bottom of the page with the other navigation templates and should be the width of the article, as seen in this revision. Thoughts? -- Hawaiian717 22:09, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

It looks to me like an aesthetic question, but I favor your solution. Unless the information were in an info-box i don't think it particularly needs to be left right-aligned. Ameriquedialectics 22:15, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, should say right-aligned. But you probably know what I mean. :) -- Hawaiian717 22:20, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
I think it works best as a full-width template at the bottom of a page. It is intended to link topics together. It now mentions that its "counterpart" is Template:Infobox Public transit; however, that template is an infobox, and this one is not. They should not be treated or used in the same way. I support the previous version. —ScouterSig 22:49, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Based on a lack of any objections here -- and it's been almost a month -- I've gone ahead and reverted the template to the full page width version consistent with other navigation templates and moved it back to the bottom of the relevant pages. -- Hawaiian717 21:07, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Fuller Seminary

Greetings,

Please help. User: Flixthecat85 has repeatedly vandalized the Fuller Theological Seminary article. Me and other editors have helped maintain the site with a moderate, unbiased perspective for the past few months, but this guy just recently started making significant edits and deletions without any discussion. He primarily has vandalized the criticisms section, making me think that he is a Fuller alum or current student that is very biased and doesn't want to see any criticism of his school, even though it is fair (Fuller is a very controversial school). Please investigate, warn him if he doesn't stop he will be blocked, and restore the criticisms section that he recently vandalized yesterday.

Thanks,

-manutdglory —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manutdglory (talkcontribs) 09:31, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

So can you help? -manutdglory

A response posted also on the Fuller Theological Seminary site in response to Amerique's moderation:

Thank you, Amerique. The policies seem very clear (after all, most of what you stated about referenced material, etc. is well known to most experienced wikipedians). If you check the history, all I did (and what other users did that was also undone) was to note what was unreferenced material, and after a while this unreferenced material was removed. I find it disappointing that a user (especially someone describing himself as a committed Christian) would repeatedly undo changes and assume that others are not acting in good faith, ignoring our comments about why exactly this was done and even trying to get others blocked. However, I am (and always will be) happy to work with him on any referenced facts to make sure that articles are accurate. Flixthecat85 (talk) 06:07, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

A california fungus is at FAC

Amanita ocreata is at FAC - good public health one...cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:50, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Santa Barbara oil spill

Greetings: I am reposting a request that I originally posted at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Environment last week, in hopes of attracting another collaborator:

I've just made a rather shocking and very dismaying discovery: There's no article about the 1969 Santa Barbara oil spill. In fact, on all of Wikipedia, there are no more than a handful of passing references to this event. It's not even mentioned in the List of oil spills. Yikes! How on earth is this possible??? This is mind-boggling. In all seriousness, this is undoubtedly the most glaring omission I have ever found on Wikipedia (and, believe me, I've found more than a few). We are talking about the single event that was most directly responsible for launching the modern environmental movement on a mass scale. It's no mere coincidence that Earth Day 1970 took place just months later.

Especially with two oil spill eco-disasters currently under way, I hope I'm not alone in feeling that creation of this article should be a very high priority for this Project. I am in the middle of some very time-consuming things elsewhere on Wikipedia right now, but I promise that I will join in on a collaboration to write this article. Please reply here, and leave a note on my talk page, if you are interested -- especially if you've got good sourcing material. Regards, -- Cgingold (talk) 22:05, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I saw your comments and I appreciate your suggestion to make an article on this oil spill accident. Most likely, I will start an article on this on coming Wednesday. OhanaUnitedTalk page 13:48, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

If you're interested, please reply at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Environment#Santa Barbara oil spill and/or my talk page#Santa Barbara oil spill. Regards, Cgingold (talk) 19:35, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Proposed merger notification

A merger was proposed from The Twomps, Oakland, California to San Antonio, Oakland, California. It may benefit from your input, discussion is at Talk:San Antonio, Oakland, California. Thanks. -- Pepve (talk) 22:56, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Talk:California‎

I'd appreciate it if someone could answer my question. Thanks, Yonatan talk 03:12, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

History of California

Greetings from WikiProject Oregon! (Sometimes known as WikiProject California's WikiProject Canada.) You might want to check on your history article. We've been working with a well-meaning editor who turned our History of Oregon, that was previously a redirect to the history section of the Oregon article, into a collection of templates. While the controversy continues over whether this user's work is helpful, it has finally got one of our members to actually write an article there, since the template solution was universally diapproved of. Meanwhile, your history article, which until recently was a soft redirect to a couple articles covering certain areas of history, is a collection of templates, which may or may not be what you want there. Happy editing! Katr67 (talk) 17:45, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughts, and for your continuing sterling work on Oregon articles. Actually, the original History of California article was so large, that we had to break in two - History of California to 1899 and History of California 1900 to present. The History of California template also contains references to other specific historical areas. Anyone have any ideas to re-organize? NorCalHistory (talk) 17:54, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and added some explanatory text in the page that opens when a reader clicks History of California, explaining where more detailed articles will be found. If anyone has any better ideas, please chime in. NorCalHistory (talk) 00:43, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

City limits

Does anyone have a good source for city limits of California cities, in particular Paramount, with good enough precision to tell whether they are on the sides or centerlines of streets? Thank you. --NE2 13:50, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

New California Flag Graphic

New version - updated bear

Good morning. I recently updated the SVG for the Flag of California. The new version is designed to better reflect the colors of the bear as well as give a more accurate depiction of how it rendered on the flag. In particular, I attempted to get the textures and shapes as accurate as possible. I used an actual California Flag as a reference (I scanned it into my computer for tracing). Anyway, I would like to hear your opinions on the changes ... and if we should revert to the other version or keep this one. I wouldn't mind changing the colors of the bear to be more "vibrant" (match the current version). When this is complete, perhaps someone could replace the existing file on Wikimedia Commons (I created an account, but it is far too new). I also added this topic to the California discussion. Thanks for your time. -DevinCook (talk) 15:11, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Settlements

Greetings once again from Oregon. I was tidying up Wikipedia:U.S. cities without articles by removing bluelinks and noticed a couple to point out to you before they are deleted. Crowley Lake, California and Lake Almanor, California both redirect to their respective lake articles but don't mention any settlement by the same name. June Lake (California) is a good example of incorporating both features into an article. But sometimes there isn't actually a settlement named after a feature, it's just a naming convention mistake. I'll leave that to y'all to figure out. Also, I redirected Mi-Wuk, California to Mi-Wuk Village, California, I'm assuming they are the same place, but sometimes these kinds of names indicate separate locales. Happy editing! I hope you are staying warmer than we are. Katr67 (talk) 19:08, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

New Barnstar

California Barnstar

Hey everyone. I just created a new version of the California Barnstar. Initially, I saw an image linked in the "images that should have an SVG" section on Wikipedia. After I created the graphic, another user pointed out that someone else had beat me to it. Anyway, I would like to hear what you guys think of the graphic I created. Should we use this one or the other?

I also created a new template designed to have the basic colors and appearance of the California Flag.

California Barnstar.svg THE CALIFORNIA BARNSTAR
I award you this barnstar for your considerable efforts on improving articles related to the California Republic. -- (4 tildes)

Also, I can create a new graphic for the California Portal template. This one would have to be simple given the size constraints. Perhaps it can have a red star centered at the top with the bear centered below it. Anyway, please give me your feedback. -DevinCook (talk) 00:31, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

  • I like the original. Also, the original is used by all the California related WikiProjects. I wouldn't objct to the box redesign. --evrik (talk) 02:29, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
    • For the barnstar box, do you think it would be best to use the current portal image or the proposed barnstar image? Personally, I think the proposed version would look better, but my opinion is a tad bias... :-) If we to continue to use the portal graphic, do you have any objections updating the image's colors to match the official colors of the California flag? -DevinCook (talk) 09:32, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I think the current image is fine, really. Matching the colors wouldn't be a bad idea. I don't thik we need to replace the images, but why don't you ask some other people to comment. --evrik (talk) 14:48, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

  • I would love to hear anyone's opinion on the matter. I might go downtown sometime next week and take a good picture of an official flag at the Capitol. That should provide the detail I need to make a truly perfect version of the flag.-DevinCook (talk) 14:20, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Does anyone have an opinion regarding modifying the California Barnstar Box? The original image will stay the same.-DevinCook (talk) 23:45, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I like the new barnstar box. Ameriquedialectics 21:53, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

French Camp

Under the "Claim to Fame" heading, I really can't believe French Camp was the first city west of the Mississippi. How about Santa Fe? Overall, the article reads as if it were copied straight out of an older history book.

Good catch. I think that is an unsupportable assertion. Frankly, I doubt it was ever even a city. I'm going to remove it. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 22:45, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Also, you are correct that the material was copied. This [1] appears to be the source. Unfortunately, books published on or after 1923 are still copyrighted. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 22:58, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

GA nominee - Castle Lake (California)

Castle Lake (California) is a current Good article nominee.NorCalHistory (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 13:44, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

  • Should we add the California Template to the end of the page? I've never been that far north, unfortunately. -DevinCook (talk) 11:46, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Great idea, DevinCook, thx! NorCalHistory (talk) 15:18, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Bradshaw Trail

Hi! Just did a new stubbish article on the historic Bradshaw Trail if anyone's interested. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 09:26, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

  • Great work! You need some citations, but that's true of 99% of articles. :-) I once found an excellent work on the subject of old abandoned trails from the times of the Gold Rush. If I find it again at the library, I will send you its title. Cheers. -DevinCook (talk) 11:45, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks much. I've harbored an interest in the local history of the Coachella Valley ever since I moved here. In fact, I started a lot of California-based articles under my old username and expanded the Coachella Valley article and a lot of its related articles. I did a slew of work on the Route 66 article as well. Just off the top of my head, here are some of my originals:

I originally wrote Wigwag (railroad) which was invented in Los Angeles and June McCarroll, a nurse in Indio who first proposed separating two opposite lanes of a highway with a painted white line. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 19:25, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Wiley's Well

Just added Wiley's Well as a sort of companion piece to Bradshaw Trail...which is a DYK feature today! Woo-hoo! --PMDrive1061 (talk) 07:01, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

California template usage

Is there a guideline for which articles should have the California template? Specifically, should it only be used in articles that have links in the template? Or, is it okay to include it in other articles about places in California, for example, articles about state or national parks? Mudwater (Talk) 13:22, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

San Diego Exposition evaluation

A lot of new stuff at Panama-California Exposition (1915) could use an evaluation rating. -- SEWilco (talk) 04:54, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


WikiProject California: Articles of unclear notability

Hello,

there are currently 45 articles in the scope of this project which are tagged with notability concerns. I have listed them here. (Note: this listing is based on a database snapshot of 12 March 2008 and may be slightly outdated.)

I would encourage members of this project to have a look at these articles, and see whether independent sources can be added, whether the articles can be merged into an article of larger scope, or possibly be deleted. Any help in cleaning up this backlog is appreciated. For further information, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Notability.

If you have any questions, please leave a message on the Notability project page or on my personal talk page. (I'm not watching this page however.) Thanks! --B. Wolterding (talk) 15:45, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

This was a helpful post. 18 of the articles listed were schools, including 4 public high schools and 6 public middle schools. Rossmoor, Walnut Creek, California was also listed. It had tags for lack of notability, lack of references, and a proposal to merge it with Walnut Creek. I added some "notable" information with references and removed those tags. I also posted an argument against the merger. It needs more work, of course.--Hjal (talk) 22:54, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

California Chapter?

Would anyone be interested in forming Wikimedia California? Geoff Plourde (talk) 01:01, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Kanaka

I added the California Wikiproject to this article's talkpage, as it could use some input on the role/experience of Kanakas in California; I only know about their presence there from a Canadian-written book, Kanaka by Tom Koppel (not Ted). The Kanaka article was originally written only from an Australasian/South Pacific standpoint, where the term is derisive and associated with plantation slavery; in BC and California it's associated with the gold rush and, earlier, the fur trade. Not sure how much Californian-Kanaka history there is, but I know there's some; the Kanaka placenames in California (see List of Chinook Jargon placenames under "k") must have stories associated with them, maybe some worth articles also. Koppel's book, which I no longer own, has some stats on how many Hawaiians there were in gold rush California, and other details...this is also posted on the Talk:History of California to 1899 pageSkookum1 (talk) 13:36, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Main page nomination for Manzanar

With the 39th Annual Manzanar Pilgrimage coming up on April 26, I have nominated Manzanar to be on Wikipedia's main page on that date. Please add your support for that at Today's featured article requests. Thank you! -- Gmatsuda (talk) 21:11, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

California photos

I revised Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in California, Template:WikiProject California, and WikiProject California images to give WikiProject California and California based photographers better information regarding California articles needing photographs. GregManninLB (talk) 17:51, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

my husband was to a lady who lived on th hat creek resevation and was put up for adoption. we now have two boys and would like to know how to go about getting his indian numbers for our boys. if there is some one who can help us please respond to t.georgana@yahoo.com thank you so much —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.252.164.4 (talk) 23:24, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Coordinates in article

Does there really need to be three displays of the coordinates in a single article?.

1. First sentence in section Geography.

2. Above infobox.

3. Inside infobox.

Is this information that a reader can use? I'm referring to the Cobb, California article.

Marcia Wright (talk) 16:42, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

No, make that four references to coordinates, the last one under external links. These are CDP's in Lake County, but I stll don't see this many references as useful . Marcia Wright (talk) 15:33, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

If there are no objections, I will go ahead and remove all but one coordinate, keeping the coordinates listed in the infobox. That seems the most appropriate place for this information Marcia Wright (talk) 16:49, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Robert F. Kennedy assassination - some help needed

I spent several hours last night rewriting this article to try to limit the influx of fringe theories into it. I would now appreciate several more sets of eyes and some comments on the talk page of the article in an effort to vaguely establish a consensus for the rewrite compared to its original version. This has been prompted by IP reversions and my suspicion that the edits I've make are rather contentious for some. I hope you can help! Best wishes Fritzpoll (talk) 16:15, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

French Laundry up for deletion

Someone has placed French Laundry up for deletion. The WP:AFD discussion is at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/French_Laundry. —EncMstr (talk) 04:58, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Eastern Sierra question

Is the term Eastern Sierra in common usage? This question arose in relation to Template:High Desert/ Eastern Sierra Radio High Desert (California) has an article but Eastern Sierra doesn't which makes me wonder if it's notable enough to describe this area of California. While not every metro (or not so metro in this case) area has a Wikipedia article, those that are used in these radio market navigation markets should have articles to assist browsers in answering the question "where the heck is Eastern Sierra" for themselves. An opinion from someone with more knowledge of the area would be helpful.--Rtphokie (talk) 12:06, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Blog for Janice Hahn

Could somebody add the Councilwoman's blog as an external link? www.janicehahn.net —Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrewac (talkcontribs) 05:58, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Labouchere (paddle steamer) FYI

Not sure what else you might have to add; bio articles on namesake family/company seem called for but mostly English history (see google for this name).Skookum1 (talk) 22:47, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Featured Article status for San Francisco, California

Although this article is listed as a Featured Article, it no longer meets the criteria. For the most part, it looks very good. There is a lack of references throughout the article, though. If the article can be thoroughly referenced, I have no problem with it remaining as a Featured Article. I wanted to mention this to the relevant WikiProjects to see if anyone is willing to work on the sourcing for this article. Best wishes, GaryColemanFan (talk) 21:50, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

The article has well over 100 references, not counting those on its dozen subsidary articles (using both "Main article" and "See also" links from the major sections). It is also just under 100K. It doesn't seem to me that a lack of citations in general is a serious problem there, although people may have introduced unsourced bits that are either controversial or POV and should be removed without their own specific sources.--Hjal (talk) 06:28, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Kanaka placenames in Cailfornia

Hi; please see Talk:Kanaka#Kanaka_placenames_in_California.Skookum1 (talk) 04:33, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

RFC on Harvey Milk

A request for comment has been posted at Talk:Harvey Milk#REQUEST FOR COMMENT: Milk's involvement with Jim Jones/Peoples Temple. Other editor's input would be appreciated. Banjeboi 04:08, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Lighthouse articles being renamed to another project's style

Many of the articles on lighthouses and light stations included in List of Registered Historic Places in California have been moved from "Foo Point Lighthouse" or "Foo Point Light Station" to "Foo Point Light." This is done without discussion in most cases. Some existing articles were simply changed to redirects to new articles with the new naming convention adopted by Wikipedia:WikiProject Lighthouses.

Please review the discussion regarding the propsal to move Point Reyes Lighthouse to Point Reyes Light at Talk:Point Reyes Lighthouse.--Hjal (talk) 07:53, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

NPOV dispute

Anonymous editors have been changing the wording of Berkeley Oak Grove Protest, and article in your project's scope, and have recently added a NPOV template. I'd like opinions from other editors, so please stop on by and leave a comment here! Thanks! --Falcorian (talk) 20:06, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Ohlone GA Sweeps Review: On Hold

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the GA criteria and I'm specifically going over all of the "Culture and Society" articles. I have reviewed Ohlone and believe the article currently meets the majority of the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. I have left this message at this WikiProject's talk page so that any interested members can assist in helping the article keep its GA status. In reviewing the article, I have found there are a few issues that may need to be addressed, and I'll leave the article on hold for seven days for them to be fixed. I have left messages on the talk pages of the main contributors of the article and other related WikiProjects. Please consider helping address the several points that I listed on the talk page of the article, which shouldn't take too long to fix if multiple editors assist in the workload. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 05:32, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

{{County of Los Angeles‎}}

I have been currently involved in a heated debate regarding the name and the header of {{County of Los Angeles‎}}. Because the creator wants the scope of the template to just list the county's departments, board of supervisors, and other government-run offices, I have been arguing for a more specific title than just "County of Los Angeles". It has become so heated that I have accused him of WP:OWN. Therefore, I would appreciate if others could post their opinions on the matter at Template talk:County of Los Angeles‎#Might need to be renamed to help settle this dispute. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 16:42, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Changes to the WP:1.0 assessment scheme

As you may have heard, we at the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial Team recently made some changes to the assessment scale, including the addition of a new level. The new description is available at WP:ASSESS.

  • The new C-Class represents articles that are beyond the basic Start-Class, but which need additional references or cleanup to meet the standards for B-Class.
  • The criteria for B-Class have been tightened up with the addition of a rubric, and are now more in line with the stricter standards already used at some projects.
  • A-Class article reviews will now need more than one person, as described here.

Each WikiProject should already have a new C-Class category at Category:C-Class_articles. If your project elects not to use the new level, you can simply delete your WikiProject's C-Class category and clarify any amendments on your project's assessment/discussion pages. The bot is already finding and listing C-Class articles.

Please leave a message with us if you have any queries regarding the introduction of the revised scheme. This scheme should allow the team to start producing offline selections for your project and the wider community within the next year. Thanks for using the Wikipedia 1.0 scheme! For the 1.0 Editorial Team, §hepBot (Disable) 22:12, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Herburger publications

Nuvola apps important yellow.svg

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Herburger publications, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of Herburger publications. Gavin Collins (talk) 04:48, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

I would appreciate some comments from editors with local knowledge concerning an independent Californian newspaper publisher. The article itself seems to read like a vanity piece, and would normally propose such would be deleted. However, if anyone has an opinion as to whether this company is notable or not, I would be grateful. Please leave comments on the talk page. --Gavin Collins (talk) 20:59, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Herberger for years has published the local paper for Lodi, California, which is also within the market for the single Stockton, California newspaper, the Stockton Record. While both are small-town, the Record is probably closest to a full-spectrum newspaper (although many discerning and more metropolitan readers also take the Sacramento Bee or papers from the San Francisco Bay Area). The Lodi paper is a local fixture, and long-standing. Herberger also publishes some other sleepy-town local advertising nostalgia papers in surrounding burgs. Those residents of Lodi who are most vocal would argue that Herberger vindicates the small town's need to distinguish itself from Stockton, but many residents and readers know and politically disagree with members of the Herberger publishing family. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.197.93.206 (talk) 08:52, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Featured Article review for San Francisco, California

San Francisco, California has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. GaryColemanFan (talk) 15:40, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

The San Francisco article successfully kept it's FA Status (Wikipedia:Featured article review/San Francisco, California/archive1) thanks to the work Paul.h, Sfmammamia, Kurykh, and others. -Optigan13 (talk) 07:31, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge

San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:13, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

The bay bridge's FA status has been removed (Wikipedia:Featured article review/San Francisco – Oakland Bay Bridge/archive1). -Optigan13 (talk) 07:31, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Cities in California by county

I edited this category page, completing it by adding every counties template! Believing that something should be got right once and then used, rather than multiple reconstructions. Thus

-- Category:Cities in California by county can be changed from a category to an article and existing categorizations deleted.

-- Category:Cities in California should be an article generated from the county templates (sorry, I'm a zero at tools/tool writing).

I did the same thing (adding county templates) for Category:Cities in the San Francisco Bay Area. If people believe that a list in alpha order is required (I don't - the Wikipedia search function works and so does Googles) then the same tool as for state (above) is needed.

Again, rely on your templates and stop the multiple categorization of cities, etc - getting the templates right is hard enough, let alone multiple redundant categorizations of every city/burg.

And yes, I messed up some of those redundant categorizations before catching onto the curious distinctions being made in categorizing cities, unincorporated, ... entities.(curious as in why do you do it - what question do you think is commonly asked to justify such low level distinctions in an encyclopedia?) Apologies, I hope the net total of my edits was positive (Mare Island is not in San Francisco bay).

If there is an option on templates for "show" instead of the normal "hide", that might be appropriate for these uses. 69.106.246.31 (talk) 10:21, 25 August 2008 (UTC) Add links here.69.106.246.31 (talk) 15:56, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

  1. I'm unsure I understand why you like templates so much. In my experience they are tricky to maintain. However, I see that adding templates to the "Communities in X County" was an improvement, and I thank you for that.
  2. Mare Island could be considered part of San Pablo Bay, which many people seem to consider a part of San Francisco Bay though technically it is not. It's really not an island, either, so including it in List of islands of San Francisco Bay was a big stretch, and I have no objection to its removal from the list.
  3. The distinction between an incorporated municipalites and an unincorporated communities is important for some purposes. Municipalities have separate governments as well as well-defined boundaries and inception dates. Unincorporated communities tend to be more fluid and less well documented. Stepheng3 (talk) 00:07, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

County categories

(1) Every county has at least two categories: 'Cities of ...' and 'Communities of ...' Given your county templates that is unnecessary complexity. You will serve users better by deleting the Cities of ... categories and including the county template in the 'Communities of ...' category page. That way there is only one list of cities (your current arrangement has two lists: the list in the template and those cities categorized 'cities of ...'. The two lists are rarely the same!) No information is lost.

(2) Some cities, Newport Beach, for example have both an article Newport Beach and a category Category:Newport Beach, California. In the county template you link to the article, but you should link to the category. You, the creators of templates, don't know the intent of the user, don't know what is being searched for. The editors of Newport Beach found a structure necessary to describe the wonders of Newport Beach but that structure is not obvious to casual (most) Wikipedia users (only a repetition of the name at the very bottom of the article - if they even read to the bottom) so please link to the category -- users will find all of Newport beach's sand! 69.106.246.31 (talk) 16:42, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Articles flagged for cleanup

Currently, 2632 articles assigned to this project, or 19.8%, are flagged for cleanup of some sort. (Data as of 18 June 2008.) Are you interested in finding out more? I am offering to generate cleanup to-do lists on a project or work group level. See User:B. Wolterding/Cleanup listings for details. If you want to respond to this canned message, please do so at my user talk page. --B. Wolterding (talk) 11:53, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

  • I've added the cleanup listing template.diff -Optigan13 (talk) 06:41, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Possible redesign of project page

I've worked on a possible redesign of this project's page based on the one I did for WP:SFBA, it is in User:Optigan13/Sandbox 3 right now, so take a look at let me know if anyone has any concerns. I still need to organize several subpages and rework the participants list, so it may be some time until the page would be updated. Once the page is updated I would poll the participants to check our total number of active members. -Optigan13 (talk) 08:32, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Region of/for Monterey County?

Does Monterey County, California has a well-defined or commonly-accepted region that it's generally held to belond to? It seems to be wedged between Southern California, the San Francisco Bay Area and the San Joaquin Valley, without belong to any of them. Alai (talk) 18:02, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

To partially answer my own question... Looks like this is considered to be in the Central Coast of California, which somewhat overlaps the above. So I suppose it's a judgement call how to scope these. Alai (talk) 16:07, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia 0.7 articles have been selected for California

Wikipedia 0.7 is a collection of English Wikipedia articles due to be released on DVD, and available for free download, later this year. The Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team has made an automated selection of articles for Version 0.7.

We would like to ask you to review the articles selected from this project. These were chosen from the articles with this project's talk page tag, based on the rated importance and quality. If there are any specific articles that should be removed, please let us know at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.7. You can also nominate additional articles for release, following the procedure at Wikipedia:Release Version Nominations.

A list of selected articles with cleanup tags, sorted by project, is available. The list is automatically updated each hour when it is loaded. Please try to fix any urgent problems in the selected articles. A team of copyeditors has agreed to help with copyediting requests, although you should try to fix simple issues on your own if possible.

We would also appreciate your help in identifying the version of each article that you think we should use, to help avoid vandalism or POV issues. These versions can be recorded at this project's subpage of User:SelectionBot/0.7. We are planning to release the selection for the holiday season, so we ask you to select the revisions before October 20. At that time, we will use an automatic process to identify which version of each article to release, if no version has been manually selected. Thanks! For the Wikipedia 1.0 Editorial team, SelectionBot 23:17, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject California Template Image

The icon for the template banner {{WikiProject California}} has been changed from Image:Road Sign Welcome to California.jpg to the state flag. Please visit the template's talk page if you have any objections/comments. Thanks, --Jh12 (talk) 00:03, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

I like the change.-DevinCook (talk) 10:17, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Do you really like the change? I was the one who did it. Splat5572 (talk) 21:09, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • It's a bad change. The original was better. This one is ... uninspired. Newport Backbay (talk) 19:11, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Death Valley National Park FAR

Death Valley National Park has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here. -- Longhair\talk 23:06, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

The article has successfully retained it's FA status thanks to the hard work of User:mav. -Optigan13 (talk) 05:45, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Harvey Milk

This biography has been recently rewritten to coincide with the anniversary of their death on November 27 as well as a feature film on them released around the same date. While awaiting further research material on request from libraries as well as some licensing for images it is now in a peer review. Other editors are welcome to offer constructive feedback and assistance. -- Banjeboi 04:35, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

That article is now at FA (Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Harvey Milk). -Optigan13 (talk) 05:38, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Image needs replacement - Westwood Village Memorial Park Cemetery

Hello all...

An image used in the article, specifically Image:Hayedeh6.jpg, has a little bit of a licensing issue. The image was uploaded back when the rules around image uploading were less restrictive. It is presumed that the uploader was willing to license the picture under the GFDL license but was not clear in that regard. As such, the image, while not at risk of deletion, is likely not clearly licensed to allow for free use in any future use of this article. If anyone has an image that can replace this, or can go take one and upload it, it would be best.

You have your mission, take your camera and start clicking.--Jordan 1972 (talk) 20:58, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I've tagged the page of the artist (Hayedeh) whose grave the picture is of for a replacement and it should show in requested images for LA county. -Optigan13 (talk) 05:41, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Gorman, California

After being subjected to a massive face-lift Gorman, California is ready to meet her public. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 02:09, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

I've responded on the article talk diff -Optigan13 (talk) 06:54, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Mountain Communities in Southern California

In addition to Gorman, California, above, the following new or heavily revised articles are now ready for your perusal and cooperation in improving them: Neenach, California, Sandberg, California, Scheideck, California, Mountain Communities of the Tejon Pass, Frazier Park, California, Lake of the Woods, California, Lebec, California, Three Points, California. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 15:27, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

New idea proposal

After working on the bio of Theodore Lukens, who was a Pasadena citizen and conservationist,etc., I had the idea of a bulletin board/noticeboard for editors who can and would be willing to collaborate on articles in their geographical area. I live in Lake County and could help someone who needed newspaper/library sources dealing with this area of Lake County, for example. So, if I could find someone in/near Pasadena to do the same for articles related to that area via a bulletin board page here in WP California... If this idea has been brought up previously, my apologies.

Thank you in advance, Sincerely, Marcia Marcia Wright (talk) 15:47, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

That's a nice idea. I think the first step would be to promote user categorization by location under Category:Wikipedians in California. For instance, there's currently no Category:Wikipedians in Lake County, California. For help with photography, look at Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in California which is already broken out by county. There's a space on Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in Lake County, California to add yourself as a photographer for your region. Perhaps people willing to local research could list themselves on Category:Wikipedians in X pages. - Stepheng3 (talk) 17:49, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
I've added myself to the Northern Ca category, but this is not exactly what I was proposing. I was thinking of something similiar to the "Dashboard" setup on this Wikiproject main page- a central place to note offers of help or ask for assistance. As it stands now, I would have to check out every user page listed in N Ca category. Another example of my idea is the listing of editors who are willing to mentor new folks: it's in a list format with a short description of the person's area of interest.
Thanks Stepheng3 for responding-I appreciate it. I'll probably bump into you at Northwest branch library one day.
Marcia Wright (talk) 18:10, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
I agree that checking every user page under Category:Wikipedians in Northern California is not an effective strategy. What I'm suggesting is that you start a list of local researchers, either on the category page itself, or else linked from it. The category pages are already used to advertise meetups, etc. Similarly, if you build a dashboard, you might consider linking to it from the relevant category pages. Cheers! - Stepheng3 (talk) 19:01, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Help me out?

Could someone improve the links to Redondo Beach pier, so "Pier" with a capital P also links there, or tell me how to do it. Also I couldn't find article for the Manhattan Beach pier and Hermosa Beach pier, but these are pretty big attractions in CA. (ChocoCereal (talk) 18:30, 29 October 2008 (UTC))

It's not totally clear what you're asking for, but I've created a redirect. If Redondo Beach Pier is a proper noun, we should consider renaming the article. - Stepheng3 (talk) 19:23, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

SF Meetup #8

  In the area? You're invited to
   San Francisco Meetup # 8
GG-bridge-12-2006.jpg
  Date: November 8th, 2008
  Time: 2PM
  Place: Metacafe, Palo Alto, California
  prev: Meetup 7 - next: Meetup 9
This is posted to the groups by request. Please sign up on the Invite list for future anouncements. Thanks. --ShakataGaNai ^_^ 18:20, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Template:California business citation

I created Template:California business citation to allow article inline citations to California business' listed at sos.ca.gov. This may come in handy when referring to a California business that does not have its own Wikipedia article (and perhaps unlikely to have its own Wikipedia article), yet the reader may benefit from access to additional information on the business. The template was modeled after Template:US trademark. -- Suntag 15:19, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Unidentified bronze bear in SLO

Please have a look at Image:SLO_Bear.jpg. Unless we find the details on this sculpture, we'll have to delete it. So if someone can find the name of the artist, when the sculpture was erected, and check all inscriptions on the sculpture such as dates, signatures, copyright notice, it would be most welcome. Teofilo talk 16:09, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

You have to see this:

http://www.news10.net/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=50924&provider-top . A Local media outlet has a encounter with a UFO while engaged in a sporting event. Powerzilla (talk) 20:30, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Need a neutral editor to look at York School's entry

I am a representative of York School so I should not be the one to edit, so I am requesting a neutral editor take a look at an edit made by an anonymous user to to the York School entry on October 13. I believe this edit does not represent a neutral point of view. My explanation is on the talk page of the edit. Thank you! Brookhouser (talk) 22:05, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't see a POV problem. If true, the statement could be objectively verified. I do, however, notice that the edit does not cite a source. I am therefore inclined to revert it. - Stepheng3 (talk) 22:10, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Rick Warren

The Rick Warren article has been repeatedly vandalized by dozens of unestablished users over the past couple days and need to have a partial lock added ASAP.

Manutdglory (talk) 23:49, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Looks like it's already been nominated at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. Not sure what else we can do for you. - Stepheng3 (talk) 02:20, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Great source

I found this book on Google Books (which lets you "preview" almost the entire book online) and have been using it for cities, former settlements, etc. in Yolo County. Its been a really good resource and it has snippets of information for (virtually) every geographic place name in California. Just wanted to drop the link off here in case anybody else wanted to use it for anything they're working on that is California related. Killiondude (talk) 08:55, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

mountain ranges of California now all have at least stub articles

Some time ago I created the List of mountain ranges of California based on USGS Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) data. With the help of a Perl script (computer program) to generate stub text from GNIS data, I added 216 stub pages to fill in the list. It was still a manual cut & paste process as I tried to collect some additional info for each one when available. There are no more redlinks on the list - meaning there is at least a stub article for every mountain range in California. (Well, that's for the ones listed in GNIS.) Also, all the mountain range pages in California which already existed now have a geobox, locator map, coordinates and a reference from USGS GNIS if they didn't already have these. Enjoy! Ikluft (talk) 08:39, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Nice work. Thanks! - Stepheng3 (talk) 19:35, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Template Protected Areas of California needs work

I would like to add a "group" to this template titled National Wilderness Preservation System, just wanted to drop a note here on the talk page so if there are any objections, we can discuss them. This template is already huge but it is incorrectly categorizing the wilderness areas. Not all wilderness areas are under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management's National Landscape Conservation project.

Ideally, this template could be split into two separate templates-one state protected areas and the other federal protected areas within the state. Any thoughts on this? Happy New Year to all as well! Regards, Marcia Wright (talk) 14:35, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

P.S.
Upon further thought-just replacing "National Landscape Wilderness System" (a BLM program) with " National Wilderness Preservation System" (encompasses all WAs) is the best thing to do. Does not inlarge the template and is more accurate. I'll go ahead and do this and hopefully not screw up the tempplate. ;) Cheers Marcia Wright (talk) 15:17, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Marcia, I'm fine with separating the two types of wilderness areas. - Stepheng3 (talk) 16:49, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi Stephen-Well after looking at the template carefully, I added a subsection under National Forests so that it does not confuse or conflict with the BLM areas. Thankyou for the go-ahead but I will confess I am not skilled with the markup code and would rather one of our fine engineers/computer software-experienced editors perform that job. The template is I think 49K in size now, but as the default setting is "hide" it is not such a bear when editing articles that contain it. (Fine weather we are having eh? 70+ degrees in January no less!) :) I love California-
Thanks for responding Marcia Wright (talk) 18:05, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
I'm not skilled with templates, either. I find I learn best by doing, especially in an environment like Wikipedia where accidents are easily reverted. - Stepheng3 (talk) 18:09, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Ha! I can't weasel with you around-so, what, are you saying I should Be Bold? I do have a sandbox...hmmm
Marcia Wright (talk) 14:53, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Done! I would ask that you look them over to see if they are "ready for primetime" please.-Navboxes

Marcia Wright (talk) 17:03, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

They look fine so far. - Stepheng3 (talk) 22:04, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Requested articles: UC Natural Reserve System

The University of California Natural Reserve System has 29 Natural Reserves (currently red links) awaiting creation. I'm copying this request to the UC project as well. Viriditas (talk) 10:47, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject California: San Diego article needs some help

I just would like to bring attention to the sorry state of the San Diego article. The San Diego article lacks a decent Lead, content, logical structure, sources, and good prose among other things. There are few regular editors of this article, so if there are any editors in this project that are bored and arent busy, we would be grateful if you Wikipedians could dedicate some time to this Top-priority WikiProject California article. Thanks! Anon134 (talk) 03:58, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

WP:Mexico on Spanish/Mexican-era articles

In reading [Presidio of Sonoma]] just now, it occurred to me that it's part of Mexican history; would it not be approrpriate on such articles to also have WP:Mexico? For example, on Russian America articles, such as Fort Ross, WP:Russia or WP:Russian history appear (WP:Russian history is being merged so I'll truncate that WP on that page); doesn't it make sense that all Mexican/New Spain articles in relation to California (or Arizona etc.) also have WP:Mexico?Skookum1 (talk) 15:55, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Milestone Announcements

Announcements
  • All WikiProjects are invited to have their "milestone-reached" announcements automatically placed onto Wikipedia's announcements page.
  • Milestones could include the number of FAs, GAs or articles covered by the project.
  • No work need be done by the project themselves; they just need to provide some details when they sign up. A bot will do all of the hard work.

I thought this WikiProject might be interested. Ping me with any specific queries or leave them on the page linked to above. Thanks! - Jarry1250 (t, c) 21:44, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Fun with Fort Ross....

I'm in no mood right now to try and integrate what was needlessly deleted/substituted with what is now in place instead, and I'm not a Californian and unfamiliar with "Russian California"; there's half-a-dozen new bits of information there, all in need of cites, but the article already needed a lot of line-cites to start with. I hadn't heard of the farming settlements beyond Fort Ross - Kustov? Rustov? - or the "hunting settlement" on the Farallons....what I have noticed is a lot of Russian America articles with overblown non-facts, such as the (alleged) existence of Russian settlements in Oregon, Washington and BC...I"m not saying there weren't any - news to me if there were - but if there were, or there were Russian settlements outside of Fort Ross, then citations for this are definitely needed, and also items on the geographic/town articles where these settlements were alleged to have been. Fort Ross was in any case shut down in very short order as t h need for its existence was solved by closer supplies from Hudson's Bay farms (i.e. for the Russian presence in what's now Alaska, where food-growing is dififcult, and often just not possible). I'll cross-post this to WP:Russia, I'm hoping others may shepherd the facts in this article, and also control what non-facts may surface.....mostly right now I'm concerned that some bits of information, e.g. California's first windmills, were wholesale deleted (but weren't actually cited anyway, not line-cited that is; the info is in one of the park's promotional brochures/writeups I'd think, which are in the references.Skookum1 (talk) 01:45, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

FWIW, I poked about the russian google and can only find a few fleeting mentions in what purports to be history books of the russians having *been* in Oregon in the "beginning of the 19th century", but I couldn't find any reference of them having *settled* there. --Cubbi (talk) 06:04, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
I just googled "Russians Fort Ross" and got this as my first link: http://www.calacademy.org/exhibits/science_under_sail/sailing.html I also know that Russians have been through Washington and Oregon and even that one of the Russian Elite Nobles was about to marry the Spanish Elite Nobles of California. There's also this: http://www.parks.sonoma.net/rosshist.html http://softadventure.net/cal-russian.htm Anyways, I'm tired. Hope that helps. 72.245.7.97 (talk) 08:18, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

Coordinators' working group

Hi! I'd like to draw your attention to the new WikiProject coordinators' working group, an effort to bring both official and unofficial WikiProject coordinators together so that the projects can more easily develop consensus and collaborate. This group has been created after discussion regarding possible changes to the A-Class review system, and that may be one of the first things discussed by interested coordinators.

All designated project coordinators are invited to join this working group. If your project hasn't formally designated any editors as coordinators, but you are someone who regularly deals with coordination tasks in the project, please feel free to join as well. §hepTalk 00:25, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Article alerts

This is a notice to let you know about Article alerts, a fully-automated subscription-based news delivery system designed to notify WikiProjects and Taskforces when articles are entering Articles for deletion, Requests for comment, Peer review and other workflows (full list). The reports are updated on a daily basis, and provide brief summaries of what happened, with relevant links to discussion or results when possible. A certain degree of customization is available; WikiProjects and Taskforces can choose which workflows to include, have individual reports generated for each workflow, have deletion discussion transcluded on the reports, and so on. An example of a customized report can be found here.

If you are already subscribed to Article Alerts, it is now easier to report bugs and request new features. We are also in the process of implementing a "news system", which would let projects know about ongoing discussions on a wikipedia-wide level, and other things of interest. The developers also note that some subscribing WikiProjects and Taskforces use the display=none parameter, but forget to give a link to their alert page. Your alert page should be located at "Wikipedia:PROJECT-OR-TASKFORCE-HOMEPAGE/Article alerts". Questions and feedback should be left at Wikipedia talk:Article alerts.

Message sent by User:Addbot to all active wiki projects per request, Comments on the message and bot are welcome here.

Thanks. — Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 08:54, 15 March, 2009 (UTC)

I think I've set it up correctly, we'll see how this goes. -Optigan13 (talk) 01:15, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

A little help, people

Just to let you all know, I have three articles, Franklin Knight Lane, Jerry Voorhis, and Murray Chotiner, all part of your project, at GAN. Help with reviews would be greatly appreciated. I intend to push all three on to FA.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:26, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Two have passed, and the third, Murray Chotiner is now at FAC. Obviously, reviews from members of this Wikiproject who are interested in California politics, would be very welcome indeed.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:54, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
The same goes for Franklin Knight Lane, currently at FAC. Reviews would be nice.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:24, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Electoral reform in California needs expansion

I recently stumbled upon Electoral reform in California, which greatly needs expansion. I've posted my initial thoughts on its talk page. Gentgeen (talk) 09:07, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Co-sponsor a Task force on California historic sites?

Hi. I'm a member of new Wikipedia:WikiProject Historic sites which is just starting up a Task force on California historic sites, at shortcut wp:CALHSITES. To develop coverage of California Historical Landmarks, various city and county historic registers, etc.

To the management here as a whole, would you like to co-sponsor this, and make California historic sites a task force under this wikiproject, too? There is some general info about Task forces at WP:TASKFORCE. The master example is wp:MILHIST with its, well, militarily coordinated multiple units.

To anyone individually, management or otherwise, please feel free to jump ship and come work on historic sites, instead of other California topics. :) It's fun, you get to take pictures, it's easier than birding because ur targets are stationary. doncram (talk) 05:51, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure how active this WikiProject is... but I think its a good idea to do a jointed endeavor. Perhaps it'll revitalize this WikiProject a little :-) Killiondude (talk) 22:12, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Tortilla Soup

Could somebody who is active with WikiProject California please explain why the article about this film is considered part of it? Thank you very much. 67.79.157.50 (talk) 14:25, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Where did you get the information that it was part of the project? Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 17:53, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Probably from the California WikiProject banner on the talk page. Killiondude (talk) 18:06, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
I expanded this article yesterday and, like 67.79.157.50, wondered why this would be considered part of WikiProject California. If nobody can explain, I will remove the banner from the talk page. LiteraryMaven (talkcontrib) 19:55, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
I agree with taking it off of this project. Killiondude (talk) 22:11, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Ranchos of California

KIndly visit the above article and comment on the Discussion Page as to whether the lists of California ranchos should be split into their own pages instead of following the main text of the article. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 04:31, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Auto-assessment of California articles

The project's template (Template talk:WikiProject California#New version of template) has recently been updated using the meta banner template. As part of this recent update I was planning to request an bot assisted assessment of all pages in Category:Unassessed California articles (8,371 pages as of this writing). An auto assessment was apparently conducted in the past by User:Betacommandbot on the articles presently in Category:Automatically assessed California articles. Would anyone object to a bot assessment of articles? -Optigan13 (talk) 22:36, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like an excellent idea to me. --Stepheng3 (talk) 23:15, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
Another minor point on this. Do we want to copy other project's assessment, and if so do we want the low or high of other project's assessments if there's multiples? Personally I favor copying assessments, and going with low since it's easy to just revisit if anyone objects. -Optigan13 (talk) 06:29, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
I think it's OK to use other project's assessments for quality, but not for importance. From my experience, in the case of multiples the higher assessment is more likely to be accurate, but of course there can be exceptions. --Stepheng3 (talk) 15:25, 21 April 2009 (UTC)
I've requested an assessment by User:AnomieBOT (diff), using the higher assessment. -Optigan13 (talk) 03:00, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Gypsies in Northern California

Hello -- I was told that in the 1930s and 1940s, Gypsies lived in the area of Gardenland, California, near Sacramento. I was told they interacted with the Hells Angels motorcycle club. I've been unable to find any confirming information at all. The gypsies made a practice of staying out of public notice, so this is tricky, and a little piece of arcana. Anyone? Thank you. Bek1a (talk) 04:46, 22 April 2009 (UTC) bek1a

Assessments for Death Valley and Lauren London

If someone has some time can they perform an assessment on the last two articles listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject California/Assessment#Requesting an assessment or re-assessment. I've just assessed/reassessed several others listed there and was planning on removing the section since it becomes just one more place to watchlist to look for assessments. -Optigan13 (talk) 05:41, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Killiondude (talk) 07:03, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Converting WikiProject Southern California into task force of this project

I've proposed converting WikiProject Southern California into a task force of this project. Please leave any comments at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Southern California#Changing to task force of WikiProject California -Optigan13 (talk) 08:37, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

I added a question and comment there, which is the appropriate place to discuss the possible conversion. If you are implementing that conversion, though, I'd like to see wp:CALHSITES set up as a Task force of the California-wide project as well, and perhaps the two could be done more efficiently together. wp:CALHSITES is already a Task force of wp:HSITES. doncram (talk) 09:36, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
Does your project template load anything into Category:WikiProject California articles? I'm not sure how overlapping project task forces are pulled off in general. -Optigan13 (talk) 23:55, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
I think it does not yet do that. It could be adjusted to do so; i would support that. There is some discussion and examples of joint task forces given at wp:Task Force. I think it is largely a matter of just linking the task force from both parent project's lists of Task Forces. Also revising both parent project templates to allow for the Task force to be declared as part of either, and adding categories into those templates. But, i have not done it before. doncram (talk) 06:21, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

I've now tagged WP:SOCAL as a task force of this project, the bot updates of the templates are on hold until some other possible merges/demotions are considered. I'll try to look into how to best add overlapping task force tags to the project banner for when a project is a task force of two larger projects. -Optigan13 (talk) 04:09, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Sorting out pin maps for towns

Hi is there any chance somebody can run through the towns and settlements in California and add a pin map of the location. I find the urban area locator maps within county maps very unsightly and difficult to follow. This is the same for most states. It is possible somebody could sort them out as from a world persective its difficult to follow unlike other countries. Dr. Blofeld White cat 11:01, 30 April 2009 (UTC)

I prefer the urban area ones myself, although some are better done by the bot that made them than others. Was there any old discussions on the past for the pros and cons of pin maps vs the older locator ones? Also, without a bot to perform the swap that's a pretty daunting task to perform a replacement like that. -Optigan13 (talk) 03:42, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
I actually like the urban ones better myself. It shows boundaries of cities/towns, which is probably my main reason for liking them. Killiondude (talk) 04:15, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Dividing up a California Protected Areas template

Please see my comment on Template talk:Protected Areas of California#Breaking into sections. I've proposed breaking a template up into several templates based on how large it is right now. Thanks. Killiondude (talk) 05:41, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Template:Greater Los Angeles Area up for TfD

Please comment: Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion#Template:Greater_Los_Angeles_Area. There is a related discussion on a substitute template here: Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion#Template:Southern_California. Ameriquedialectics 18:18, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Converting WikiProject Santa Barbara County into a task force of this project

I've started a discussion on possibly converting WikiProject Santa Barbara County into a task force of this project. Please leave any comments at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Santa Barbara County#Changing this project to a task force of WikiProject California. -Optigan13 (talk) 04:16, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Converting WikiProject University of California into a task force of this project

I've started a discussion on converting WikiProject University of California into a task force of this project. Please leave any comments at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_University_of_California#Converting_to_task_force_of_WikiProject_California. -Optigan13 (talk) 05:46, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

CSU Humboldt State University WikiPage in need of update

I noticed that the Humboldt State University (CSU) info page(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humboldt_State_University) lists the "Average Undergraduate Class Size: 25[6]." I have studied at Humboldt State for a few years and have attended a few graduation ceremonies to watch my friends recive their bachelors degrees. The annual group of candidates is definitely well over 25. The total number of graduates per year is probably over 700. I could not find any specific statistics, but if anyone knows how to find this out it'd be great if they wanted to update this information. Thanks, Kristen Cowan 08:25, 11 May 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.227.10.28 (talk)

That appears to refer to the number of students in the classroom, not the overall graduating class. You may want to review the citation given, which is for 2008. Thanks, Alanraywiki (talk) 15:40, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Does your WikiProject care about talk pages of redirects?

Does your project care about what happens to the talk pages of articles that have been replaced with redirects? If so, please provide your input at User:Mikaey/Request for Input/ListasBot 3. Thanks, Matt (talk) 01:35, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I'm trying to check out why exactly we would want to keep track of them (WP:RFD on article alerts?), but right now Category:Redirect-Class California articles has 175 pages, and the few I looked at (5 or so) only 1 had non-bot activity, and that was Talk:Terman Middle School which had an old AFD(VFD). So right now I'm leaning towards just merge away since between the 17 thousand or so articles, we have enough to keep track of without having to worry about the few redirects. -Optigan13 (talk) 09:13, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

More cleanup needed

Please see my comments at Talk:California State Legislature, 1999–2000 session. The job needs to get finished. Michael Hardy (talk) 05:05, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Sports MBA

{{Split section}}

I would like to devote a separate article to sports MBA (see sports MBA), it's now listed as to be deleted because it's also mentioned on the page of College of Business San Diego State University. However, the content is distinctive and only the name is listed on the CB site now. Is it possible to split the section that mentions the sports MBA on the source page and link to the new sports MBA page?

Mariskar84 (talk) 21:44, 14 May 2009 (UTC)

Sports mba(no caps) is proposed for deletion. If you want to contest the deletion, simply click the edit this page link at the top and remove the proposed deletion template at the top (see the instructions in that red box). Although at this time I would think it should be deleted too. In the paragraph or so you have written all of the information relates specifically to the Sports MBA program at SDSU, and not Sports MBAs in general. You also only have one reference, generally at least two references are required to start off an article (See WP:Notability). At this point you should try to at least flush out a paragraph about the Sports MBA program in the San Diego State University College of Business Administration#Degrees section. Once you've done that get a couple of references, and follow the WP:Your first article guidelines to create a separate article. I've also refactored your split section template, that is meant to be used on the actual article, and not on pages like this. -Optigan13 (talk) 00:48, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Rob Pelinka FAC

Please comment at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Rob Pelinka/archive1‎.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:43, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

GA Sweeps invitation

This message is being sent to WikiProjects with GAs under their scope. Since August 2007, WikiProject Good Articles has been participating in GA sweeps. The process helps to ensure that articles that have passed a nomination before that date meet the GA criteria. After nearly two years, the running total has just passed the 50% mark. In order to expediate the reviewing, several changes have been made to the process. A new worklist has been created, detailing which articles are left to review. Instead of reviewing by topic, editors can consider picking and choosing whichever articles they are interested in.

We are always looking for new members to assist with reviewing the remaining articles, and since this project has GAs under its scope, it would be beneficial if any of its members could review a few articles (perhaps your project's articles). Your project's members are likely to be more knowledgeable about your topic GAs then an outside reviewer. As a result, reviewing your project's articles would improve the quality of the review in ensuring that the article meets your project's concerns on sourcing, content, and guidelines. However, members can also review any other article in the worklist to ensure it meets the GA criteria.

If any members are interested, please visit the GA sweeps page for further details and instructions in initiating a review. If you'd like to join the process, please add your name to the running total page. In addition, for every member that reviews 100 articles from the worklist or has a significant impact on the process, s/he will get an award when they reach that threshold. With ~1,300 articles left to review, we would appreciate any editors that could contribute in helping to uphold the quality of GAs. If you have any questions about the process, reviewing, or need help with a particular article, please contact me or OhanaUnited and we'll be happy to help. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talkcontrib) 05:05, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Reassessment of Victor Valley College

I wondered if someone could assess Victor Valley College. The article was auto-rated, I believe I did enough to get it out of Stub-class and would appreciate feedback on further improvement. 216.117.192.91 (talk) 09:35, 19 May 2009 (UTC)

Done, I tend to agree with what was said by the person performing the assessment for WP:UNI. -Optigan13 (talk) 07:48, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Outside opinion

A discussion regarding the Golden Gate Bridge is taking place here. An outside opinion would be helpful. Thank you. APK lives in a very, very Mad World 19:54, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Cerritos High School

This page has been a target for vandalism in the last 6 months: someone added Ronaldinho in the "notable alumni" section and the "History" section was vandalized and erased many times. Yaaargggh (talk) 18:52, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Infoboxes

Where do I go to complain about the Infoboxes somebody is adding to certain pages, like Mettler, California. The one there is redundant, repetitive, and virtually useless. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 21:59, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

The infobox? Or the template at the bottom? Both are useful, and the reason they're added is that consensus showed they were useful. Both provide information and links in a very short, concise, and easy to find way. Killiondude (talk) 22:03, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I am speaking of the infobox, and my question was, "Where do I go to complain about the Infoboxes somebody is adding to certain pages . . . " Is this the page? And can you please direct me to the "consensus" you mentioned? Thank you so much, your friend, GeorgeLouis (talk) 22:26, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

You can complain to the specific editor who added it, but I doubt that will do much in the specific case you brought up... Nothing is wrong with it. Anything a part of the Manual of Style is a result of consensus, and the relavent Manual of Style page for infoboxes is here. Killiondude (talk) 22:41, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much. I will digest that page, which I had not seen before. Yours sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 00:01, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

State Parks

This might seem off topic, but it is sort of pertinent to this WikiProject. Governor Schwarzenegger has proposed the closure of 220 out of the 279 State parks (80%). This would affect many of the state park articles, which all fall under this project. Anyways, there's news reports everywhere, but here's a link to the San Jose Mercury News [2]. I find it interesting that this is happening, just as I started to work more on California State Park articles, and spent hours of work on the {{Protected Areas of California}} template :-( Killiondude (talk) 03:37, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

We'll see how all of this ends up in a few weeks when the state is forced to make the actual cuts. The state article (California) at last check had a nice few sentences and avoided recentism. But in terms of what this means to the various state articles, I could see some of the state based sources may start becoming out of date or dead. There may be some issues in terms of areas being sold off to raise funds, but again we'll see. Since most articles tend to avoid the detail which would be directly affected by the cuts, unless we start talking about state programs which may change from is to was. -Optigan13 (talk) 02:44, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

New page on Anaheim Island

I recently encountered this new name for my old nabe, then pulled together a little history of the area that I've known since 1963 as the "Gaza Strip." Comments, corrections, feedback welcome. --KathleenSeidel (talk) 02:17, 2 June 2009 (UTC)

Finally responded there, sorry it took so long. -Optigan13 (talk) 02:34, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Portal link images

Several different images are currently being used on links to the California portal. What is your preference? Is there a consensus favorite?

Please discuss at Portal talk:California#Portal link images.

Links to the other state portals are displayed at Wikipedia:List of U.S. state portals. Yours aye, Buaidh (talk) 14:20, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Discussion on creating WP articles from unincorporated communities out of USGS GNIS system

There's been an effort to import unincorporated communities in California from the USGS database into WP articles. If you'd like to comment on or discuss this effort, please feel free to join the discussion at WT:WikiProject Cities#Systematic inclusion of GNIS unincorporated communities. Thanks! —hike395 (talk) 09:25, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Pictures needed

I have compiled a list, through AWB, of California Historical Landmarks and NRHPs articles (in California) that need photos. Any help taking pictures of these buildings/places would be greatly appreciated. Tonight I began to search for photos on Flickr to upload to Commons, and I already found a few. If you can help in that regard, that would be appreciated as well. If you do find a picture for any of these articles, please take it off my list and take the "req photo in" template off of the talk page. This list is is in no way exhaustive, it only contains articles that have been properly categorized and tagged.

The list is here. Killiondude (talk) 08:17, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

{{Greater Los Angeles Area}}

If anyone monitoring this page would kindly put {{Greater Los Angeles Area}} on their watchlist i'm sure people interested in reading about this area would appreciate it. Thanks. Ameriquedialectics 20:12, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

This appears to have been responded to. Thanks to User:Athaenara and User:Shereth for responding. -Optigan13 (talk) 04:49, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

New project

I've just noticed Wikipedia:WikiProject Inland Empire and was thinking that it might be better if it worked as a taskforce of this project rather than a separate one. What do people think? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:31, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree. There are several wikiprojects (SFBA, SoCal, Santa Barbara) that just recently got demoted to task forces of this project (or should be demoted), due to minimal activity---at best. This should probably be a task force until it shows enough participation to warrant a full on project, in my opinion. Killiondude (talk) 07:53, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
I've responded over there. [3] -Optigan13 (talk) 04:49, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Converting WikiProject San Francisco Bay Area and WikiProject California Delta into task forces of this project

I've started discussions on possibly converting WikiProject San Francisco Bay Area to a task force at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject San Francisco Bay Area#Changing this project to a task force of WikiProject California. Please respond there. I've also proposed moving Wikiproject California Delta to a task force location. See discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California Delta#Requested move and comment there. -Optigan13 (talk) 04:49, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I've moved California Delta into a task force position, although I don't plan anything further at this time. I'm going to wait a while longer on WP:SFBA as that requires a bot run, and I'm trying to do multiple tasks with one request, see below for those. -Optigan13 (talk) 22:58, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Converting WikiProject Los Angeles into a task force of this project

I've proposed converting Wikipedia:WikiProject Los Angeles into a task force of this project. Please respond with any thoughts, objections, etc. at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Los Angeles#Changing this project to a task force of WikiProject California. -Optigan13 (talk) 23:04, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

UCSD GA drive

Talk:University_of_California,_San_Diego/GA2 Somebody nomed UCSD for GA today, please assist if you have time. Ameriquedialectics 23:23, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

I got some citation templating done on it tonight. It appears to have been failed for now, but that's not quite clear as it appears to be on hold on the article talk. Either way there's plenty of suggestions from the review for people to work on. -Optigan13 (talk) 09:24, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks! (The fail template is from an earlier nomination.) Ameriquedialectics 20:39, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

"Mother's Motors"

Is the defunct motorbike store Mother's Motors of any verifiable significance, and if so are there any reliable sources for it? Its article, quaintly written in the historical present tense, cites three sources but I think these could all be termed elusive, unreliable or both. A fairly typical sentence:

1968, February: Dick Raymond, Stewart Brand and Timothy Leary of the Portola Institute in Menlo Park, visit Mother's Motor's [sic] to see what Charles Wehrenberg means by "all you need is access to tools."[citation needed].

which mixes trivia and name-dropping.

See its talk page too.

I'll crosspost this to the motorcycling project. -- Hoary (talk) 23:02, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

New category: Northern California

FYI for WikiProject California participants: I created and populated Category:Northern California. This was created to complement its counterpart Category:Southern California, but for the 48 counties north of the intuitive east-west dividing line at Monterey/Kings/Tulare/Inyo Counties.

The timing of this addition got accelerated by some other events. Background info: I had already created Category:Upstate California to go along with the Upstate California article, for the 20 northernmost counties, after enough references were available to show the term is in sufficiently significant use at the state and local levels. Over time I also created 430 new articles (mostly stubs but all with refs at least from USGS) for mountain ranges in California and Nevada, split about 50-50 between the two states. In California, I categorized the articles under Category:Mountain ranges of Southern California (which already existed), Category:Mountain ranges of Northern California (which I created) and Category:Mountain ranges of Upstate California (which I created). I noticed no one had yet created a category for Northern California, and it was an obvious gap between all these other existing categories. So that had to be next.

Yesterday a proposal was made to rename Category:Upstate California to Category:Northern California. The proposal is a subject of current discussion. I wish that the proposer had asked about this first. One option would be to pursue a large amount of talking, hand-waving and debating about what the Northern California category should look like. But it wouldn't be as convincing as showing where it fits as the final piece of this enormous puzzle. Since there's no prohibition from creating the category and doing the work to populate it, I went ahead and did it. Having already done very similar work on constructing other categories, it came together more quickly than expected.

Thanks for the heads-up on the "upstate" discussion and for creating a needed NorCal category. I realize a geographical category page needs defined boundaries, but I'm not sure about your definition of Northern California. See Category_talk:Northern_California ferretstew (talk) 20:17, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
It isn't my definition. But I accepted it. It's what was already hashed out much earlier as Wikipedia had to deal with the fact that California is a huge state, much bigger than most people's own local perceptions. If you're going to pick somewhere, I can see how the one place where county boundaries go across the state west to east in a straight line is indeed the intuitive point to do so. It was the only obvious one of many candidates where to define it for Wikipedia. The dividing line was used to make the Southern California and Northern California articles long ago. This has been settled - it's what we use. Ikluft (talk) 21:25, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

New category: Mountain ranges of the San Francisco Bay Area

The discussion brought attention to another gap which I had previously noticed. I have now filled it by creating Category:Mountain ranges of the San Francisco Bay Area and recategorizing articles into it. Originally the thought was that we should keep consistent categories between Northern and Southern California. For the most part they already existed for Southern California so that was the example to follow. (i.e. Category:Mountain ranges of Southern California) As the categorization effort proceeded, Category:Mountain ranges of Northern California and Category:Mountain ranges of Upstate California were made. A question was brought up about why subdivide it by Upstate California since there were no other subcategories. Well, yeah, not until the Bay Area category was created. :-) So it's there now. That should answer the question. It's just simple subcategorization. But anywhere it isn't consistent, questions come up. Ikluft (talk) 23:52, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

Central Valley articles - improvement needed

Hi everyone, I've just joined this project and am excited to help out. I've previously done some editing on local California places, mainly smaller cities. I am interested in discussing the Central Valley's Wikipedia presence with other editors. The main C.V. article is assessed "top importance" but only "start class" quality. I think the material needs a lot of development and possibly some re-thinking. The Sac Valley and SJ Valley articles also have their problems and overlap considerably with the main article. Any interest in creating a Valley subproject? ferretstew (talk) 09:12, 26 July 2009 (UTC)

The prospect is interesting, but will need to be pursued persistently to become successful. Most of the California subprojects are practically dead at this point in time.
As for the Central Valley itself, it would be helpful if more book references could be added; unfortunately, most local libraries in my area have little information on nearby Sacramento, much less the Central Valley. I might raid the bookstores either this week or sometime mid-August in search of references, though. --Starstriker7(Talk) 16:45, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
I can only echo Starstriker's thoughts here. It would be nice if we had enough participants to get a Central Valley project together, but right now all the WikiProjects that were for specific parts of California have been inactive. WP:SFBA, WP:SOCAL, Santa Barbara, and WP:Los Angeles all are inactive. Some are now just task forces of WP:CAL due to inactivity.
I think the best thing to do is just collaborate here, on WT:CAL. Killiondude (talk) 20:24, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

New category: Mount Shasta

FYI: I created and populated Category:Mount Shasta and subcat Category:Glaciers of Mount Shasta.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Ikluft (talkcontribs) 20:31, July 28, 2009

New categories for Mojave Air & Space Port and Edwards Air Force Base

FYI: I created and populated the categories Category:Mojave Air & Space Port and Category:Edwards Air Force Base. Ikluft (talk) 17:14, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

San Francisco International Airport GAR notice

San Francisco International Airport has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:36, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

I've tried to address some citation formatting and alt images issues, but I could use some help addressing missing references and layout issues to help maintain this one's GA status. -Optigan13 (talk) 07:08, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Reassessment for Anna Escobedo Cabral

I am requesting a reassessment for Anna Escobedo Cabral. It's had significant work done since last assessed, about tripled in size, re-ordered, etc. Thanks.The Original Historygeek (talk) 06:26, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Raised to B-class. Nice work. --Stepheng3 (talk) 00:27, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

California articles needing geographic coordinates

203 articles in Category:California articles missing geocoordinate data do not have geographic coordinates. Coords are useful for making the article appear on Google Maps & many other mapping services; and they allow our users to click through to see the article subject location on a map. There's a short guide to on how to add geocodes to articles ... it really is very easy to do. I hope you'll take some time to ensure that California is as well represented as it can be on wikipedia by fixing up the listed articles. thanks --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:46, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, this is all very well, but do these coordinates still show up in three or four different parts of an article? I understand there have been some complaints about this. Yours, GeorgeLouis (talk) 03:48, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
This is a massive load of work. Any ideas on how to break it down into manageable chunks? - Stepheng3 (talk) 23:43, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
I went ahead and started working on it, focussing on San Francisco Bay Area articles. It's easier than I thought it would be. 51 down, only 1873 to go... - Stepheng3 (talk) 20:49, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
Down to 1590 articles. Let me know if you want to learn how. Plenty of work here. - Stepheng3 (talk) 01:47, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
I had almost got it down under 1500 when The Anomebot2 went and found about a thousand more. I could use some help here! --Stepheng3 (talk) 02:45, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
It's back down to 2,900 articles. Definitely need some help. --Stepheng3 (talk) 23:34, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
I could probably help a little. Since no one else seems interested :-) I'd have to read up on how todo geocoordinates for things like streets and stuff though. Killiondude (talk) 23:39, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
The category is up to 4,457 pages now, though I keep chipping away at the Northern California ones. This is a long-term project that could use a lot of help. --Stepheng3 (talk) 21:48, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
That spike back up was probably caused by the mass creation of stubs based on GNIS data earlier, but I think that's stopped now. I'm trying to go through the assessments and importance ratings right now, but Category:California articles needing attention needs some long term setup to call attention to them. Maybe transcludin what's in the article or something. -Optigan13 (talk) 08:09, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
If the new articles were coming from GNIS, then they would already have geocoordinates, or at least it would be trivial to supply them. My perception is that a lot of the additions to the maintenance category have been schools, historic sites, and ghost towns. To deal with the first two types, I've been typing lots of street addresses into ACME Mapper. --Stepheng3 (talk) 17:53, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Third Opinion request at Talk:List of people from California

An inpass in a recent clean up of the List of people from California which is within this project's scope has been brought up by myself in the talk page listed in this new section's title. Please see the article's edit history as to reason why individual was removed, and why said removal was reverted. I am seeking a compromise between complete removal, and complete readdition, which would lead to a possible future edit war which would not be in the best interest of the goal of Wikipedia or our Wikiproject. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 09:29, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Responded there. Although anyone familiar with list inclusion criteria would probably help this out. -Optigan13 (talk) 07:32, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Dianne Feinstein

Seeking consensus here, but why is it that this article of an important and influential state-wide politician is only rated as Mid, while Tupac Shakur is rated as high? I contest while both are definitely already Notable, that in the scope of the WikiCaliforna Project that their importance classes should be switched, with Senator Feinstein being High, and Tupac being rated mid. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 13:25, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

The switch looks correct based on my reading of the scale. --Stepheng3 (talk) 00:24, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
I've swapped the two ratings. Feinstein is one of two sitting US Senator so that's a no brainer. I'm a bit on the fence about Shakur as Mid or Low. While he may be important to West Coast Rap, that material is best left to WikiProject Hip Hop. I'm not sure how that importance scale was formed, but I haven't really used it in my assessments. Taking a look at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Release Version Criteria#Importance of topic we may want to rewrite the Cal Importance scale. Entertainers like Angelina Jolie, Kirsten Dunst may have more name recognition, but the only celebrities I would mark as being important to California are Reagan and Schwarzenegger. -Optigan13 (talk) 01:37, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
May I also add Bono and Eastwood as at least mid importance due to their being elected officials at one point in their lives.
I am not doubting that Shukar should be high or top for the hip hip project, but why is it that he was high for California? --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 09:14, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure I would put Eastwood at a mid or higher rating given that he was a single term mayor of a small town, and had a pretty limited political career. As far as Bono, that's a bit tougher because I'm not sure where I would put the House members. I don't know what the historical number is, but I'm assuming a lot more than the Senate. At least enough to possibly give House members a different importance ranking from senators. I'm gonna check at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Council to see if another state project has come up with some good general guidelines we can adjust to update ours, especially with respect to the various Biographies. -Optigan13 (talk) 06:18, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Importance categories: Politicians

Well there's no real clear suggestions outside of Wikipedia:WikiProject Germany/Assessment#Importance scale which I'm not sure how applicable that is to us. How about for politicians at least,

  • High for

As for the rest of the people in Category:California politicians, I tend to want to put them at low by default, but that's largely because I'm not sure how important it is for people to know who the Lt Governor or State Controller was. I'm sure there will be exceptions for early local politicians and others, but this is just more of a general guideline as opposed to any firm criteria. -Optigan13 (talk) 20:32, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Since no one objected I've tagged all Governors, US Senators as high, and all US reps as Mid (assuming they weren't later Governors or Senators). -Optigan13 (talk) 23:02, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

GA reviewer needed

California's 12th congressional district election, 1946 has been waiting for a GA reviewer for over a month. Anyone care to take a shot at it?--Wehwalt (talk) 20:37, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I took a crack at reviewing it, but since it's my first GA review I'd like someone else to take another look at it. I've pinged someone on the GA mentor list so hopefully you can get a final opinion soon. -Optigan13 (talk) 05:28, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
I've now taken it to FAC. Reviewers with knowledge of California politics, or just interested in the Nixon story, please feel free to add your comments, I don't pretend to be an expert in either and would be glad if people looked it over.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:55, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Popular pages list for project?

I'm thinking it might be interesting to add a popular pages list for this project (tools:~alexz/pop/) see Wikipedia:WikiProject Medicine/Popular pages for example. Not sure how useful it would be, but since it's bot updated it should be pretty straightforward. I'm thinking the default configuration with the subpage being at Wikipedia:WikiProject California/Popular pages, and with 500 pages listed. Anyone have any thoughts, objections, etc. -Optigan13 (talk) 00:47, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I actually went to go apply for this, but the application form asked for a link to a discussion within the wikiproject where people said they'd like to have it or somesuch. I am interested what the highest viewed pages are within this project's limits. It would give us a good idea where we should improve things. :-) Killiondude (talk) 00:58, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
Well this should help us determine what we should keep our eye on in terms of vandalism, etc. The combination of Popularity, Importance ranking, and some other criteria dictate what gets put in the release versions per Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Release_Version_Criteria#Importance_of_topic. -Optigan13 (talk) 08:33, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

List of forts in California might be incomplete

The list of California's forts at Category:Forts in California contains less forts than the list at List of forts in California —Preceding unsigned comment added by Imonmywaynow (talkcontribs) 22:01, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

20-year anniversary of Loma Prieta earthquake

The 20-year anniversary of the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake is coming up in 1½ months, on October 18. I'd like to see the article rushed through the GA process, and then through the FA process, in time for it to appear featured on the Main page on its anniversary. What it needs most are references for entire paragraphs that have none, especially in the 1989 World Series section which I think contains some original research. Binksternet (talk) 02:50, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Correction, we have one less day than you thought... October 17. It was 5:04PM Pacific Time so maybe someone stated the date somewhere in UTC as Oct 18. Yeah, there was some remarkable circumstances there... it just happened to be San Francisco vs Oakland in the World Series and the quake happened as the game was about to start. I've met several people who say they would normally have been driving on the Cypress Structure of I-880 that time of day if not for the game. I'm sure we can find plenty of references - the media who had assembled to cover the game turned out to be well arrayed to cover the disaster. Ikluft (talk) 04:53, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
That's right, it was October 17. I don't know what I was thinking when I typed the 18 above! Since the earthquake, a number of popular books, scholarly books, and "Ten years later" type of newspaper and magazine articles have been published, so one or two is likely to help us reference the World Series bits. Offer your two cents at Talk:1989_Loma_Prieta_earthquake/GA1#GA_Review or just dig into the article and make it better! Binksternet (talk) 15:44, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
The date and time are permanently burned in my memory. Though I was in grad school in Chico, just far enough that some people in town felt it but I didn't, my family was in San Jose. Fortunately my mother had left a message that everyone was OK before I got home - but I couldn't get a call through until the next morning. The TV coverage showing all the damage in San Francisco and Oakland led us to believe San Jose must have been terribly damaged since it was 50 miles closer to the epicenter. An error by CNN didn't help at all, saying they got reports of "widespread building collapses in downtown San Jose" which they later corrected to Santa Cruz - I wonder if they realized how big a goof that was. (San Jose is sometimes the biggest city nobody has heard of.) Turns out, things were going relatively well in San Jose so there was just no significant news (certainly no dramatic video) to report. We learned from that how much mud can amplify a quake's motion. Other than that, the worst damage is confined to adjacent to where the fault breaks, which was a 35-mile long segment of the San Andreas, not just the epicenter. The next Spring I finished grad school and got a job in Silicon Valley. But my family who had been in the quake soon all moved out of the area. Ikluft (talk) 22:02, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Lake Tahoe

Lake Tahoe has been nominated for the Article Collaboration and Improvement Drive. If you have any comments, feel free to add them to the nomination. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:00, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Avalon, California

I'm requesting that the WikiProject California group take a look at the Avalon, California page. I'm new to Wikipedia, and I'm not sure where to start in improving this article. I would greatly appreciate any input from the project group so that I will know where the article stands as of right now in terms of quality and importance and what I can do to improve the quality. Thank you for your help. mcd51 17:53, 29 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcd51 (talkcontribs)

I've assessed it as C class.
  • It should probably have a Cityscape section with at least a brief paragraph describing the towns layout. You might want to take a look at San Francisco (a recently reviewed Featured Article) for general structure ideas.
  • The citations should be consistently formatted. The easiest way to do this is with citation templates, Magnus' makeref tool might help until you get the hang of doing them by hand.
  • The Education section needs expansion into a full paragraph.
  • Should add some images to illustrate Government (picture of city hall maybe), Education (picture of a school?), and demographics (a chart of some sort).
  • For climate you probably want to create a chart either of the {{Infobox Weather}} (ex:{{San Francisco weatherbox}}) or {{Climate chart}} (ex: Manchester#Geography) variety to show month to month variation.
  • For demographics you can create some form of infographic or use {{USCensusPop}} (ex: Atherton, California#Demographics) for an easy way to show historical population.
In terms of importance I've placed it at Low importance because the population is less than 25,000. An easy way to check what is expected for a city article is to take a look at Featured Articles like San Francisco, Manchester, England or Cleveland, Ohio. I hope that helps. -Optigan13 (talk) 00:01, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for looking at the page and giving me some advice. I wonder, though, if Avalon's current rating importance rating of "Low" isn't accurate. I understand that the guidelines above state that settlements with less than 25,000 should generally be classified as "Low" Importance. However, I would say that Avalon, CA has mitigating circumstances that push its importance past that of other podunk California cities
Avalon is one of the few major resort communities serving Southern California. As a tourist destination, Avalon has averaged from 750,000-900,000 visitors per year over the last 20 years (Catalina Island Chamber of Commerce Visitor Counts). This compares favorably to Mission San Juan Capistrano, which receives close to 500,000 visitors per year. Additionally, the California Travel & Tourism Commission rates Catalina Island as one of its top five destinations in the Greater Los Angeles Area [4], with Avalon being the central point of tourism for the entire Island. I'd like to hear your feedback on this. Thanks again for looking at the page. mcd51 00:38, 30 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcd51 (talkcontribs)
I understand what you're saying but I'd like to keep the importance rating where it's at for now. There's currently 13,329 articles without an importance rating and a lot of automation is needed to bring that down. If there's some straightforward way to add in tourism, household income, and the host of other factors that affect the relative importance of a settlement to California where you could plug it into a bot to get a consistent and easy to understand result I'd like to do it. Also bear in mind that the importance scale is only one of several factors consider for release versions, which also includes external interest including hits, as well as quality score. Project importance shouldn't necessarily affect what you work on. Would you mind if we just leave it where it is for now? I'd like to finish flushing out the importance categories above. Then hopefully give everything an importance category, and then start adjusting articles importance assessments. -Optigan13 (talk) 22:34, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
That seems fair. I was going to continue to work on it anyways even if it retained its rating of low. Besides, now that I've had a chance to think about it more, it seems like Santa Catalina Island, California (which is unrated right now) would be a more comprehensive article that would go higher on the importance list. I'll probably start working on that article once I finish working on the changes you suggested for the Avalon page. Thanks for all your input, Optigan13. It's very helpful for a new contributor like me.--mcd51 (talk) 01:01, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

OK, I've taken at least an initial pass at all of the suggestions for this page. I would appreciate it if Optigan13, along with any other users watching this page, would come take a look at my changes. I'm looking for a reassessment of the article's quality rating and any tips or suggestions for moving it further up the quality scale. Thanks for all the help!--mcd51 (talk) 17:43, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

A couple thoughts
  • Not sure if I would specify the phone information in the lead, but maybe that could work if the prose was tweaked a bit of something. See WP:LEAD.
  • If you're going to link Tongva you should probably link the full name as [[Tongva|Gabrielino/Tongva]].
  • "tribe, who, having" You might want to drop the commas, I don't know if you need to have the readers pause there.
  • Probably link George Shatto, he bought the island of Catalina, he might be notable.
  • Might need to adjust the sentence about the Banning brothers improvements, it's a bit of a run on.
  • Unfortunately I think that image will have to go. It looks good, but in order for the fair use to work it needs to be more than decoration, the image or something it illustrates have to be discussed. (See Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria).
  • In 1929, Wrigley built the Catalina Casino was built in 1929 over ...
  • The Santa Catalina Island Company maintained maintains control of ...
  • Make sure to use {{convert}} throughout for the measurements, there's several that need it, like 22 miles in the geography section. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) for the whole story on those.
  • Explain what the acronym P.L.A.Y. stands for when you first use it.
  • "but a single principal, currently Joe Carlson, administers all three levels of education." I don't think you need to name the school principal.
I've rerated as a B, and at this point I would recommend you consider starting to take it through the more formal content processes starting with a WP:Peer review with suggestions on possibly going to WP:GAN or even WP:FAN eventually. I'm pretty weak on the specific WP:Manual of Style issues, and on tightening prose. You may be able to find someone in one of those forums to help you. -Optigan13 (talk) 08:23, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Oakland Raiders GAR warning

Oakland Raiders has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 16:25, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

The article should be pushed up to WP:FAC so that it can have a chance of being featured on the Main page on January 30, 2010 when the franchise becomes 50 years old. Binksternet (talk) 16:42, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Bluewater, California page

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluewater,_California) is a hoax. Please remove it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.187.44.4 (talkcontribs)

It looks to me to be a valid place. It pops up on Google Maps ([5]) and GNIS has a page on it ([6]). Killiondude (talk) 23:49, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
Agree. But this [7] website which was removed in the last edit is fake.Emargie (talk) 23:59, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
see more here [8]--Emargie (talk) 05:14, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Not sure what there is left to do at this point, blocking Bluewaterca (talk · contribs) may be in order for inappropriate username for imitating an (WP:ORGNAME), but all of this is after the fact. Not even sure this is worthy of even a mention in the WP:Signpost. -Optigan13 (talk) 05:49, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Agree. The fake TV Station page is gone [9].--Emargie (talk) 06:08, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Inappropriate use of "Chinatown"

Please see Talk:Southern_California_Chinatowns and Talk:Chinatown, Talk:Chinatowns in Canada and the United States and related article talk-pages. Either citations for actual common-use (not promotional use) of places like Rowland Park as "Chinatown" should be provided or the article in question should either be deleted or renamed.Skookum1 (talk) 18:32, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Subcategorization of Category:California articles missing geocoordinate data by county

I've now added support for Californian counties to the {{coord missing}} tag, and subcategorized 3600 of the articles under Category:California articles missing geocoordinate data into their respective per-county categories. I hope this helps geocoding these articles. If you wish, you are also welcome to join the general geocoding project at WP:COORD. -- The Anome (talk) 01:38, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

List of United States federal courthouses in California

There are probably about a dozen courthouses missing from this page. Nine of them are at the FJC cite in the external links, the rest, locals may know better. Any help would be appreciated. Cheers! bd2412 T 04:21, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Looks like someone made that list using only the historical courthouses link at the bottom of that page. A second source would helpful if somebody wants to go look. -Optigan13 (talk) 07:47, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
The FJC is a good resource, but only for old courthouses. The rest might be found by searching the individual district court pages for the four districts of California. bd2412 T 19:18, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

Pageview stats

After a recent request, I added WikiProject California to the list of projects to compile monthly pageview stats for. The data is the same used by http://stats.grok.se/en/ but the program is different, and includes the aggregate views from all redirects to each page. The stats are at Wikipedia:WikiProject California/Popular pages.

The page will be updated monthly with new data. The edits aren't marked as bot edits, so they will show up in watchlists. You can view more results, request a new project be added to the list, or request a configuration change for this project using the toolserver tool. If you have any comments or suggestions, please let me know. Thanks! Mr.Z-man 06:02, 1 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I've added a link to the project page. -Optigan13 (talk) 07:47, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

New Sacramento task force?

Maybe one of these is in order. A lot of progress can be had here. --Starstriker7(Talk) 06:13, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

I just registered with Wikipedia, hope to write an article on my employer (Rabobank, a significant player in the Central Valley banking world based in Roseville, part of a giant Dutch bank which already has a Wiki article) and live in Sacramento as of about three years ago. While that article seems like a good start for a newbie -- something I know about and can write knowledgeably (yep,I'm well aware of the need for NPOV). I'd be glad to help with Sacramento since I'd like to get involved in Wikipedia, probably get more helpful as I gain experience.--Jbh5jbh5 (talk) 03:37, 25 September 2009 (UTC)
Please be careful regarding creating said article as it may fall under WP:COI. As for the need for Sacramento having its own task force. I could see the need for a more inclusive Central Valley/Sierra Nevada Task Force, but in relative size Sacramento itself does not need a task force. I mean if San Diego doesn't have one, and it's one of the ten largest cities in the United States, why does Sacramento?--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 08:29, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Idea regarding task force

Why not set the Southern California task force so that it does not cover Los Angeles and Orange counties, since there is a Los Angeles task force for those counties? WhisperToMe (talk) 03:16, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

I would strongly advise against that. Until recently, the Southern California and Los Angeles task forces were entirely separate WikiProjects with their own self-defined scope. One Task force (and its members) should not be in the business of determining another one's scope. Both of those task forces are inactive at the moment, so this is largely a moot point. -Optigan13 (talk) 07:33, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Well, since the task forces are empty anyway, I would suggest revising the task forces so that none interferes with another. I understand that until now there were two parallel task forces that sort of covered each other. Now we need to drive LA-area editors squarely into the LA one, instead of having them split their duties between LA and Socal. Since Inland Empire has its own project, it is making the Socal task force almost redundant, if it wasn't for San Diego. Why not turn Socal into a solely San Diego task force? WhisperToMe (talk) 08:04, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
I was unaware that Inland Empire had its own WPP until now. They only have four members, I don't see why they, and the LA Task Force aren't subsumed into the greater SoCal Task Force which is far more inclusive a task force than either of the two separately.
That being said, as States second largest city, I must comment that many in San Diego feel like we are considered far less important as other parts of the state, and receive significantly less attention then our size warrants both by the State Government and the general public at large. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 21:29, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Importance assessments of California settlement articles and Quality assessments

As part of the task force conversions proposed a bot run would be necessary to replace instances of the project banners. There are a few other items I would address as part of that same bot run if possible.

  • An importance assessment of all settlements in Category:Unknown-importance California articles based on population size (assuming this is possible). I'm thinking along the line of (High = Pop >= 100,000, Mid = Pop >= 25,000, and all other pages being low). I'm not particularly attached to those numbers. I'm trying to think of reasonable levels, and not sure how many that means would be in the mid and low categories. I'm also not sure if this is possible with any of the existing bots, but I'll check.
  • Tagging all articles in Category:California ranchos with a project template and a mid-importance (where one isn't already present). I feel they were of sufficient historical importance as they covered land which ended up being multiple cities and large parts of whole counties to warrant mid-importance.
  • Assessing all pages for class in Category:Unassessed California articles in the same way with the [[previous run where we copy the higher of the project's assessments. Most of the articles should be in the unknown importance category, and I'm trying to limit the number of bot writes to each talk page. There appears to have been enough articles (especially those with stub tags) to decrease the number of unassessed articles by at least 100.

The reason I'm trying to do all of this is because I would like to have the class and importance categories to a manageable level so that we can effectively respond to new articles and re-assessment requests. Thank you everyone for all of your patience in reading all of this and in all your work so far. Are there any thoughts, questions, or comments? -Optigan13 (talk) 04:49, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree with what you said. As far as the numbers for the cities, I'm not attached to those numbers either, but somewhere around there sounds good. From your prior experience in organizing things, I trust your judgment. Killiondude (talk) 08:24, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Task force replacement and assessment bot request

Just placing this here for a more formal wording and a bundling of several requests to link to

For the remaining ones see above for the discussion

I'm off to go request this. Thanks to everyone who chimed in at the various discussions. -Optigan13 (talk) 02:06, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Since the standard for rating the importance of settlements already seems to be in practice and no bot run has been made yet, I went ahead and rated the importance for all Los Angeles CPD's and unincorporated areas by hand.--mcd51 (talk) 03:28, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps the High cut off should be those cities that are over 250,000 in population, otherwise such cities as Chula Vista and Fremont would be considered high importance. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 21:54, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Well the bot run happened a couple months ago, but I'm in still in favor for the over 100K limit, largely because of the large number of low importance unincorporated communities (2,059), former settlements (1,162) and other articles. Template:CA cities and mayors of 100,000 population shows 63 articles, compared to all the other material Category:Settlements in California. It's not that the cities are so important that everyone in the world needs to know about them, but they are important relative to the large number of low and mid importance topics that we have, and will likely continue to see added, so increasing the number of high importance is helpful to split them out. -Optigan13 (talk) 23:14, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Mount Whitney importance rating

Mount Whitney, in my opinion should be rated Top importance to the scope of our project. It is the highest point in the State of California, and the highest point in the contiguous/continental United States, therefore, it is more important overall to the project then Mount Shasta. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 22:58, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Fine with me. --Stepheng3 (talk) 23:16, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
It is rated as top importance. I had listed it as part of the top importance suggestions at the assessment discussion, and no one disagreed, hence why it's easy to miss that it should have been top already. Sorry about the delay in responding, I'm trying to catch up on some talk page discussions. -Optigan13 (talk) 23:23, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Why was Death Valley, or more specifically Badwater Basin struck from the Top list? It is the lowest point in the State and contiguous/continental U.S. after all. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:32, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
I've responded over at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California/Assessment/Archive 2, I'm just trying to keep all the assessment discussion over there. I placed it on an archive page so that I could initially transclude it here to get more attention. -Optigan13 (talk) 00:09, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
IMO, the following geographical features should be top:

Badwater is too specific a place to be top, though Death Valley should indeed be top Purplebackpack89 (talk) 01:38, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

See the assessment discussion at the top of this page (re-transcluded), we're rehashing the same discussion from August. -Optigan13 (talk) 02:05, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

That's because a wrong call was made in August, and I agree 100% with RightCow that Death Valley (along with some other stuff as well) belongs as top priority. I see no consensus for dropping Death Valley except for an unsigned comment, and two current contributors are clearly for it. Also, you shouldn't be making new edits to an archive (this applies to both Opt and RightCow) Purplebackpack89 (talk) 02:18, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

I know about not posting in archives, but I was under the impression that Opt was the project coordinator. Furthermore, there is a duplicate conversation in the non-archive talk page. Of course, that would be a more appropriate place to post, and from what I have seen, any changes are reflected on poth pages. So you bring up a good point, but at the same time it is a bit moot.
As for back on topic, lets continue in the assessment talk page. Yes?--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 09:07, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
I added a new section. Hit it up. Happy T-Day Purplebackpack89 (talk) 18:50, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum and SoCal

Newbie here. I don't see the Coliseum listed anywhere, as a native So. Californian I am very interested in your project and the Coliseum is important: The Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum is home to the University of Southern California Trojans football team. It is located next to the Los Angeles Memorial Sports Arena adjacent to the campus of the University of Southern California (USC). The stadium is jointly owned by the State of California, Los Angeles County, and the City of Los Angeles. The Coliseum has the distinction of being the only stadium in the world to host the Olympic Games twice, in 1932 and 1984. It is also the only Olympic stadium to have also hosted Super Bowls and World Series. It was declared a National Historic Landmark on July 27, 1984, the day before the opening ceremony of the 1984 Summer Olympics. Also, you have not mentioned the Port of Long Beach, one of the largest shipping ports in the world. It has been mentioned as a prime target for terrorists because it would have worldwide repercussions. You mentioned the Loma Prieta earthquake but not the Northridge, the costliest seismic disaster in U.S. History.[1] If you have these on another page please excuse the intrusion, but I hope to be of some small help and maybe a SoCal perspective.JoyDiamond (talk) 06:35, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Is this the article you are speaking of?
Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum
--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 09:02, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Request for comment

As an organization based out of San Mateo, California, Junior Statesmen of America falls within the scope of our WikiProject. Presently there is a content dispute between myself and another editor, who may have conflict of interest, regarding a new section of the article regarding a single high school club, which is being referenced to a website from that club which falls under WP:SPS.

In an attempt to avoid an edit war, after the first reversion, I created a section in the talk page. I kindly ask others to comment on the present dispute. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 12:34, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

It's perfectly fine for you to delete the content regarding a single high school club. I may even ally with you in this so you don't get slapped with a 3RR Purplebackpack89 (talk) 16:44, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Request for comment

I ask fellow WPP Californian editors, to comment regarding a current discussion of content of the San Diego Comic Con article. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:40, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

There is presently an active effort by editors from WPP Comics to exclude information in the article San Diego Comic-Con International regarding participation of individuals, and expansion of the event to areas outside the comic industry. Furthermore, what mention there is of said expansion is framed in a non-neutral point of view, that puts non-comic industry participation in a negative light. Is there a way of remedying the issue regarding exclusion of referenced content? --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 07:36, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Merge Inland Empire Project into this?

Let's keep this all in one thread over there. -Optigan13 (talk) 08:20, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

The following discussion 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.

We need to do it. Needs to be merged in like LA, SOCAL, and the bay. Purplebackpack89 (talk) 16:29, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't see why not. however, what do their members say to becoming a task force of this WPP? --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:51, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
A few months ago, a discussion ended in no consensus. The problem is that it only has 50 pages and 4 members, much less than other Cali projects that have already been merge Purplebackpack89 (talk) 15:44, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps you should reopen the discussion in the appropriate talk page, and let us know, so we can add our 2 cents. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 22:17, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

A discussion on merger of the Inland Empire project is open both here and at the Inland Empire Project talk page Purplebackpack89 (talk) 23:06, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

As the Creater of WikiProject IE, I think not we have made a lot of progress. Please see the project talk page, and we ask that you respect our requests. House1090 (talk) 04:54, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
OK...#1, you might want to get rid of that stray "not". #2, being a taskforce doesn't mean that all work on articles stops; but being a project means you violate precedent. #3, as far as I can tell, the "respect our requests" you're referred to is a several-months-old discussion where the only editor who clearly spoke out against the merger was you yourself, and now several editors, on and off IE, have come down in support of the merger. And finally, I think that you have a little too much invested in this project. I am 100% for this merger Purplebackpack89 (talk) 06:00, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
I'll leave a note for Optigan to look into this, he's the one who actually did the merges of the other projects, so he knows the technical part. Because Wikipedia works by consensus, I'm afraid only one person wishing it to remain it's own wiki-project isn't enough support. Killiondude (talk) 06:31, 30 November 2009 (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.


As an afterthought, because the Inland Empire is not as major of a region as the other parts of California, I feel that it makes sense to make the Inland Empire project a task force of WP California. If regions of California were to have their own projects, it would first be Los Angeles, and then SFBA. To raise awareness of the latter I am posting the San Francisco portal (which indirectly leads to the task force) in several prominent articles. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:36, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Discussion is live at the Inland Empire talk, so I copied your comment there Purplebackpack89 (talk) 00:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

New article on Bay Area group at AfD

Yesterday I created Magic, Inc. (organization) and it's listed at AfD. I'd appreciate your opinions on whether the organization is indeed notable, as I thought, and if anyone has access to sources I haven't used, could they mention to me? I'm having problems searching newspapers since the Mercury News uses a paywall and in any case its online archive only starts in '85, I think it is, and they seem to have deep-sixed the (Palo Alto) Daily News archive. I also suspect there may be relevant books on environmentalism and/or the human potential movement that are too new to show up in Google Books that might cover the group, but I wouldn't know where to begin in identifying them. However, I do have access to the San Jose State/San Jose city library. So I'd appreciate any advice anyone could give; the AfD means I have to get my skates on improving this article, or let wiser heads prevail on notability. Yngvadottir (talk) 14:28, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I've added some relevant project tags to the template for the project, so they should show up in some article alerts. I'll try to take a look at the sources on there and comment at the AFD. The main concept being referred to is a redlink (Valuescience), is the concept/term used by other organizations or publications? -Optigan13 (talk) 10:07, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your attention, though I'm a bit puzzled by the suggestion that the article needs expansion - I don't think the group merits a long article, just an article. Valuescience seems to only come up online in connection with this group, but as I indicated on the discussion page for the Philosophy project, Value Science has an article. I am not knowledgeable enough to discern whether they are the same thing, so I went ahead and added a "See also" in the article. Stanford has had members of the group teach a course in Valuescience for 30 years, indicating some respect for both the approach and the group. Which is why I put it in there. I've now added a fuller exposition of what it is as a quote in the article notes. I suspect someone knowing where to look in offline sources could rapidly deal with that aspect of the article, and with establishing the extent of the group's paper trail on sustainability and ecology, but I don't have the necessary knowledge of publications in the fields.Yngvadottir (talk) 17:05, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Yeoman work at Ranchos of California

I just wanted to alert project participants of the fabulous contributions by seemingly tireless editor Emargie who has been working at writing articles about every historic California rancho and land grant. The List of Ranchos of California reflects this dedication. So far, Emargie has written more than 180 articles about ranchos, and a score more about early Californians. Well done! Binksternet (talk) 21:45, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Indeed. Emargie has been a fantastic contributor.   Will Beback  talk  21:59, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Glad to be able to help. If you go to Category:California ranchos the simple power of the "map of all coords" added to by User:Stepheng3 inspires me to help him with his missing coordinates work.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Emargie (talkcontribs)

Medal of Honor

I have began to tag those recipients of the Medal of Honor who were born in, or who came from, California with our talk template. I will go from present, backwards in time. The process will probably take several days, if not weeks, to complete.

Importance wise, should they be given automatic ranking, or is it case by case?--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 11:33, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Also, I was thinking, would a category for those individuals like "Category:Californian recipients of the Medal of Honor", under the parent category of "Category:California military personnel", be appropriate? --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 12:19, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I am not going to be adding people who retired, died, or were trainined in California, least every "Hollywood Marine" who was awarded the Medal of Honor, be listed. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 12:36, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

OK, I have gone as far back as the Korean War. I'm going to take a break before sorting through the large number of World War II recipients. Also, would anyone else support the idea of creating a list of California MOH recipients? I don't want to create the page, only to have it AFDed. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:39, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Just go ahead and assign importance as you see fit for those individuals for now. I prefer broad ratings based on easily determined criteria, because it's fairly neutral, and since the 1.0 release bot considers inbound links, traffic, and quality assessment, individuals who garner more mentions in other articles, or are visited more often would be well represented. From there people can develop articles on people that have more material available, or have more compelling stories. Also we can come back and work through those as we work through the various assessment updates. With respect to the Cal Medal of Honor recipients what do you have in terms of sources so far? You might also want to try bouncing the idea off of WT:MILHIST to see if they have any previous experience with similar material. Right now I don't see anything in Category:Recipients of the Medal of Honor outside of Kentucky Medal of Honor Memorial. -Optigan13 (talk) 09:53, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Right now, I think all should be assessed as mid, as there are so few of them. As for the list, or category, I was thinking of creating a subcategory to Category:California Military personnel, as I suggested above. I looked at the list of Californians, and as it is alphabetic, rather then topic oriented, it would work as a sub section there. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 21:08, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, I must have missed the piece about Category:California military personnel. But yeah mid sounds good to me, and as long as you're using some of the same general MoH sources that are used on the other lists it should be fine. -Optigan13 (talk) 04:52, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Lieutenant Governor template

Any objection if I put the full names into this template instead of just the family names? See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:CALtGovernors GeorgeLouis (talk) 18:43, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

I'd probably just go with first initial. Purplebackpack89 (talk) 21:34, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

I don't get it; why not the full name? Certainly a viewer might be satisfied with that instead of having to click to the article to find out the full name of a particular lieutenant-gov. GeorgeLouis (talk) 00:36, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Very few lists of people I've seen have that Purplebackpack89 (talk) 03:29, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

OK. Whatever. I can't deal with this. GeorgeLouis (talk)

San Diego task force

User:Alex537 started a San Diego WikiProject on the Spanish Wikipedia. Here I asked him if he was interested in starting a San Diego task force on here, and he said on his talk page that he was interested. Do I need to do anything else before setting up the task force? I helped start Wikipedia:WikiProject Michigan/Detroit - I hope to use that as a model for the San Diego task force. WhisperToMe (talk) 22:31, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

That's a good idea, i just hope that more San Diegans Wikipedeans can join us.--Vrysxy! (talk) 23:14, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Given that there are very few wikipedians in, or from, San Diego, I don't see a reason for it. However, if there are a significant number of wikipedians willing to work on articles who are connected to San Diego County, I would not be against a task force. After all there are projects with fewer active contributors. -sigh- --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:54, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
Yes, I was thinking that the scope of the project would be everything in San Diego County. There may be some San Diego-area Spanish Wikipedia users who may decide to contribute in the English language version as well. Speaking of WikiProject Asian Americans, I am linking the project to several Asian American neighborhoods in the United States to increase exposure to the project. Also WhisperToMe (talk) 07:00, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
BTW I need to remind myself to add Iomega to the San Diego task force once it is established. WhisperToMe (talk) 07:47, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Let's see how many people are interested first. If there's enough interest I'll set it up using the same layout as the other projects, but I'm just finishing up with the Inland Empire task force conversion, and need a little break. Also, is there any reason why you don't think the main project or the Southern California task force would be a good venue for working on the same material? -Optigan13 (talk) 09:56, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
1. There is already a project on the Spanish Wikipedia specifically in regards to San Diego. There needs to be an equivalent project here, and a task force will fill that role.
2. The San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA MSA is the 17th largest in the United States - several MSAs below that position have their own WikiProjects (St. Louis, Tampa, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Kansas City, Las Vegas, Indianapolis, Austin, and New Orleans - As a note, while WikiProject Charlotte exists, it is inactive). Therefore there should be a significant interest in developing the task force.
3. I think the scope of Southern California conflicts too much with LA and other task forces, and also I think it is too broad to really work. I would prefer to have task forces generally set up around metropolitan areas instead of broad regions.
WhisperToMe (talk) 11:40, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Agree with this, and also perhaps a Sacramento task force Purplebackpack89 (talk) 21:07, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

← Task forces are hardly needed when WikiProject California (itself) has very little activity. You'd be subdividing what is already an (essentially) dead project, in my opinion. Killiondude (talk) 01:54, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

California is the most populous state in the United States, and has many large metropolitan areas (especially Los Angeles and SFBA) - It is the center of the technology industry and it has the headquarters of the Wikimedia Foundation. Several California cities are popular tourist destinations and have an interest from outside of the state and outside of the country. See, WikiProject California is not supposed to be anywhere near dead. If you think it has less activity than it should, then tag California articles with portal links. Tag article talk pages with the California template if they don't already have the appropriate tags. Tag articles of SFBA-related pages with SFBA portal links. Aggressively let the population know that this project exists and that it is calling for members. If you look at my contributions list, I went crazy and spread the SFBA portal around to many such articles, and I plan to tag even more articles with the SFBA portal. WhisperToMe (talk) 02:10, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
I agree with User:Killiondude. House1090 (talk) 03:10, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Acceptance of WikiProject California having a perceived low participation is harmful to the project itself. Instead of saying "Oh, we have a low participation, so don't bother starting another task force," one should be saying "Oh, gosh! WikiProject California should not be having a low participation rate. It is wrong. We need to do something about it. This low participation rate is a problem for the project that needs to be solved, and we cannot accept it." You should be seeing this low participation rate as a disease, a problem, a malady. It is a flaw that needs to be fixed. It is a problem that needs to be solved.
I want this task force to be started, and if someone says "but we have a low participation rate already" one should stop, realize that it is unacceptable for WP:CAL to have this low participation on the English Wikipedia, and be striving to fix that. The WikiProject ought to have a high participation rate, and this WikiProject having a low participation rate is an embarrassment for the State of California and for the Wikimedia Foundation.
Currently I am spreading around the SFBA Portal to raise awareness of that region's task force. I am doing something to raise the participation rate of this project. Everyone needs to find some way to make this project's participation increase.
Anyway, Task force San Diego ought to exist. The region has the population and attention to be viable. Even if few Wikipedians who identify themselves as being from San Diego are visible, there is the potential to attract more residents from San Diego and people who are interested in the area, so one can make a reasonably sized task force for the city.
WhisperToMe (talk) 03:38, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Tell me what I can do then, I will be happy to help and try to save this project from disaster. House1090 (talk) 05:23, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Make sure all articles are tagged with WikiProject California.
If the article is about LA County or Orange County, ensure "la=yes" is included. If it is about SFBA, ensure "sfba=yes" is included - similar with other taskforces like Inland Empire, etc
Make sure that SFBA-related article have the SFBA portal (code: {{Portal|San Francisco Bay Area|SF From Marin Highlands3.jpg}} included in the "See Also" or "External links" section of the articles.
Adding the portal will draw readers into the SFBA task force, as the task force is mentioned in the portal and the task force is a reader's introduction into SFBA.
Non SFBA-related subjects (especially articles of statewide concern or state agencies) should have the California portal (code: {{portal|California|WPCF.svg}})
Consider establishing a portal for Los Angeles so it will be easy to attract readers into the Los Angeles task force.
Ensure that key topics (Tourist attractions, Fortune 500 companies and other major companies headquartered in California, major city agencies, state agencies, large school districts, etc) are all tagged first, and then go down to topics of lower and lower importance.
For instance I found that Visa Inc. was not tagged with the WikiProject template, nor was it tagged with the SFBA portal. So I added the portal and added the project tag
WhisperToMe (talk) 05:30, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
I will start off with the Inland Empire related work and the work by way to the rest of SoCal and eventually Central and NorCal. Should I put my name in the list of Wikiproject Cal list, or is it fine if im just in the IE Task Force page? House1090 (talk) 05:36, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
In my opinion I would try to put your name on both lists. Anyway, thank you in advance for your efforts :) WhisperToMe (talk) 20:39, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
No problem, I want to avoid Amerique as much as possible, so this should be good and should keep me busy for the next couple of days. Actually thank you for allowing me to work and join wikiproject Cal. House1090 (talk) 23:05, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Firstly, reports of this project's death (or imminent disaster) are greatly exaggerated. Neither the existence of comparable WikiProject pages nor the large number of residents demonstrate the need for a project, and there are valid options for raising the participation of this project without starting a new task force.

With respect to the other projects you referred to, I'm not seeing significant activity in several of them, and most show more of the issues that Killiondude and I are concerned about. es:Wikiproyecto Discusión:California/San Diego only shows two threads, a welcome one from September of last year, and your image request from this year. es:Wikiproyecto:California is marked as inactive. Looking at the English projects I'm seeing similar situations with several with posts with no response, and limited or no general signs of activity or project development (see Tampa Bay, St. Louis Cincinatti, Kansas City, and Indianapolis). To say that we need to have a task force because all the other areas have one isn't a valid reason.

While the large number of number of residents, the technology centers, and other reasons you enumerated are reasons that we should have significant coverage of California topics, and at 21,302 articles we do. Those same reasons would lead someone to assume that there would be active and thriving Wikiprojects developing Featured Articles, tagging and assessing new articles, responding to inquiries on the project talk pages, that was not the case in the past. I merged all of these projects together into one larger one in the hopes that the few remaining people doing that work would collectively work on California topics, while still keeping up with the responding at the talk page, and to the various issues that arise. While individual members of WikiProject California might not to work on a specific article that another participant wishes to, hopefully enough will have the time and energy to help a fellow member out, and in return their fellow members would be able to return the favor when needed. If you look at this talk page and the archives from this year, you'll see a small number of people responding to a large portion of the issues. Now that we are beginning to build up a healthy number of participants on this page, it is too early to begin splitting back off into new task forces. On projects and task forces with limited number of participants, three or four going inactive or moving onto other topics after a few months could mean that all the whole project would go inactive, while a healthy project/task force with a large number of participants will recover and move on. The broad scope of the project would bring those same participants under one big tent to work together. So many projects and task forces have started with great enthusiasm and passion for their subject only for their members to run out of steam, lets not go back down the path towards more inactive projects and task forces.

All of that being said, yes please:

  1. Tag (and assess) articles with their relevant project and task force tags, all of which are listed at the bottom of the documentation for Template:WikiProject California.
    New articles are listed by a bot for California, Southern California, Los Angeles, and the SF Bay Area.
  2. Use the updated {{Cal Invitation}} which I've updated with new language, and the ability to specify work with {{subst:Cal Invitation|art=Article name}} to invite someone to the project based on their work with a specific article.
    I've also created variations for each task force listed at the bottom of the template's documentation.
  3. You can find a lot of possible participants with those new article bot results. You can also add {{Wikipedia ads|ad=182}} to your user page to display the project banner ad.

None of these ways to build membership requires an additional task force, and none of the reasons listed so far are really convincing arguments for creating a task force. I've been working on reviving this project for some time now, while still trying to find time to develop articles, and I see nothing to be embarrassed about. -Optigan13 (talk) 09:38, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

If anything, I can see the reduction of the task forces we have now and have two SoCal, NorCal, with each increasing its area of coverage. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 21:11, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

If thats the case then why did you want Wikiproject IE as a taskforce? Some people, like me, want to improve our area first, and I think thats why we have a task force, people joining together to improve a local area, rather than a large region. House1090 (talk) 05:17, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
It was only a suggestion. Just because the taskforces are reduced, expanded, merged, whatever, doesn't mean that you cannot continue to work within the project on only those articles that you are interested in. No one is forcing you to expand to articles outside of your interest, no one can really force you to do anything really. What the community can ask you to do is act and edit within the policies and guidelines that have been set forth by those who have come before us, and those that we may contribute to in the future.
I am only stating my opinion, that there need only be two task forces, if any. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:41, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Intentional break #1

I personally think that we need MORE taskforces, rather than LESS. Purplebackpack89 (talk) 18:00, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

We also need more people. And world peace! Ameriquedialectics 18:30, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
^ Made me smile. Killiondude (talk) 18:36, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
I think we need more people first, then we can start talking about more TFs. Right now, what we have is a dozen or so active members, some of whom are only within their own TFs, not really venturing outside of it. That's fine if they want to do that, no one can force them to change their editing decisions. However, when it comes to the overall quality of the project, the number of TFs don't really matter. Furthermore, reduction of TFs reduces the work load of the coordinator.
Moreover, all the new TFs fall under the SoCal TF which is only semi-active, if not inactive. Therefore we are only drawing away individuals away from an existing TF. This is why I say there need only be two. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 22:17, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
Many of the child wikiprojects and task forces on Wikipedia concern themselves with metropolitan areas and not regions of states. Personally I think using a metropolitan area allows for more cohesion in a project. Also while defining what falls within a region of a state may be difficult, the US government's defines metropolitan areas, so we have an easy way of determining what falls in the scope of a metropolitan area project.
Anyway, to help I added the California Wikipedia ad to my user page.
WhisperToMe (talk) 23:24, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
What do you suggest should happen to the TFs that aren't metro area specific?
Ditto, on the ad. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:42, 11 December 2009 (UTC)
I prefer getting rid of Socal (the only non-Metro specific TF) and keeping SF Bay area (more or less representing the SFBA CSA, including the San Francisco and San Jose areas), Los Angeles (Los Angeles MSA - LA County and Orange County), Inland Empire (Riverside and San Bernardino counties), and Santa Barbara (Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Golieta MSA).. WhisperToMe (talk) 22:22, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
I agree, but I would like to start a San Diego Task Force. Would you guys be okay with that? House1090 (talk) 23:17, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Being a San Diego County resident, I believe that improvement of articles within San Diego County can be done via the already established SoCal Task Force, and that creating a San Diego Task Force is presently unnecessary given the low level of activity of San Diego county residents and non-SD county interested individuals on wikipedia. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:25, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
No problem, although if SoCal goes (I think it should) then SD should get a task force, at least I think. House1090 (talk) 23:57, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

If SoCal stays, it and Los Angeles need to be better defined. Purplebackpack89 (talk) 00:50, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

I dont support socal much but the task force is for all of SoCal including SoCals largest population centers (in order of population: Los Angeles, San Bernardino-Riverside (IE), San Diego). House1090 (talk) 01:11, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, but the IE region is large, there is no arguing that, but as a single incorporated city, neither city is as large as San Diego. If you shall use a single metric of MSAs then please do so, but please do not attempt to elevate smaller cities above that of larger cities. It would be like saying the County of San Bernardino is more important than the state of Rhode Island because of size.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 02:54, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, I was talking about metropolitan areas. House1090 (talk) 03:57, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
We got off topic...the point is, if we keep both socal and LA, we need to decide what goes in socal, what goes in LA, what goes in both, and what goes in neither Purplebackpack89 (talk) 22:14, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
SoCal TF would include all southern california counties from Santa Barabara to Impirial. Now the LA task force would only be LA and possibly Orange counties, only the LA metropolitan area (MSA). Its not rocket science. House1090 (talk) 01:36, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
If we keep the, the LA taskforce maybe should just be the CITY of LA Purplebackpack89 (talk) 21:33, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Presently, the way it works is anything that is tagged with LA, Santa Barbara, and IE TFs, should also be tagged with the SoCal Tf by default. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 04:29, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Or the LA Metro kind of like TF IE and future TF SD, mabey. House1090 (talk) 04:40, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Handling House1090

House1090 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Following House reporting me for edit warring over Polaron's improvements to the Inland Empire article, 2over0 recommended a project discussion over how to approach issues pursuant to this user, who some of you have become acquainted with due to his zeal in defending his preferred versions of anything that can be made tangentially or remotely related to the IE or San Bernardino, not to mention anything actually within those subject areas themselves.

His level of understanding of these areas (or rather "confusion", more appropriately) is made evident by his edits. This account has a lengthy history, most of which related to sockpuppetry is available here, but there is more over the year since then of edit warring primarily, not to mention horrifically bad English proceeding from his ability in that language, that I haven't collated yet for a full WP:AN review. My intention ultimately is to request support for a topic ban of House from any articles or nav templates relating to Southern California. I suppose the purpose of a discussion here would be to determine if a consensus at WP:CAL would support this action or if anything else can be tried. Thanks to all, Ameriquedialectics 22:59, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

First off how were those improvements? Having an old IE metro picture, and calling the area a region when it is about Cal's 3 largest metropolitan area (MSA). Now I have done more contributions to the Inland Empire Articles, than you have. Also I want to change and stop arrguing with users and being such a pain, but you are impossible to work with and come to a conclusion with. I put stuff on the talk pages but people esspecially you ignore them, and just revert, revert and revert. I love wikipedia, if I did not I would not be here trying to help expand the IE and other articles. I am truelly sad you have suggested this but this is life, and I hope people can see beyond my past and see my side of the story. PS: when you stop contributing to the IE it was like ending a war, MissionJim.Inn and I disscussed and together edited the IE, and if one of us did not agree we would come to a conclusion. But not with you, I have tried but I am starting to think its impossible. Now as for my english I graduated from Cajon High School last year with a 3.67 GPA and in English got all A's in my 4 years of High School. Its just that I type fast and I tend to make a lot of errors and I am always in a hurry.House1090 (talk) 23:14, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
(e/c)House, in the few weeks that I've been aware of your presence on the project I can see that some of your contributions, while they may have been your attempt to help Wikipedia, have been somewhat disruptive. After reviewing your behavior on Wikipedia and reading the thread on WP:AN3, I can say that it looks very much like you edit with a distinct POV (see also WP:NPOV, which is Wikipedia policy) which is to further the topic of the Inland Empire on Wikipedia, no matter the cost. Sure, it's great to write articles or add content relating to a field you're interested in. But when it starts to become spammy, it's not good.
Amerique, I can understand your concerns about House, but you knew better than to edit war. I don't support a topic ban for House at this point, but I would strongly recommend that s/he takes a step back from their current behavior. Should I find more information, I might change my opinion, but that's how it stands at this time. Killiondude (talk) 23:34, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Please look at Talk:San Bernardino Valley and Talk:Inland Empire it looks as if I was talking to my self, when I am trying to talk out our differences so we can come to an agreement. This is what wiki is about coming to agreements for the better, but you have to be willing to talk it out rather than reverting with out a statement & judgeing without knowledge. These are exactly the problem with Amerique. By the way thanks Killiondude, for your support, and I do plan on taking sometime out will working with WikiProject Cal. House1090 (talk) 23:46, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Continuing to comment on Amerique won't lead anywhere. Please refrain from doing that. You can provide facts without the commentary (i.e you can say "I commented here, but Amerique didn't respond", not "These are exactly the problems with Amerique"). It is nice that you plan on stretching the topics you work on, on Wikipedia, but I don't think that means you shouldn't be careful about the bias you have been adding into articles. I would still recommend cautious content editing. :-) Killiondude (talk) 23:56, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Yes, sorry for that. I plan to, I want to be more cautious of my edits, there is just times that you forget to look it over and leave it at that, you know? But I think communication is the key to happy editing here in wikipedia, and if we cant communicate we wont get no where, and so that is all I ask is to communicate, with who ever is involved. House1090 (talk) 00:03, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Ok, let's talk. You are imposing your strange idea that "region≠MSA" on the thousand or so readers that click on the IE article each day. Polaron's edit used a simpler term in describing the area and also provided an explanation of what the MSA term means as applied by the Census Bureau. There was not a qualitative difference in the pics. One was less fuzzy, I suppose.
For some reason, you asked for input in that one case earlier about changing the name of the IE article, which you have been trying to do since you got here. While it was good that you did seek input, the fact that you had to be convinced and apparently still hold to a belief that the IE is entirely bounded by the terms of the Census, and therefore can't be a "region", shows how far off the map you are in terms of basic comprehension. I believe you sincerely want to improve the articles. If I was not convinced of this, I would have acted before now. But you are operating at a grade school level, at best. Other people, I believe, are willing to humor you because it is easier than confronting you. It gives me no pleasure to confront you. But if we care about the content of the encyclopedia, and not about humoring anyone's misplaced sense of egotism related to their area of origin, then we have to act accordingly to expedite quality controls.
For the rest of the audience, harsh as it sounds, sometimes the welcome mat has to be rolled up. Before House ever showed up on Wikipedia, I fully participated in driving off two hardcore trolls who were busy for months owning the University of California, Riverside article entirely to louse it up. That article could not have been brought within minimal WP standards and eventually to FA without the extreme vigilance of those Wikipedians who had confronted those users every step of the way. I'm not saying House is as bad as that, but a topic ban to get him out of the IE/Southern California mainspaces would be the best option for the articles, as he has indicated willingness to contribute elsewhere and may still improve if allowed to work on subjects he is dispassionate about. Ameriquedialectics 01:27, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
First off, User:MissionInn.Jim is in favor of a name change, I can go either than thats why I suggested it The Inland Empire is a nickmname of the Riv-SB-Ont MSA. Now I only contribute to the IE because thats the only place that I have real know about in order to contribute. I am working in other places you dont know about. You are trying to get rid of me, and have been since the beginig, other users believe in what I can do and of my knowlege of the Inland Empire. I am constintly doing research in this area, everything I put down here in wiki is from my research and knowlege of the area, I dont make it up. Now how is a region the same as a MSA? Most people confuse the IE as being only SW San Bernardino County and NW Riverside County, now that could be the region but the article is an MSA which includes all of SB and Riv. Counties. I though wikipedia wanted references and sites, and went by what the US Census went by? Now if Im cting like in grade school, well so are you, by sinking to my level (i.e. edit warring, and not willing to confront me). When I got here to wiki the article did not even had a infobox, it was unorganized and was just bad. I did a lot of work on there, and its still is present there. You are no better than me, I am no better than you, but you think you own the IE related articles and you just get frusterated when people dont agree with you. You just want it your way dont you. You are also a very mean and insulting person to me and treat me with disrespect which I have just ignore, you have been fueling our fights. Ok I am not here to argue like a baby I am ready to move on and forget, but I dont think you can do that. I seems like your objective ever since I got here to wiki, is to get rid of me. House1090 (talk) 01:51, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
House, my whole operating philosophy as far as personal interactions go is not to suffer_fools_gladly. Being open does not mean users of demonstrated incompetence should be allowed free, unobstructed reign over the encyclopedia. In your whole time here I've only noticed you to make one referenced edit to the encyclopedia at all, and I can't even find that now. However, I will try to use talk pages more diplomatically further out. Apologies if my comments offend, but your editing does not demonstrate the proficiency of someone who "got all As", much less passed HS English. That much should be obvious. Ameriquedialectics 02:56, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I did not get all A's, I did however get all A's in all my english classes, and graduated with a 3.6 GPA, I dont really care if you believe it or not because I am now in a 4 year university. Like I have said before I type fast and dont check my typing as much as I need to here on wiki. And yes use the talk page, please. House1090 (talk) 03:35, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

To anyone still concerned, House only got off without a topic ban in the first place because I argued in favor of allowing him access to his favorite subjects in order to prove that he could work within consensus over a year ago.[10] That experiment hasn't been entirely successful, which is why we are here. Ameriquedialectics 05:09, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Comment: It appears that House1090 thinks that the term "Inland Empire" is exclusively used to refer to the 2003 definition of the metropolitan statistical area centered on urban Riverside-San Bernardino, which is the entirety of Riverside and San Bernardino counties. This definition is the result of the use of counties as boundaries for building up metropolitan statistical areas. It is clear from the article itself that there are various boundaries and definitions for the Inland Empire. The article history also shows that the article was originally written about a fuzzy area. The external links of the article all refer to the Inland Empire as a region primarily. An option may be for House1090 to split off a separate metropolitan statistical area article. Although how much distinct content can be put there is questionable. --Polaron | Talk 03:58, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Finally, you understand, well your getting there. I want to start an article about the SB-Riv Urban Area which would be about SW & NW SB and Riv. Counties. The Inland Empire Article is already about the metro and includes all the cities in the metro, so it would be easier to start a new article about the SB-Riv Urban area. Now I would need all the support I can to create it. This is were you would come in. House1090 (talk) 04:07, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
FYI to anybody, Amerique has a fairly clean record; House has been blocked at one point for abusing multiple accounts Purplebackpack89 (talk) 05:01, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
As far as I can tell, he hasn't been starting up new socks lately, but he may have taken to striking up conversations with old socks of his in order to gain support for his old positions, such as here: Talk:Inland_Empire_(California)#Largest_city. The IP's rhetoric and behavior match House perfectly: [11] Ameriquedialectics 05:24, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Right now with it being so focused on House1090 and Amerique I'm thinking it might be best if: 1) House voluntarily limits himself to a one revert rule, 2) start a talk page discussion once reverted, and 3) if he feels that his concerns aren't being addressed to leave a note here requesting additional opinions (keeping all discussion on the relevant article talk page). From there follow standard WP:Dispute resolution processes. This WikiProject's activity is starting to pick up, so we should be able to help address this. I'm trying to think of the best way for House1090 to contribute to the encyclopedia, while balancing the encyclopedic needs for accuracy, verifiability, grammar, etc. If a topic ban is the necessary to achieve that, than so be it. Right now Inland Empire (California) is protected, any content specific issues should be brought up there, and any edit warring should be stopped for now. -Optigan13 (talk) 10:34, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

I'll voluntarily limit myself to 1r regarding House, but I'm not the only editor this guy gets into fights with. Ameriquedialectics 00:41, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
yea other people like you, unwilling to look at the talk page. Now is there other options? I mean I dont want an even worse record (will it appear? I will voluntarily do it). Amerique and other people always bring it up and judge me because of my past, people change as I have been trying to for the past year. Amerique has always edit warred with me should he get a restriction too? All I want is for us to work together and if we dont agree, lets solve it. Like I did yesterday, I added region, because thats what Amerique and the other guy wanted, then he reverts me again, whats that about? They also reverted a better metro pic, which amerique later noticed. Now thats me trying to solve the problem, but the other party has to be willing to listen a mabey give something up, as so should I. Now as for my speling i will type slower and check my spelling, something I have never done here on wiki. House1090 (talk) 00:54, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
My apologies for being late to the discussion. I think the proposal of a single revert is appropriate, and possibly asking House to voluntarily discuss Inland Empire related edits on the article talk page first so a topic ban would not be necessary. House and I had a very civil discussion on the talk page of Talk:California State University, San Bernardino Palm Desert Campus that shows that process works well and can be positive. He has made some worthwhile edits to improve articles, but his zeal for the San Bernardino area often makes his edits too IE-centric for an international encyclopedia. Discussing Inland Empire edits on the talk page first and expanding into areas that are not related to the area, as well as learning about how to cite sources, can be positive for House and for the project. And House, if all the spelling and punctuation errors are just because of fast typing, please SLOW DOWN and proofread your work. It’s not fair to other editors to spend their time copy editing your edits. Remember, there’s no deadline on an encyclopedia. Just my thoughts . . Alanraywiki (talk) 04:32, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks Alanraywiki, I will slow down on the typing and if I dont know how to spell a word I will use a spelling check system to correct my spelling and grammer. As for how to cite sources, well I am just really learning how to so I apologize for a lot of my unsourced work, I try to go back and add the source but sometimes I forget. And I would like to thank-you for reading the talkpages, I put a lot of my thoughts there and I go over my work there as well. House1090 (talk) 05:08, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

House1090 stated that I supported a name change for the Inland Empire (California) article, but that is not accurate. I have argued that the article should not be renamed. I would not oppose creating a new article named Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario Metropolitan Statistical Area (RSO MSA), but if that was done, I would expect the two articles to have very different content for the reason stated here. MissionInn.Jim (talk) 16:48, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Idid not understand you correctly, my apology. See IE talk Page. House1090 (talk) 19:17, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Formalizing terms of arrangement

Just to make sure everyone is on the same page here before I mark this as resolved. How does the following sound

  1. User:House1090 voluntarily agrees to limit himself a one revert rule on articles related to the Inland Empire, and all other California articles, in article space and all namespaces (Portal, Wikipedia (WikiProjects), etc.)
    1. After reverting, House1090 will post to the talk page of the related page to discuss the issue.
    2. If House1090 feels the that his concerns aren't being addressed to leave a note here(WT:CAL) requesting additional opinions, while still keeping all discussion on the relevant article talk page.
    3. If all previous steps fail, then continue on the normal Wikipedia:Dispute Resolution procedure.
  2. User:Amerique in the spirit of cooperation agrees to similarly limit himself to one revert in all disputes involving User:House1090
  3. In approximately three months time (March/April) we can revisit this to see if any extensions or modifications are needed, or to extend the agreement.

Any questions, comments? -Optigan13 (talk) 08:48, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Killiondude (talk) 08:55, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Fine with me. Been busy elsewhere, but will return when I have a chance. Thanks, Ameriquedialectics 00:42, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
I guess. House1090 (talk) 01:18, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

A way to increase exposure of the LA and SF task forces

I found that one can manipulate the WPBox to link to specific task forces. So...
{{WPbox|California/Los_Angeles_task_force|image=Flag_of_Los_Angeles,_California.svg}} for Los Angeles<br> {{WPbox|California/San_Francisco Bay Area task force|image=SF From Marin Highlands3.jpg}} for the San Francisco Bay area<br><br> We could post these in the "See Also," "Further Reading," and/or "External links" sections of articles related to these cities to people will know that these task forces exist. These links directly link to the task forces.

How does that sound? WhisperToMe (talk) 19:24, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Fine by me. Purplebackpack89 (talk) 19:37, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
I'm also trying to figure out how to put more than one WikiProject in a box (like how multiple portals can be listed by Template portalbox. WhisperToMe (talk) 22:00, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Perhaps {{WPBS}} is what you're looking for. --Stepheng3 (talk) 00:34, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
I think the banner shell is intended for the talk page. I need one that lists multiple Wikiprojects in the article space. WPbox is there to list one Wikiproject in the article space. WhisperToMe (talk) 02:06, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
What about the Inland Empire (IE)? House1090 (talk) 05:37, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, we can do that one too - all we need to do is mess with the parameters so it links to Inland Empire. WhisperToMe (talk) 05:43, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
I've nominated the template for deletion/discussion, as I feel it creates self-references to wikipedia in article space. -Optigan13 (talk) 23:04, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Also, you might want to create a template for the portal boxes, as there's been an issue in the past with the California portal of with multiple different images being used on pages with no consistency. See Portal talk:California#Portal link images -Optigan13 (talk) 10:05, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Template loop

Wikipedia:WikiProject California/Los Angeles task force/Participants has a template loop. Would someone good with templates please fix the loop? Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 00:31, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Fixed, it was a transclusion of WP:WLA instead of a link. I'll leave a note to the user about linking vs transclusion. -Optigan13 (talk) 22:52, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Environmental issues in California

An Environmental issues in California article is needed. There is stuff in the associated category at Category:Environmental issues in California. See Environmental issues in Florida and Environmental issues in the United States for inspiration. Cheers. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 00:56, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Create Imperial Valley Canal?

I was reading Salton Sea, and it mentions the term Imperial Valley Canal. Is this term redundant with any existing article, or should a new article be created? MatthewVanitas (talk) 09:19, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Not sure, after looking at some of the material there appears to a bit of inconsistency in the dating of the material. Or I might be misreading some of it right now. Modern news stories referring to an Imperial Valley canal appear to be referring to the All-American Canal, which wasn't built until the 1930s. I'll ping User:Shannon1 since they've been working on a lot of rivers and dams in California material and will probably help shed some light on this. Have you had any chance to look at non-wiki sources? -Optigan13 (talk) 09:55, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
No, the Imperial Valley Canal is separate from All-American Canal. The Imperial Valley Canal was a lot older and was built along the U.S. Mexico border in the 1900's, to supply water for both California and Mexico parts of the Imperial Valley, I think. It still exists. The All American Canal was built later to supply water for irrigators north of the Salton Sea. It's also different from the proposed "sea-level canal" from the Gulf of California. I think the Imperial Valley Canal was also responsible for creating the Salton Sea, since it was the canal through which the Colorado River's floodwaters broke and flooded the Salton Sink. Hope this clears things up. Shannontalk contribs 17:37, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
I understood the difference between the two, but as Salton Sea is the only article that links to that page I was wondering if there was another name or article being used. Also are there any sources that you would suggest to start off with? -Optigan13 (talk) 23:44, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
Well, it’s also called the Imperial Canal or Alamo Canal, or simply Alamo [12]. I think Alamo Canal is actually the real name of the canal. [13] The Imperial Valley Canal or Alamo Canal originally provided water for both countries. [14] The All American Canal was built to replace the Alamo Canal but provided water for the U.S. only, hence the name. I think the Alamo Canal is used by Mexico only now. It might be useful to add that the canal’s name led to the naming of the Alamo River, because that river was the first one of the two rivers formed when the Colorado River broke through the canal in 1905. I can’t find much information about the canal though; maybe because it’s rarely used now. Shannontalk contribs 21:47, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Another useful link here. Shannontalk contribs 21:50, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

I say create it. You may also want to research George Chaffey, who designed said canal. I believe the original canal filled with silt or flooded before the All American Canal was built.

Just created the Alamo Canal article. From reading various references it seems to be also very well known as the Imperial Canal. Weedwhacker128 (talk) 00:37, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Cannabis in California

With all the recent local, national, and international news surrounding the attempts to legalize marijuana in California, now is the perfect time to expand the Cannabis in California article. Practically a stub, the article needs to be expanded greatly to include usage statistics, the history of decriminalization and the medical marijuana program, the current legalization effort, etc. A good example of a similar article is Cannabis in Oregon, which is a Good article. WikiProject California members are encouraged to join WikiProject Cannabis members with improving this article, as it is currently the latter's collaboration. Thanks! --Another Believer (Talk) 22:17, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Faults-No Geology

There is no high level article describing all the faults (41+) in California. Worse, there is no "Geology of California." Even worse, Geography of California does not have a organized Geology subsection, just little snippets here and there.Student7 (talk) 23:48, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Project sub-page cleanup, several tagged for deletion

I'm going through and tagging several project sub-pages for deletion, either as a deprecated template, or for an MFD. If someone wants to use one of the pages feel free to remove the deprecated tag or voice opposition at the MFD. Most of these are unused or redundant and not being updated, or if they are, someone posts there a notice there which no one sees (See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California/Open tasks for an example). Many of these are from when there were several various projects spread out, hence some of the names. There's might be some more that don't have any historical value, but these seem the most obvious to me. -Optigan13 (talk) 01:38, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Deprecated
MFD

Merge proposal

There is a merge proposal involving Brea-Olinda, Brea, California, Olinda, Orange County, California, and Brea, California, all of which are pages in this taskforce. For information, go here Purplebackpack89 (Notes Taken) (Locker) 00:03, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

WP 1.0 bot announcement

This message is being sent to each WikiProject that participates in the WP 1.0 assessment system. On Saturday, January 23, 2010, the WP 1.0 bot will be upgraded. Your project does not need to take any action, but the appearance of your project's summary table will change. The upgrade will make many new, optional features available to all WikiProjects. Additional information is available at the WP 1.0 project homepage. — Carl (CBM · talk) 03:04, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

GA reassessment of Kevin Spacey

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns with the article which you can see at Talk:Kevin Spacey/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:19, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

looking for 2nd opinion on Area code 415

A peculiar unsourced paragraph has been added four times to Area code 415 and removed three times. I'd be grateful if a few people from this project would either confirm the facts or help revert the additions. --Stepheng3 (talk) 18:12, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

It's been reverted(diff), but I agree that the edit was just vandalism. -Optigan13 (talk) 00:23, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Cities vs Regions in Portal:Southern California/Cities/Top

I am suggesting that Portal:Southern California/Cities be changed to my older version because:

  1. I (dont know about other users) could not even read the things he had w/his poor pictures, they blocked the words! I changed them to "thumbs")
  2. I added the metro because they summarize the regions where the cities are, so why cant we have that? I relates to the cities, its not like I'm puting types of cars in the section, where that has nothing to do with cities in SoCal. Someone reading about the cities in SoCal might want to know SoCals largest metropolitan areas, where which city is located in the mega-region we call Southern California.
  3. Why did he have three cities w/a lot of information and the rest with none? Some metro are anchored by two cities not just one. For exampe the Inland Empire, Riverside and San Bernardino are equally as important to one another, the IE centers around both cities not just Riverside, the IE article says so it self.
  4. To me the pictures look better as thumbs rather than having them being posted there. Now if you though the pictures were to small, we can make them bigger correct?

My versions are here :

Socal LA's version is the current one. House1090 (talk) 21:22, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Searchtool-80%.png Your recent Third Opinion request has been removed from the list of active disputes:
Reason: A Third Opinion is not available for disputes involving more than two editors. (If three or more editors are involved, a third opinion has ipso facto already been given.) According to the discussion of this matter at Portal_talk:Southern_California/Cities, editors House1090, SoCal L.A., and Amerique are already involved (as is Optigan13, but only procedurally), with Amerique having already given a third opinion on the matter, saying that s/he prefers SoCal L.A.'s version of the page. If the dispute continues, you might want to consider moving on to an RfC or some other form of dispute resolution. —TRANSPORTERMAN (TALK) 14:43, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Northern Red-legged Frog GA Sweeps: On Hold

I have reviewed Northern Red-legged Frog for GA Sweeps to determine if it still qualifies as a Good Article. In reviewing the article I have found several issues, which I have detailed here. Since the article falls under the scope of this project, I figured you would be interested in contributing to further improve the article. Please comment there to help the article maintain its GA status. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talkcontrib) 04:21, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Imperial Valley task force

I propose that we create an Imperial Valley task force that would cover the...

...and everything in between. I feel that most articles relating to those articles are in a mess and can use a dedicated task force to help clean up and improve, even make longer, those articles. Work on creating the task force has already begun and can be found here - See:Imperial Valley task force. SoCal L.A. (talk) 02:53, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Please wait until others indicate interest before creating a task force subpage. Is there any particular reason you feel that the main project or the Southern California task force wouldn't suffice? I'm worried this would spread our limited number of participants across several pages and increase the bureaucratic overhead required before people have time to actually work on the articles. If enough people express interest I can set everything up, but right now I'm not seeing the need. -Optigan13 (talk) 03:37, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
In response to your question i feel that the Imperial Valley gets ignored and overshadowed by San Diego and Los Angeles and there plethora of categories and subjects. While Imperial Valley's categories, topics, and pages are a lack there of. SoCal L.A. (talk) 23:06, 29 January 2010 (UTC)


I would say no because we could just make a San Diego/South Border Task force that would cove the whole South Border. I also feel too many taskforce's would just make the SOCAL

task force useless. Then we would just have to make SoCal a project. House1090 (talk) 23:25, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

True but as i stated before work in the task force would be centered on fixing SD pages since it is larger and has more importance in the world. Wouldn't having task forces dedicated to one region be better since they could focus there efforts on them? It wouldn't matter if we could just start fixing them up though. SoCal L.A. (talk) 16:34, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

I say if you can get five people to sign on to it, do it Purplebackpack89 (Notes Taken) (Locker) 16:41, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Los Angeles Metropolitan Area

Please see:Talk:Los Angeles Metropolitan Area. SoCal L.A. (talk) 01:32, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Its already in wiki's 3O, but you may still take a look. House1090 (talk) 01:48, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Landmarks question

Resolved
Casa de Machado y Stewart. Not a California Historical Landmark in its own right, although it is in Old Town San Diego State Historic Park.

I'm hoping someone can help in sorting out or clarifying what seems to me to be an odd relationship in the category hierarchy. Category:California adobes is a subcategory of Category:California Historical Landmarks. There is no main article corresponding to Category:California adobes. Are a particular set of landmark buildings officially designated "California adobes"? If not, the hierarchy seems problematic here, because a building can be made of adobe, and in California, without necessarily being an official California Historical Landmark.

I can't ask the person who created Category:California adobes, because he's been perma-blocked for unrelated reasons.

My guess is that Category:California adobes should be renamed something like Category:California Historical Landmarks - adobe buildings, but perhaps that is not what is going on here.

(For what it's worth, I noticed this because Commons' hierarchy follows en-wiki's in this area, and I was trying to categorize a photo of an old adobe house in San Diego that lacks the status of a California Historical Landmark.) - Jmabel | Talk 03:06, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

I agree with you on this. Adobe buildings are made today that aren't necessarily historic. Another suggestion is to leave the Category:California adobes and then add the sub category Category:Historic adobes with the parent categories of Category:California adobes and Category:California Historical Landmarks, since Categories should have at least two parent categories as stated by wiki. SoCal L.A. (talk) 03:34, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
I don't see any reason for Category:California adobes to have a relationship with Category:California Historical Landmarks. I suggest categorizing the adobes that are CHLs as CHLs and reparenting Category:California adobes under Category:Buildings and structures in California.
I'm also unaware of any requirement for categories to have at least two parents, so I wouldn't worry about that aspect of the change. --Stepheng3 (talk) 04:28, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Stepheng3's proposal would be fine with me. If no one objects in the next day or two, and if no one simply does this before me, I will make this change. - Jmabel | Talk 19:59, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
DONE. Interestingly, only about half of these were California Historical Landmarks. I've done my best to put Category:California Historical Landmarks on precisely those that are, but someone might want to check my work. - Jmabel | Talk 17:47, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Santa Ana River

...is languishing at WP:GAN...surely some california local can review it for GA status? Casliber (talk · contribs) 11:17, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I am willing to review the article, but it would probably take me a while, since I haven't yet performed a GA review, and I tend to be somewhat meticulous when I review things. I'm thinking it could take me around a month to get through the whole article in my spare time. Let me know if you would like me to review it. MissionInn.Jim (talk) 00:17, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks Jim, I would review it myself but I supplied some references before User:Shannon1 started working on it so I might be viewed as non-impartial. Ameriquedialectics 00:57, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
It looks like someone is already reviewing the article. I'll watch how they do it so I can learn and possibly review something in the future. MissionInn.Jim (talk) 19:15, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Merge Los Angeles and i.e. task forces.

I propose that we merge the two task forces to form the Greater Los Angeles Area task force (GLAA task force), so that it would also cover Ventura County. By merging into the GLAA it would be more akin to the SFBA task force and could work just as well. I also suggest getting rid of the Santa Barbara county task force which would be covered in, the then active, Southern California Task force as would Imperial and San Diego Counties. I have seen the light in that task forces should be left large since many become inactive once the small scope of the designated force is exhausted. This would also renew activity in the SoCal task force since Imperial and San Diego county related articles are in need of a fix up. SoCal L.A. (talk) 01:03, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

What, no. I still work on it. I made it so the IE can have its own area of focus. The Inand Empire has improved a lot and will continue too with the task force. I would rather have it merge into Southern California taskforce. Please, I am very passionate about this and would not like to see the IE taskforce go into a GLAA taskforce. House1090 (talk) 01:18, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
I am also opposed. The city of Los Angeles needs its own taskforce, just like Chicago and NYC do. Full stop. I have other reasons Purplebackpack89 (Notes Taken) (Locker) 06:48, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Alternatively, we could keep the LA task force and merge the other task forces into the SoCal taskforce. I agree with User:SoCal L.A. on the over-specificity of taskforces. User:Purplebackpack89, why does LA need its own task force? And what other reasons? --TorriTorri(Talk to me!) 10:05, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Most other major cities have their own WikiProjects or taskforces that are titled by the major city. SoCal, SFBA is an awful example, as it's the exception, not the rule--New York, Chicago, Detroit, Philadelphia all have taskforces or WikiProjects that are titled by the city, not the region. You can do whatever you want with the SoCal and IE WikiProjects. My vote remains opposed to elimination of the L.A. taskforce. Purplebackpack89 (Notes Taken) (Locker) 18:03, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
I am also opposed to the elimination of the Los Angeles task force name. WhisperToMe (talk) 12:56, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
I agreed with you Purplebackpack. Los Angeles needs it's own task force like New York, Chicago and other major cities. I prefer Torritorris plan to my own. A merge of the Santa Barbara County Task force and the Riverside-San Bernardino task force (inland empire) into the Southern California task force. I believe Santa Barbara is inactive do to its already exhausted scope. However i have no idea how to merge and we still need to come to a consensus. I am for keeping LA but merging inland empire and Santa Barbara County into the Southern California task force which will renew its activity. SoCal L.A. (talk) 23:50, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm pretty familiar with merging projects and task forces for this project, so if there's some consensus for a change I can handle it. I'm going through the directory of wikiprojects doing cleanup at the moment, but I'll chime in with my two cents here once I have a better idea of what the general activity levels of the California as well as other City/Metro area projects are. -Optigan13 (talk) 23:58, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
I would like to keep the IE taskforce as its the 14th largest metro in the US and it needs some work at least for a while. House1090 (talk) 00:18, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
There are many larger metropolitan areas that don't have task forces, e.g. the Pheonix metroplitan area. SoCal L.A. (talk) 01:21, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
On the Arizona project page I asked if anyone was interested in starting a task force... Now, I asked Michigan the same question in regards to Detroit, and a task force resulted. WhisperToMe (talk) 13:19, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Like I have said before only because Pheonix does not have one it does not mean the IE should not either, besides the IE needs a lot of help of help and through a more direct taskforce it will be able to get that help. House1090 (talk) 02:02, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

task forces should be left large since many become inactive once the small scope of the designated force is exhausted... This would also renew activity in the SoCal task force Are there any other people who disagree with this idea besides house? Again I am in favor for keeping LA but merging inland empire and Santa Barbara County into the Southern California task force which will help to renew its activity. SoCal L.A. (talk) 02:33, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

I believe since the general consensus is to merge we should do just that. SoCal L.A. (talk) 23:33, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Or we can wait to see what other IE editors think. The taskforce is growing, don't stop it. House1090 (talk) 23:41, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
It could grow faster under the SoCal task force and more work would be done since there are more members of it. Please, people, opinions are indeed needed. SoCal L.A. (talk) 23:45, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
I think the IE task force should be merged with the Southern California task force. While there are several editors that edit IE articles, no one except House is using the project much anymore. It has served its purpose and now bringing IE articles to the attention of more editors through this merger will be a good thing. Those interested in IE articles will continue to edit them even without a standalone IE task force. There is somewhat of a consensus for this merger at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California/Inland Empire task force#Taskforce / Subproject? and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California/Inland Empire task force#We gotta merge this. Alanraywiki (talk) 01:10, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

I am somewhat conflicted regarding the matter, but I am more inclined to keep the IE a separate task force. It would allow those who are interested to maintain a more focused effort on the IE. Even though the IE is part of the greater LA area and part of Southern California, I think most people who live in the IE identify more with the IE than LA or So Cal. The reason I am conflicted is because I agree with Alanraywiki that the IE task force is not particularly effective, but I don't believe merging it will make it any more effective. What is needed is a more cooperative spirit. The people in the task force need to work together to achieve common goals rather than each working independently. I don't see how merging will help do that. If the fact that the members of a project or task force are not currently working together, but all work independently, is a reason to eliminate a task force or project, then we would probably want to eliminate most projects and task forces. MissionInn.Jim (talk) 16:14, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Would not been able to say it better my self, thanks MissionInn.Jim. (PS: The Users involved in the task force want it kept, the uninvolved users want it gone.) User:House1090 (talk) 18:10, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Right. I am completely uninvolved in Inland Empire-related articles. On a side note, if anyone didn't click the signature, you should know that Salcan is House. --TorriTorri(Talk to me!) 21:04, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
I did not want to make it seem as if I (House1090) wasn't Salcan, you could see in my signatures page that I have been experimenting. And I never said you were personally were not involved. I will change my name back though. User:House1090 (talk) 23:11, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi TorriTorri; My understanding is a task force (as well as a project) is intended for a group of editors to collaborate on a set of related articles. The task force page is intended to help coordinate and organize the writing and editing of those articles. I have to admit, there doesn't seem to be a lot of collaboration happening within the IE task force, but I'm not convinced there is much collaboration within the So Cal task force either. Would you be more interested in keeping the IE task force separate if the members actually worked more collaboratively rather than independently? For example; I believe it would be worthwhile if the IE task force worked together to accomplish specific goals each month (or some other time period). They might, for example, decide that during the month of February they would make sure all communities within the IE have at least a stub article written, that each of those articles is rated for quality and importance, and each city has an appropriate info box set up. Maybe the following month they would work together to bring a key article, such as the San Bernardino or Riverside article, up to a good article status. What are your thoughts on that? MissionInn.Jim (talk) 23:09, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

I like your idea MissionInn.Jim. But how would we decide what to do per month? House1090 (talk) 23:33, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
One possible way is to rotate each month, between the Task Force members, who chooses that month's goal. The rest of the Task Force would have to agree that it was a reasonable goal to complete within a month. (I'm just thinking out loud here. Before we jump in and do anything though, we should have a discussion with all task force members to see who all wants to participate, or if there are other ideas on how to approach this.) Keep in mind; this could work even if the IE is merged with the So Cal Task Force. If there are enough people interested in just the IE, it would make sense to keep it separate, if there isn't, but a broader group in So Cal is interested, then we might want to merge the two task forces. If we do merge them, then if it was my turn to pick the goal for the month, I would probably pick something related to the IE, and everyone in the So Cal Task Force would focus on that. Someone else might pick something from San Diego or Imperial County, and we would all be expected to work on that goal. As I said before, I lean towards keeping the IE a separate Task Force, but that assumes there is enough interest in working together to improve the IE articles. If only a couple people want to work together, a separate task force really isn't necessary. That holds true for the So Cal task force also. I don't see the point of having any task force, if the members don't work together. MissionInn.Jim (talk) 00:58, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Thats a good idea. I'm for it. House1090 (talk) 01:21, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Merging all sub-SoCal task forces except for LA would, in my opinion, revitalize activity on the WikiProject. As we have it now, the project is too splintered, with little collaboration, having one task force for SoCal would involve more editors and allow knowledge to be shared further. --TorriTorri(Talk to me!) 22:52, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
There is no activity in SoCal right now, I think we can give the IE task force atry and see where it takes us. I have a question: Why not LA TorriTorri? Its also unused. House1090 (talk) 00:24, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
While you guys have great ideas for the task force, those same concepts could be applied to wikiproject Southern California. Los Angeles needs it's own task forces since it is a major city, to be cohesive with New York and other major city task forces, even though it may be "inactive". However the Inland Empire and Santa Barabara task forces should indeed be merged since it would renew productivity in the Southern California task force. Revitalize as Torri put it. The reason the Southern California task force is inactive is because of smaller task forces like the Inland Empire. Then what happens with the creation of an San Diego, Imperial, and Orange county task force? It renders the parent task force useless. Task forces are better off stronger since they can cover a wider (but not to large) scope of things, whos sources can almost never be exhausted. SoCal L.A. (talk) 01:30, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
I think we should give the IE task force a try, see how much we could get done, and if it works keep it, or merge to the SoCal. The IE TF has active potential, so we should give it a chance. I don't know about Santa Barbara. House1090 (talk) 02:03, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

"smaller task forces...renders the parent task force useless. Task forces are better off bigger since they can cover a wider (but not to large) scope of things, whos sources can almost never be exhausted."SoCal L.A. (talk) 02:16, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

The project contributers should decide what happens with this task force. House1090 (talk) 23:34, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
While you may think that, since the IE task force is part of WikiProject California, WP California should decide. Just incase you keep missing my point,"smaller task forces...renders the parent task force useless. Task forces are better off bigger since they can cover a wider (but not to large) scope of things, whos sources can almost never be exhausted." SoCal L.A. (talk) 23:56, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
I understand how a lot of small task forces could dilute a parent task force, but at the same time, if a task force is too big, it could make it difficult to manage, collaborate, and find consensus. I don't know what the right size is though. As I said before, if any particular Task Force isn't working together, then we don't need it. I'm willing to work with either Task Force, if we can get people to work together. What activities has the Inland Empire or the So Cal Task Forces done where their respective members worked together? MissionInn.Jim (talk) 16:50, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

I personally do not care if the IE task force were merged with SoCal's, or not, as neither structure has enough consistently active volunteers to maintain. I find WP:CAL currently has enough volunteers to make posting here worthwhile, as a means of achieving a broad consensus on some issue.

Generally, everyone posting on WP should be interested in working collaboratively, but doing that practically can be like herding cats. We are all volunteers with different skill sets, interests, and real world time commitments... Something as great as the Santa Ana River is currently couldn't have been built by waiting on either the SoCal or IE taskforces, for example, or even this project. Ameriquedialectics 20:05, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

I understand what your saying Jim, but I believe the I.E. taskforce is to small, and will soon exhuast it's scope. Also with a merge, we could cover the I.E. as well as S.D. and Imperial and Ventura counties. SoCal L.A. (talk) 23:53, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
As it currently stands I'm not seeing any consensus for a merger, with straight up vote counting at 2 for, 3 against, and 1 neutral for various reasons. My main intent with merging these various projects together under the California umbrella was to combine a limited number of editors under a clear scope. The issue with the various regional level California task forces is a limited number of participants, as well as an unclear scope with problems of defining the geographic scope before you can even get to maintaining and developing articles. There's not a problem with defining what the boundaries of California are, instead we're hung up on how to split up projects. Personally I think it would be best if we stop trying to split the handful of editors we have here across multiple task forces, so tagging as inactive/historical and just sticking with this page is the way to go at this point. As Amerique mentioned there needs to be enough people on a project talk page to get some kind of clear consensus on an issue. I've been focused on maintenance tasks (responding to project talk page posts, assessing unassessed articles, responding to the Wikipedia:WikiProject California/Article alerts, and general cleanup). For coordinated article development we could set up collaboration at the California project level and/or having a formal project coordinator with elections if people are interested in those things. What does everyone expect to get out of this project(WP:CAL), or from a more specific regional project? After having cleaned up Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory/Geographical/Americas, I see a wildly uneven distribution of activity among similar geographic projects, so I don't feel that we need a project/task force because X project or Y task force exists. -Optigan13 (talk) 00:35, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Well i think we can merge the Santa Barbara task force in the Southern California, after all it appears no one has gone against it's merging. One step at a time ;). SoCal L.A. (talk) 04:05, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

GA reassessment of University of California, Santa Cruz

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found some concerns which you can see at Talk:University of California, Santa Cruz/GA1. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 15:49, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Wall of Recognized content sub-page

Do we want to have a Recognized content page (see Wikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Recognized content)? Let me know and I can set one up. -Optigan13 (talk) 01:05, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

Oxnard State Beach

Could an editor throw an eye to the above article, pretty bad and it appears an editor with a couple of accounts is inserting links to google images and using another wikipedia article as a source. I was going to start a tidy on it, but it would have contained very little after I was done. Maybe someone here is familiar with the place and can add some relevant info. Mo ainm (talk) 17:35, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Because I didn't find Oxnard on the CSP website, I suspect it's technically part of Mandalay State Beach. However the Geographic Names Information System lists both a subdivision U.S. Geological Survey Geographic Names Information System: Oxnard Beach and a park U.S. Geological Survey Geographic Names Information System: Oxnard State Beach. I'll see what else I can find. --Stepheng3 (talk) 17:54, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
This seems to be part of a class (COMM 211) project at CSU Channel Islands. The class producing a string of well intentioned but poorly edited wikipedia pages about the CSUCI area - [18], [19]Emargie (talk) 19:32, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
PS Mutiple students are editing. I wrote to one about including copyrighted material. Response here [20] Emargie (talk) 19:42, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Good work I thought it was a sock on the page, but as the article stands at present there is very little that is of encyclopedic value, more like a tour guide. I don't wan't to virtually blank the page, which is why I brought it up here. Mo ainm (talk) 20:24, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia:School and university projects might be a valuable read and to point the professor/lecturer to. Anyone feel like contacting either Instructor1 or Instructor2? I found the class through the courselistings. In the meantime are the below pages all of the ones we know of that have been edited for this course? -Optigan13 (talk) 23:34, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
  1. Oxnard State Beach new
  2. Thornhill Francis Broome new
  3. John "Jack" Spoor Broome new
  4. Rancho Guadalasca edited
  5. John Spoor Broome Library new
  6. CSUCI Academic Centers new

also

  1. Boys & Girls Clubs of America editedEmargie (talk) 01:05, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Well the Wednesday has come and gone from what I can tell. Has there been any more editing related to this? I'm not seeing anything that jumps out on the User:AlexNewArtBot/CaliforniaSearchResult. I'm just wondering if it is worth doing any follow up with the class on this, or if this was just a one off assignment for just a week, or something long term. Otherwise I'm not sure how to handle this any differently than we would any other articles with issues. -Optigan13 (talk) 05:08, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
These need clean-up
  1. John Spoor Broome Library Archives -merge with John Spoor Broome Library
  2. The Broome Library Archives - delete
  3. The John Spoor Broome Library Archives - delete Emargie (talk) 22:40, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

History of the Yosemite area - Featured article review

I have nominated History of the Yosemite area for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Tpbradbury (talkcontribs) 03:45, March 17, 2010

Photo request: 3rd Street ES, Hancock Park

Who lives in proximity to Hancock Park, Los Angeles? Would anyone mind photographing 3rd Street Elementary School in Hancock Park, Los Angeles? WhisperToMe (talk) 13:08, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced living people articles bot

User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects provides a list, updated daily, of unreferenced living people articles (BLPs) related to your project. There has been a lot of discussion recently about deleting these unreferenced articles, so it is important that these articles are referenced.

The unreferenced articles related to your project can be found at >>>Wikipedia:WikiProject California/Archive 5/Unreferenced BLPs<<<

If you do not want this wikiproject to participate, please add your project name to this list.

Thank you.

Update: Wikipedia:WikiProject California/Archive 5/Unreferenced BLPs has been created. This list, which is updated by User:DASHBot/Wikiprojects daily, will allow your wikiproject to quickly identify unreferenced living person articles.
There maybe no or few articles on this new Unreferenced BLPs page. To increase the overall number of articles in your project with another bot, you can sign up for User:Xenobot_Mk_V#Instructions.
If you have any questions or concerns, visit User talk:DASHBot/Wikiprojects. Okip 01:19, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
Fine with me. I'm curious and look forward to seeing the list. --Stepheng3 (talk) 08:51, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Personally I think this might be one more page no one checks, or is generally impossible to manage. We already have Article alerts and Deletion sorting which catch AFDs and Prods, and all deletions(or banner removals) are caught by Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/California articles by quality log. I'm just not dying to sign up for this because at least personally, I know I'm not going to be interested or able to address these in a timely manner. -Optigan13 (talk) 09:17, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
It looks like there are currently 101 articles on the list. Thank you for your interest in this bot. :) Okip 01:20, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
I've PROD'd a few, sent one to AFD. I was quite interested in this list. I used the popups gadget to go through the whole thing, and clicked on the ones I was actually interested in. I would say that roughly 75% of the articles on that list are politicians (former or current). Killiondude (talk) 07:47, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Nelson Range (California) stub made

I made this because of making the article for an identically-named range in British Columbia\ GNIS doesn't say much other than its highest summit is 7674' and that it's in Inyo County, adn that's it's on the Nelson Range and Jackass Canyon USGS quads.Skookum1 (talk) 22:35, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Notification regarding Wikipedia-Books

Hadronic Matter
An overview
Quark structure proton.svg
An example of a book cover, taken from Book:Hadronic Matter

As detailed in last week's Signpost, WikiProject Wikipedia books is undertaking a cleanup all Wikipedia books. Particularly, the {{saved book}} template has been updated to allow editors to specify the default covers of the books. Title, subtitle, cover-image, and cover-color can all be specified, and an HTML preview of the cover will be generated and shown on the book's page (an example of such a cover is found on the right). Ideally, all books in Category:Book-Class California articles should have covers.

If you need help with the {{saved book}} template, or have any questions about books in general, see Help:Books, Wikipedia:Books, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia-Books, or ask me on my talk page. Also feel free to join WikiProject Wikipedia-Books, as we need all the help we can get.

This message was delivered by User:EarwigBot, at 01:38, 2 April 2010 (UTC), on behalf of Headbomb. Headbomb probably isn't watching this page, so if you want him to reply here, just leave him a message on his talk page. EarwigBot (owner • talk) 01:38, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

I took care of providing a cover for the one Wikipedia book in this project. --Stepheng3 (talk) 05:48, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Los Angeles mayoral election, 2013

This article, which is currently a high priority of the Southern California and Los Angeles task forces has been listed for deletion. Review the issue at its deletion page. Butros (talk) 11:11, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Please do not canvass inappropriately. --TorriTorri(Talk to me!) 17:40, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, new to WikiPolitics. Butros (talk) 19:58, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
No worries. We were all new at one point. :-) Killiondude (talk) 20:29, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Metrolink (Southern California)

Metrolink (Southern California) is being reviewed for Good Article status and only requires a few tweaks to pass. Please check out the review here and improve the article if possible. Thanks! Butros (talk) 11:25, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Ted T. Tanouye

I've done a substantial rewrite of this article and added comprehensive citations of authority. First timer at this and I was inspired by the PBS documentary "Citizen Tanouye". I hope I have done this hero justice. Could someone take a look and see if there is more than I can do? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mdunn30 (talkcontribs) 15:34, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Template:California sports

Most other states have one, so California now does too. It's basically a mashup of the LA sports template and the SFB sports template, plus the Central Valley and Central Coast and updated to reflect franchises that went under. Check it out! Clean it up! Place it on pages! Purplebackpack89 (Notes Taken) (Locker) 22:18, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Portals of Los Angeles and San Diego

User:Jojhutton and I have been in a debate regarding the portal Portal:San Diego.

Jojhutton wants the portal of San Diego to only be applied to the City of San Diego, and he also removed Los Angeles portals (Portal:Los Angeles) from Orange County articles.

I set the scope of the Los Angeles task force to cover Los Angeles and Orange counties, but there is no San Diego task force. Both portals mention suburban cities, and an earlier revision of Portal:Los Angeles mentioned Santa Ana in Orange County [21].

So, should the portals continue covering suburbs? WhisperToMe (talk) 23:39, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

  • The US government categorizes both LA County and Orange County as part of the Los Angeles MSA, which is why I posted the portal in categories related to both counties. WhisperToMe (talk) 15:18, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
  • If you are going to include the flag and seal of the city of Los Angeles, then let it be just about the city. Orange County should definitely be excluded from the Los Angeles portal and instead included under the Southern California portal. Alanraywiki (talk) 14:18, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
  • You can always ask for another photo to be used as the image icon. However, alanray, these portals usually cover the metro areas, not only the city (even though they use the flag and seal of the "dominant city," they are intended to cover the entire metro area). For instance the Houston portal uses the flag of the city, yet it covers the entire metro area. Also, the US government categorizes both LA County and Orange County as part of the Los Angeles MSA, which is why I posted the portal in categories related to both counties. WhisperToMe (talk) 15:18, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
  • The portal does not make it clear that this is for the MSA rather than the city. I was unable to find a policy or guideline that states that geographical portals correspond to MSAs. The current content is very LA-centric, without a mention of Orange County or even the outlying areas of LA County. Orange County is a distinct administrative, economic, and cultural entity from Los Angeles, and just because the OMB lumps OC in with LA County for their purposes does not mean that we need to on Wikipedia. That being said, if we do include Orange County, greater diversity on the portal page will need to be included. I will wait to do that until this issue is resolved, however. Thanks, Alanraywiki (talk) 19:23, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
  • I agree. If the consensus is to cover the entire LA metro area (which I vote it should be) then the portal needs to be rewritten to include information about all of LA and Orange counties. Butros (talk) 20:46, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
  • We can expands the category trees mentioned in the portal to include other parts of LA County and Orange County. Also the "L.A. Districts" part should have additional material related to other cities added. I.E. below L.A. Districts we could add "Other areas/communities" and list Long Beach, Pasadena, Irvine, Santa Ana, Fullerton, etc.
  • "just because the OMB lumps OC in with LA County for their purposes does not mean that we need to on Wikipedia." IMO the definition that the OMB gives for a metro area is the best one that we could use. I don't know of any other fairly simple and logical boundaries
  • WhisperToMe (talk) 21:17, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
  • The use of county boundaries would work. Those boundaries are even more well-defined, simple and logical. Is there a policy that says a geographical portal must be a Metropolitan Statistical Area? Alanraywiki (talk) 21:26, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
The boundaries of Los Angeles county alone and the boundaries of Los Angeles County and Orange county together are equally simple and logical - after all both are groupings counties. While there isn't a policy that says that, for completeness's sake and because the LA task force is still a task force (lack of participation), the portal ought to cover both counties. WhisperToMe (talk) 21:36, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Given that they were altered before a consensus was reached, should we go ahead and reinsert the Portal links on the OC articles which have been reverted? Butros (talk) 20:48, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

I would, personally. The editor who removed the portals did not start a discussion about it. WhisperToMe (talk) 21:17, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
I put the portals back in the Orange County articles, for now. Butros (talk) 22:38, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
Thank you! If you want, I can add the additional categories and references to Long Beach, Santa Ana, Beverly Hills, Irvine, etc. to the Los Angeles portal right now WhisperToMe (talk) 00:01, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
That would be most excellent, good sir! Maybe a slight retooling of the intro paragraph to mention these areas as well? Butros (talk) 00:34, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Well, go ahead if that is the consensus (or is it a consensus of two editors?). At least add a picture of Disneyland, arguably one of the most famous places on the planet, to represent Orange County. Thanks, Alanraywiki (talk) 00:44, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
I did other changes - Lemme add Disneyland too WhisperToMe (talk) 00:45, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
I agree with Jojhutton, who removed the portals. I live in Orange County. We are not Los Angeles. We do not wish to be lumped in with that place. Give us a break. Revert Butros' changes now !!!!! DutchmanInDisguise (talk) 00:50, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi! We are just following what the U.S. OMB classifies as metropolitan areas. In most places suburban areas are in the same WikiProjects as the main city. For instance Wikipedia:WikiProject Michigan/Detroit covers the city and the suburbs. Same with Chicago, Houston, and many other projects. The Los Angeles project needs Orange County because the LA project has had little activity and was demoted to a task force. The project needs to cover all of its metropolitan area. WhisperToMe (talk) 00:53, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Weak keep them in: I could go either way on this. I can perfectly understand Irvine and Mission Viejo not being mentioned in the LA portal--they are far away from Los Angeles ideologically and geographically. I could see keeping OC in the portal, but maybe sectioning it off to make it clear what's OC and what's LAC Purplebackpack89 (Notes Taken) (Locker) 01:45, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

You do realize Irvine and Mission Viejo are in Orange County? --TorriTorri(Talk to me!) 01:57, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
You did realize that I was weighing both sides of the issue? ;-D Purplebackpack89 (Notes Taken) (Locker) 07:03, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

I'd like to point out that consensus has not been reached one way or the other. There has been NO reasonable explanation as to why we are using OMB designations to supersede county designations. Also, keep in mind that portals are not the same thing as task forces, they are completely different things.This is the LA portal. This is the LA task force. --TorriTorri(Talk to me!) 01:59, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

The portal is a component of the task force. The portal has a link to the said task force, and the portal is tagged as being in the scope to the said task force. It does not make sense to give the portal a different scope than the task force, unless the same task force would have multiple portals. Also regarding "There has been NO reasonable explanation as to why we are using OMB designations to supersede county designations" - on Wikipedia usually the portals use the OMB definitions, not only the county that the largest city is located in. The OMB is the best way to judge the extent of a metropolitan area, and using the OMB metropolitan area definition provides a holistic and complete coverage of the major city and its surrounding suburbs. That is a reasonable explanation in and of itself. WhisperToMe (talk) 02:03, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
BTW, in regards to the San Diego portal, the OMB definition of the San Diego area consists only of San Diego County. WhisperToMe (talk) 02:03, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Check out other cities' portals at Portal:United States (Related portals section). Virtually all of them define themselves by or make reference to their designated metropolitan areas. Butros (talk) 02:19, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
On second thought, why not just create a OC Portal? --TorriTorri(Talk to me!) 02:33, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think any other portals on WP split up OMB-designated areas, aye? Butros (talk) 02:37, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
The only portals that I know of that do not stick to the OMB definitions cover only the city limits - in those cases, they are New York City and Washington DC. New York City is especially large for a single city (8 million people, about) - And DC covers the special federal district. Everybody else uses the OMB or, in the case of San Francisco, a grouping of several OMB areas (minus Santa Cruz County). WhisperToMe (talk) 03:15, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Unless there is a policy preventing it, why not be the first to base portals on counties? They are very distinct and OC hasn't been a suburb of LA in years. Alanraywiki (talk) 02:46, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
"The idea of a portal is to help readers and/or editors navigate their way through Wikipedia topic areas through pages similar to the Main Page." I would argue that having the LA portal cover both LA and Orange County would overwhelm and confuse readers with too much information, while breaking the portal in two would be clearer. --TorriTorri(Talk to me!) 03:02, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
I disagree with this. Take Disneyland as an example. Most users and editors lump Disneyland in as being part of LA. It would be more confusing to have to navigate to an Orange County page when many users associate Orange County articles with the "LA Area." Additionally, if we are going to set a precedent here, there should be some solid reasoning behind it. As of now, the OMB's LA metro area designation is the most powerful argument we have, as every other city portal follows this guideline. Butros (talk) 03:08, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
Couldn't the same argument be made for San Diego and the Inland Empire though? --TorriTorri(Talk to me!) 03:46, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
I don't know about San Diego (does anyone think the Chargers are an LA football team?), but I think an argument could be made for the IE. My main concern here is this: For us who are knowledgeable about Southern California, splitting up the LA metro area into its respective smaller areas may make sense, but would probably confuse the average Wiki reader. If I may point out your own comments on the LA/IE merge earlier, TorriTorri: "As we have it now, the project is too splintered, with little collaboration." Further splintering of the Portal and thus the efforts of the LA task force would only lead to diminished quality. Butros (talk) 03:56, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
I suppose that makes sense, but then the LA Portal should be rewritten (and preferably, retitled) to focus on the LA area. The main article should be Los Angeles metropolitan area. --TorriTorri(Talk to me!) 04:22, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
This sounds like a very reasonable solution. Shall we have consensus now, my fellow Wikipedians? Butros (talk) 05:59, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
The portal for Detroit is titled "Metro Detroit" - So it would be fine to use "Metro Los Angeles" or a similar name as the name of the portal. WhisperToMe (talk) 13:14, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

(outdent)I would support a renamed portal. I think "Greater Los Angeles" sounds broader than "Metro Los Angeles" (which again sounds focused on the city) and is more commonly used, but I would support either. But lose the city flag and replace it with an image more applicable to the entire area (palm trees or something). The other side of the Orange Curtain really has nothing to do with LA so the flag is irrelevant. And by the way, I think this has been a good discussion. Alanraywiki (talk) 13:37, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Greater LA. Metro LA could be confused with Los Angeles's mass transit system. --TorriTorri(Talk to me!) 02:44, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
Whatever everyone decides, I'd recommend creating something along the lines of {{Greater LA Portal}}, {{LA Portal}}, or some other template similar to {{California portal}}, which makes for easier standardization and updating of the various portal links. Also I'd recommend similar templates for the other portals. By the way, have they been updated regularly, or do they have a good number of pages in rotations for each of the boxes? -Optigan13 (talk) 04:54, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
It seems we have reached a consensus on the "Greater Los Angeles" name. Can we go ahead and make the necesarry changes, and reinsert the portal where it has been removed? Butros (talk) 21:11, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
I am fine with the proposed changes. :) WhisperToMe (talk) 01:52, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
As a final issue, Jojhutton has again taken out the LA Portals on all OC pages (he seems uninterested in our discussion of scope) and has replaced them with the SoCal portal. Should we replace the SoCal portals with the new Greater LA portal, or include them side by side? Butros (talk) 11:11, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
I don't see anything wrong with having both. --TorriTorri(Talk to me!) 17:00, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
I went ahead and reinserted the portal links in the OC pages alongside the SoCal portal. Butros (talk) 04:40, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I've gone ahead and moved all the LA portal pages to Portal:Greater Los Angeles. --TorriTorri(Talk to me!) 06:54, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

I've also opened a discussion at the LA portal's talk page on what the appropriate image for a portal link template (a la {{California portal}}) should be. --TorriTorri(Talk to me!) 07:09, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
I noticed this little curffuffle over the portal links. I don't see any problem providing a link to a Greater Los Angeles Portal on an Orange County site. The old link to the Los Angeles portal was just wrong IMHO. However the current link image still says Los Angeles Portal and it seems link that might be changed as part of all this.
But even if the name of the article has been changed, the content of the article still sounds like it's about Los Angeles and not Greater Los Angeles. The first thing that the opening paragraph should describe is what the Greater Los Anageles is. Right now it starts off by telling the reader what Los Angeles is. Why wouldn't a user go to the Los Angeles article for that information?
And lastly, a small complaint: sticking those link images on the right of the "See also" sections is ugly and some number of readers just don't notice them on the right. I realize that some in the Wikipedia world like them over there, but there are now methods for placing the wikimedia and wikispecies links on the left and it seems like that usage might be gaining in popularity. --Davefoc (talk) 07:21, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
Each of the portal links have to be manually changed to "Greater Los Angeles" from "Los Angeles" - Now Portal:Los Angeles redirects to "Portal:Greater Los Angeles" WhisperToMe (talk) 23:01, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

As for the San Diego portal, would I have the consensus to ensure that all San Diego County articles receive the portal? WhisperToMe (talk) 23:01, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Aye Said proposal is endorsed. Butros (talk) 00:05, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
I support this proposal as well. --TorriTorri(Talk to me!) 23:29, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
Oppose. There is plenty wiggle room here if the portal was less city-centric, and more broad, but both portals aren't even close.--Jojhutton (talk) 02:02, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
You are welcome to rewrite the portal and post a draft of it on your talk page. However as I explained on your talk page, it is understandable when a metro area portal/project is city-centric, as that is how metro areas naturally work. WhisperToMe (talk) 10:34, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Renaming discussion

It has been proposed to drop the California from the titles of Los Angeles neighborhoods, such as Angelino Heights, Los Angeles, California, similar to ways it is done in Chicago and Brooklyn. Your comments are welcome Purplebackpack89 (Notes Taken) (Locker) 05:35, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Been proposed where? Killiondude (talk) 05:40, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
Talk:Angelino Heights, Los Angeles, California...which is the first neighborhood alphabetically, I believe; as well as the most historic. Purplebackpack89 (Notes Taken) (Locker) 05:42, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
I see. I hadn't seen view the talk page of that article, just the content page (before I asked). I was just curious where the discussion was. Killiondude (talk) 05:53, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

More places it's proposed now

Purplebackpack89 (Notes Taken) (Trails blazed) 23:52, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Meetup California

Hello, I will move to Placentia in few months and wanted to make some new contacts to Wikipedians from my new living-location. Sadly I see that Wikipedia:Meetup/LA is inactive. What can I do? Kind regards --Juliana da Costa José (talk) 00:50, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't know of many meet and greets, especially down south. I myself am located in the San Francisco Bay Area. Your name was intriguing, and I checked your userpage to try to discover: how many languages do you speak, if I may ask? Best of luck to you. -- Alvincura (talk) 01:11, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
Hello Alvincura, I speak english, german, hungarian and i can read and understand latin-based languages :). It is a pity if there would no Wikipedians in my region. Hope it will be better. Best regards --Juliana da Costa José (talk) 01:37, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
I am sorry you aren't having better luck finding Wikipedians in your area. If you ever find yourself coming up north, you may have better luck. Do you speak Spanish or Portuguese? Cheers -- Alvincura (talk) 01:49, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
It is hard to believe that in whole Orange County are no Wikipedians, but I think I will visit the north and go to a meetup there, if there are some :). I do not speak Spanish or Portuguese, but want to learn it :). BR --Juliana da Costa José (talk) 02:07, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
See Category:Wikipedians in Orange County, California. --Stepheng3 (talk) 02:50, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
You could be bold and send out a message to those people in the category above, asking them if they'd like to have a meetup. It's not really something officially handled or anything, so you could initiate everything. I'm sure there'd be at least some people from the Orange County / Los Angeles area who would like to meet. :-) Killiondude (talk) 21:15, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons update

The WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons (UBLPs) aims to reduce the number of unreferenced biographical articles to under 30,000 by June 1, primarily by enabling WikiProjects to easily identify UBLP articles in their project's scope. There were over 52,000 unreferenced BLPs in January 2010 and this has been reduced to 32,665 as of May 16. A bot is now running daily to compile a list of all articles that are in both Category:All unreferenced BLPs and have been tagged by a WikiProject. Note that the bot does NOT place unreferenced tags or assign articles to projects - this has been done by others previously - it just compiles a list.

Your Project's list can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject California/Unreferenced BLPs. As of May 17 you have approximately 70 articles to be referenced, a 5.4% reduction from last week. The list of all other WikiProject UBLPs can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons/WikiProjects.

Your assistance in reviewing and referencing these articles is greatly appreciated. If you have any questions, please don't hestitate to ask either at WT:URBLP or at my talk page. Thanks, The-Pope (talk) 18:04, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Southern California "watershed" map

Anyone have opinions on whether this map i made could be appropriate for some Southern California-related article? Thanks, Shannontalk contribs 03:34, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

It's a nice map. California Aqueduct springs to mind. Maybe California State Water Project also. --Stepheng3 (talk) 05:19, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Solar Energy Generating Systems

Hello. Could someone have a look at Talk:Solar Energy Generating Systems#Coordinates and see if you could help in finding the coordinates? Please reply there. Thanks. Kind regards. Rehman(+) 02:50, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:California sports

Ambox warning pn.svgTemplate:California sports, a template tagged for this project, has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Purplebackpack89 16:06, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

History of the Yosemite area now at FARC

History of the Yosemite area is now an urgent FARC. The last remaining issue is prose. Please help by reading the article to find prose issues that need to be fixed. You can fix them directly or list them on the FARC page linked above. If the article already reads well, then please say so on the FARC page. Thank you. :) --mav (reviews needed) 03:28, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Relevant AFD discussion, California politician

Relevant AFD discussion, on a California lawyer and politician. Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kenneth Dickson (2nd nomination). Thank you for your time. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 12:06, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Portal

Note that {{California portal}} has now been replaced by {{portal|California}}. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 19:33, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Is the East Bay Green Corridor notable?

I can't find a WP article about the East Bay Green Corridor, although it is mentioned on the article for Oakland Mayor Ron Dellums. I thought I would try to write up an article (my first!) but wanted to make sure it was a good topic before spending too much time on it. The EBGR has gotten extensive local press coverage (http://articles.sfgate.com/2009-06-27/business/17210690_1_uc-berkeley-green-industry-green-careers, http://eastbay.bizjournals.com/eastbay/stories/2008/03/10/editorial2.html, http://oaklandlocal.com/article/east-bay-green-corridor-partnership-aims-lure-green-start-ups - a few examples among dozens of others), but I could only find one passing reference to it in the national press (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/21/us/21sfpolitics.html). Locally, it is an important initative, but is it WP:N? I am not trying to promote it; I have no affiliation with EBGR, other than as an interested local resident. I just want to contribute my first article to WP, and this initiative is something I have followed closely in the news. I would be sure to also include some WP:NPOV criticism of the project (such as http://www.berkeleydailyplanet.com/issue/2007-12-11/article/28674?headline=East-Bay-Green-Corridor-Industrial-Berkeley-s-Salvation-or-Road-to-Ruin-&status=301). Advice? Thanks for helping a n00b out! Tarastar42 (talk) 20:05, 17 June 2010 (UTC)tarastar42

I hadn't heard about this, but if it's been mentioned on SFGate and in the New York Times, I'd say it's notable. --Stepheng3 (talk) 23:56, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Adding Hmong to Commons uploads

For those of you uploading things to Commons, such as images (especially regarding the central Valley, with its Hmong population), if you wish to attach Hmong translations, use the template {{hmn|}} And put the Hmong text inside. WhisperToMe (talk) 04:40, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

Need one image and a half dozen addresses.

List of United States federal courthouses in California is complete but for one image, a half dozen addresses, and some dates of use. bd2412 T 19:11, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Portal:San Diego County

I just renamed Portal:San Diego to Portal:San Diego County

Portal icon San Diego County portal

needs a picture.

I plan to begin adding this portal to every San Diego County-related article and to convert {{Portal|San Diego}} to {{Portal|San Diego County}}. The scope of this portal is San Diego County in its entirety.

WhisperToMe (talk) 21:50, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

  • If I get a consensus or if I get no objections in 7 days from the timestamp on this post, I will begin adding the portals again, and it will be understood that any reverts from editors who are aware of this discussion will go against consensus and be considered disruptive and in bad faith. I say this because there are users who have edit warred even after others agreed to set scope of certain portals. WhisperToMe (talk) 03:52, 24 July 2010 (UTC)


  • To all who read this message. Please be aware that the information in the portal does not reflect the information in the articles in which WhisperToMe has been trying to add them. Also be aware that WhisperToMe has refused to rewrite the portal, only telling me that I should do it, yet he is the one who wants to add the misinformation, so it must be the responsibility of the editor who wishes to add information to any article (that includes portals), to make sure that the information is correct. Also be aware that simply renaming the portal and changing the first sentence is not gonna do it. Its like painting your cat yellow and calling it a taxi cab. It just doesn't change the fact that its still a cat. This also goes for other portals such as the ones for Los Angeles, Houston, and New Orleans (and there may be others), which are also incorrectly added added to articles that are not in the geographic areas that cover the portals. It didn't surprise me that the editor who added all of those city portals to areas outside their cities was WhisperToMe. Now to be clear, I'm not anti-portal, just anti-portal in the wrongs articles. Perhaps a good look at th eportal that is included in many of the San Fransisco bay articles would help us see what a properly written and linked portal should look like. I added a few portals to show the differences. Thanks.--Jojhutton (talk) 04:26, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Portal icon San Francisco Bay Area portal
Portal icon Arizona portal
Portal icon San Diego portal
Portal icon Los Angeles portal
Portal icon Houston portal
    • Jojhutton: When you say rewrite the portal you mean actually taking the text inside the portal and changing it, not renaming the portal or changing the portal's icon. The San Diego portal was already renamed to "San Diego County" so it can cover the scope, and there is no assigned icon for the portal yet. To be honest I don't know how to set an icon for the portal. WhisperToMe (talk) 04:36, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
Portal icon San Diego County portal

WhisperToMe (talk) 04:46, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

        • Hmm... I'm having some trouble to get the image to display... WhisperToMe (talk) 04:52, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
          • Okay, now we are cooking with gas. WhisperToMe (talk) 05:10, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
            • Jojhutton, thank you for rewriting the portal! WhisperToMe (talk) 02:02, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Help

I could use some help here Talk:Cedar Lake (California), if anybody can> Mlpearc powwow 17:16, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

I think I've fixed it. I'd appreciate further feedback at the AfD page. --Stepheng3 (talk) 19:55, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
I want to thank you very much. Stepheng3. What a wonderful job. I feel so bad, after yelling "HELP". This was my last edit to Cedar Lake[23]. Four hrs. after that edit I was in the hospital getting prepared for an emergency appendectomy. I was just released from the hospital yesterday. All went well and I am fine. But I still have praise for you and everyone that participated in the AfD. My wife set up my laptop when I got settled in and my browser opens to the last page it was on when shut down. It was Cedar Lake. After I signed in I had a message waiting for me at my talk page, so I went there first, when I came back to cedar lake the first thing I noticed it wasn't flagged for deletion :). Very nice work you are a first class Wikipedian, and again Thank You Very Much. Mlpearc powwow 20:46, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Montgomery Street

Anyone with sources to support this long-established article might like to go over there and defend it from the editor who wants to delete all unreferenced material from it! PamD (talk) 08:15, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

More good work by Stepheng3.Emargie (talk) 18:07, 31 July 2010 (UTC)
Given that the article was entirely sourceless until today, deleting all the unreferenced material wouldn't have left much! One or two more cites and we can remove the {{Refimprove}} template... --Stepheng3 (talk) 19:40, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Relevant AFD discussion page

AFD discussion is at, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Church of Scientology editing on Wikipedia. Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 13:21, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
The article in question is not within the scope of this project. --Stepheng3 (talk) 16:43, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
The article itself doesn't have to do with the California project.
As for the subject, while it is not entirely in the scope of the project, keep in mind that Scientology's headquarters do reside in the state of California, and Scientology has many facilities within Los Angeles, so a significant number of California articles have to do with Scientology.
WhisperToMe (talk) 08:45, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Hmong Wikipedia proposal

I'm trying to see if a Hmong Wikipedia could be started. Many Hmong settled in central California, so this topic may be of interest to this Wikiproject.

The proposal is at:

WhisperToMe (talk) 07:35, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

California articles have been selected for the Wikipedia 0.8 release

Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.

We would like to ask you to review the California articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.

We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!

For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 22:09, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Environment of California

Environment of California needs work. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 00:14, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Do you plan on working on it? Cullen328 (talk) 03:58, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
@Alan: Thank you for your suggestion regarding Environment of California. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the edit this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). Killiondude (talk) 06:06, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

Top importance biographies

The discussion below was copied and pasted from the John Muir talk page. As the discussion evolved, it became clear that the topic wasn't so much John Muir's article, but rather how many and which biographical articles ought to be rated "top importance" by this project. Pat Sajak has been downgraded, but certainly others should be added. Cullen328 (talk) 23:02, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Is this guy really worthy of a 'top importance' rating for California iarticles? 1812ahill (talk) 20:51, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Can you explain your thoughts a bit more? You're obviously against it, but why? --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 23:02, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
It's difficult to respond to such a vague question from 1812ahill, but I consider "this guy" to be exceptionally important. He was a key figure in the origins of the modern environmental movement and the early development of our U. S. National Parks. There is a national monument named after him that attracts millions of visitors. His home is a national historic site. He's been on two U.S. postage stamps, the California quarter, and a major medical center and many schools are named after him. He founded one of the largest grassroots environmental groups in the world. It would be foolish to classify this article any other way, in my opinion. Cullen328 (talk) 00:14, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
As the only person in America referred to as "Father of the National Parks," he should probably also be added to the "top importance" rating for American history articles, or similar category. He was a key inspiration for photographer Ansel Adams, who is also included in the "top importance" rating for California articles. --Wikiwatcher1 (talk) 01:39, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Sorry if my terminology sounded disrespectful. Muir was obviously a very important person wrt. US National Parks and early environmental issues. The reason I query his top-importance rating is that if one looks at the California top-imp. articles list one sees quite a heavy geographical/environmental/topological bias. A quick scan of it revealed only Pat Sajak(? who he ?), John Muir, Ronald Reagan and the founder of a chain of Spanish missionary stations (can't remember his name) as being notable enough for top-importance wrt. California related articles.
I admit to living in the UK, and so may obviously be ill-informed about Californian issues, but nonetheless am perplexed about the inclusion of John Muir in top, but the omission of for instance Arold Schwarzenegger from the list (I also notice the omission of Hollywood, which is probably the 1st thing most people think of when California is mentioned). I guess what I am saying is that the top-importance list is either very biased toward certain topics/people/issues or, in its infancy and needing a great deal of expansion (which would have obvious implications for the high, mid and low importance lists) - Cheers

PS - Ansel Adams is only listed as high importance - btw, can anybody and everybody change these settings? 1812ahill (talk) 13:07, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Um.....He's important enough to be featured on the state iquarter. His importance to the history of the state is very important. --Jojhutton (talk) 14:10, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

You've now raised some valid points, 1812ahill. Pat Sakak is a TV game show host and most certainly should be downgraded on this particular list, in my opinion. Certainly other biographies should be added to the list. Hollywood, the sense of California's film and entertainment industry as opposed to the specific city - of course. But downgrading John Muir? I object to that. Cullen328 (talk) 14:49, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough. In that case my point becomes one of omission rather than inclusion :). As these ratings are voted on, there is - I presume - the danger that specific interest groups or task forces can inadvertently skew the ratings allocated to different articles within a particular category. I may be completely wrong about this, and I have no particular interest in the California category per se, but this bias seems to have arisen somehow - IMHO.

I think I'll go check out if this is general trend in WP. (Note I also placed the same initial message for the Sajak article ;) Cheers 1812ahill (talk) 19:05, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Had another thought. I would expect that as time passes by and WP evolves, an increasingly strong correlation should appear between the class and the importance of an article. I.e. after ten years of WP, you might expect most of the top importance articles to have reached GA-class. Although obviously that depends on the choice of categories attached to the article. The California category is a sufficiently important category for this to have happened (again IMHO). Cheers again 1812ahill (talk) 19:22, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── A very interesting discussion. From reading it, I get the impression that both parties are much more idealistic than I am. Voting on what the top-priority articles should be? I very much doubt that ever happened. A massive effort to get all the top-priority articles to GA-class? Not since I've been here. The only suggestion I have at this point is to study the assessment rubric at Wikipedia:WikiProject California/Assessment and try to work out your differences. I don't see much point in arguing about whether Ansel Adams is more important than Hollywood. With 26,000 articles to choose from, the ones that get improved are the ones people are willing and able to improve. The rest will languish, no matter how you assess them.--Stepheng3 (talk) 02:22, 29 September 2010 (UTC) ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── While we’re on the topic, here’s the top-priority bios:

I have no problem with any of those. And here’s all the High-priority bios:

We may want to reconsider some of these as well; some could go up to high and some should go down to mid or low (Is it just me, or is this list a little too heavy on Spanish and Mexican land barons?). I recently personally added Chavez, Huntington, (Thomas) King, Lummis, Mondavi and Otis to High, and will gladly defend any questions against them being high. I agree that we need to have more (I’d say about eight), and have them be of a more expansive scope (For example, we need representatives of more periods of California history, as well as major California industries). The three names I’d add to Top are Hiram Johnson, Leland Stanford and John Sutter. I might even suggest someone like Mondavi because he’s symbolic of a California history (you could go with Samuel Goldwyn for similar reasons), and Chavez because a state that has 8-10 million Mexicans should probably have a biography up there. I also agree that Hollywood belongs, although I feel that the district is at least as important as the industry it represents. Those are my thoughts Purplebackpack89 04:39, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Purple, since you say on your page,"I dislike America's ignorance of its own history and geography" I am astounded at your lack of knowledge of Calif. history. Cesar Chavez is not a "token" Mexican as you infer, but an very important historical figure here in Calif. And whomever said That "guy" who founded the *Missions* not stations, which expanded into many California cities, is "Father", or "Friar" or "Fray" Junipero Serra, and earned more historical respect. Our history is " a little too (sic) heavy on Spanish and Mexican land barons" because of the enormous role they had in settling and developing California. Did you not go to grammar school here in California? And to all: As an aside, why is one Williams sister mentioned and not the other? And why are the Red Hot Chili Peppers included? Surely, Daryl Gates deserves a mention. His changes to police work have been implemented all over the U.S. I really don't mean to offend anyone, but this discussion really... I am a loss for words despite evidence to the contrary, LOL. Lots of work to do. I am concentrating on SoCal Cities and their history. Also, I am curious why Janis Joplin, a Texan, is included. With the best of intentions...DocOfSoc (talk) 07:55, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
Doc, that's a borderline personal attack that's basically an outright lie. I added California schools from preschool to the present, and am now earning a bachelor's in history. (And if you forgot, the teaching of history in California is terrible; we get about one year of it, and it was taught by one of the worst teachers I had). True, the land barons were important, but consider also the fact that during that time, very few people lived in Southern California (Also, they didn't mention the ones I would have chosen, say Don Benito Wilson). I never use the word "token", I do not see Chavez as a token, and it seems pretty clear that you agree with me that maybe we should put the guy on top priority. Proir to my foray into assessment of California articles, Chavez hadn't even been assessed at all!
My general problem with the list is that most of the high people on the list are Spanish land barons, former California governors/senators, or people who may not belong. What about the arts and letters, men of innovation or great men of commerce? We are clearly woefully lacking in those areas--John Steinbeck and Collis P. Huntington aren't even tagged as high importance!!! We need at least a dozen of authors and businessman at high, and one of each at top. And with regard to the three articles that you note don't belong, go ahead and drop Venus down to mid (there was a guy who went around tagging tennis articles way to high; this is likely a product of that), and I'd defend the Chili Peppers and the Beach Boys because those groups sang about California and created what many people think of as a "California sound" (You'd probably hate this, but I might even include Snoop Dogg up there with him). And didn't Janis Joplin do a lot of her important work in Oakland? In general, we need to expand the breadth of high priority Purplebackpack89 15:21, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
You attended California schools (not added, unless I'm missing something). ;-) <insert joke about California schools and typos etc.>
In any case, I don't think there needs to be any name calling/drama stuff going on. I do agree that the top importance could use some work in getting a variety of California historical figures.
@Purplebackpack, I think the three names you proposed above (Sutter et al) could be bumped up to top importance. I also was puzzled to find that John Steinbeck wasn't rated highly wrt importance for WP:CAL. On a side note, I took a trip to Salinas and Monterey this past summer and learned quite a bit about his Californian ties (visiting the Steinbeck Center and such). Never been a big Steinbeck fan, but it was very interested to hear how much of his Californian life experiences made it into his writings.
@DocofSoc, I admire your passion in California topics but perhaps it could be more directed at improving the project and less at causing division between yourself and other editors. I agree that Junipero Serra is important in California history (and so does the California school curriculum, as it is one of the required subject matters for grade school children). Also, regarding the Red Hot Chili Peppers: there are lots of musicians and other pop culture figures that are rated very highly for this project when they probably should not be. Feel free to change these in accordance with the assessment rubric at Wikipedia:WikiProject California/Assessment. I found this thread interesting and even something useful for WP:CAL. There hasn't been much meta discussion of the project lately, and it's refreshing to know others are still out there. :-) Killiondude (talk) 06:22, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
Looks like a likely consensus building around Stanford, Sutter and Johnson, and likely Chavez. Anyway, Cullen got going last night, and offered up several dozen suggestions on my talk page, which I have posted here

Cullen's suggestions from PBP's page

Cesar Chavez? Absolutely. Others I would suggest: Leland Stanford, John Sutter, Earl Warren, Walt Disney, Steve Jobs, John Steinbeck, Jack London, Huey Newton, Angela Davis, Ishii, Robert Mondavi, Ernest & Julio Gallo, Alice Waters, Lawrence Ferlinghetti, Jim Jones, Charles Manson, Howard Jarvis. More to come. Cullen328 (talk) 05:45, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
I think that the top importance bios should be of people who are central to our conception of what California is all about. In my mind, that rules out most famous athletes, entertainers and movie stars, who by definition operate on a worldwide stage. I was thinking of Charlie Chaplin, who I think is the central figure in the dominance of California moviemaking, even though he was a Brit who left the US in disgust at McCarthyism. Cullen328 (talk) 05:54, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
Other possibilities, though I wish I could think of more women: Harry Bridges, Mariano Vallejo, William Mulholland, Samuel Brannan, Samuel Goldwyn, Louis B. Mayer, Jack Warner, Howard Hughes, Linus Pauling, William Randolph Hearst, Mario Savio, William Shockley, Bill Hewlett, Dave Packard, Gordon Moore, Robert Noyce, Andy Grove, Johnny Carson. Cullen328 (talk) 07:13, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
Bill Graham, Jerry Garcia, Carlos Santana, Jim Morrison, Theodore Judah, Collis Huntington, Charles Crocker, Mark Hopkins, A.P. Gianinni. I agree with Leland Stanford. Cullen328 (talk) 07:18, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

I think that the majority of these articles could conceivably be bumped to high, and I have two high proposals of my own: Fermín Lasuén (who founded most of the California missions that Serra didn't found) and Kevin Starr (California's historian). Purplebackpack89 21:03, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
Kevin Start is an excellent suggestion. I used to correspond with him when he was a coumnist for the San Francicso Examiner in the 1970s. He has a wonderful panoramic vision of California. Cullen328 (talk) 21:27, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Strand Beach Funicular

FYI, Strand Beach Funicular has been nominated for deletion. 76.66.200.95 (talk) 06:01, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

AFD relevant to this project - Jessica Feshbach

Ongoing AFD deletion discussion for this article, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jessica Rodriguez (3rd nomination). Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 09:43, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

colour changes to ca related templates

Dr. Blofeld (talk · contribs) has this morning made changes very many templates with the the edit summary 'yellow looks naff'. i'm wondering if such sweeping changes should wrought by consensus rather than the offended sensibilities of one editor. --emerson7 15:04, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm just wondering why it is a must to have bright yellow navigation templates. Is everything in California golden yellow just because it is the "Golden State". I've been to CA and don't much remember everything being yellow. I understand it is a theme you have but is it really necessary? What about brighter Orange templates for Orange County, doesn't this hurt your eyes anybody? Is every signpost yellow? I was considering starting a cleanup operation on Californian places so the nav boxes were the first thing I picked up on. If you all love yellow and think it very important they are yellow then do what you like.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:26, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
what's at question and of primary concern is your overstepping the bounds of consensus editing. --emerson7 15:58, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

The reason for the colors: that was made at a time when almost all the United States state templates, and all the U.S. county and city navboxes were colored to match that specific state's flag and/or official colors. Template:New Jersey, the New Jersey county navboxes, Template:Pennsylvania, the Pennsylvania navboxes all currently still have that similar shade of yellow too. If the objection is yellow background, the colors can be reversed to gold text on blue background.Zzyzx11 (talk) 16:07, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure its a good look. Besides i've noticed most of the general use templates for things like schools etc use standard. Is it entirely necessary to have a fully yellow infobox? Admittedly I often use a differnet color for the nav box title but usually with a background color and different colour font text and tend to leave the group style standard light blue. You cold try a gold background with white text just for the title, that would look better. The cleanup job needing doing is tremendous for Californian towns I spent an hour purely tidying 3 articles including Glendale just removing ugly lists/tables converting into prose. I;ve noticed :Zzyzx11 doing a tremendous amount of work seemingly single-handedly at times but I see little active project collaboration over articles. I think we need some project coordination to clean up articles on Californian places, but such collaboration is rare and as usual it is down to a small number working on them.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:15, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, but to be honest, this is what I've observed in my experiences here on Wikipedia: Unfortunately, such collaboration have been rare in the past because IMO there is a very large systemic bias in favor of certain Californian subjects than others. For example, it seems to me that more people are interested in writing and improving articles about historical landmarks like Rancho Los Alamitos than such cities and towns like Los Alamitos, California. And so, in basically answering your question here, I would say that a "high Internet population" area does not necessarily translate into thousands of well-written Wikipedia articles regarding that specific area – especially if that said population results into more systemic bias towards certain topics than others. Zzyzx11 (talk) 01:56, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
  • I'd rather have, at the very least, the county templates retain the state's color. Local parks and things like that don't have too much correlation with the state, but county templates (that list cities, CDPs, etc) sort of do. Killiondude (talk)
I oppose the idea that one editor could and then did change the color of the primary boxes (counties, etc) of the entire State of California, without discussing it and seeking consensus on the consideration first. One person's preference for such a sweeping change is bad form. WE can talk of a change in color, but I am for returning ALL the boxes to the "naff" color (using that editor's judgement on the golden yellow color) previously used for now. Norcalal (talk) 16:57, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
Cal poppy.jpg
i agree...at least in part...with norcalal. many of the state, county, and local entities in california captitalise in one way or another on the 'golden state' motto, be it the california poppy, the rolling hills of golden dead grasses during most of the year, or the late 19th century gold rush. either way, such a large change affecting so many articles should be done by consensus, not by whim. --emerson7 09:21, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

city/town/community article layout standard?

I've been editing some of the articles about cities in California. In particular, I've rounded the demographic data to 10th places from the 100ths place figures that are in many articles. Several reasons: 1. a 1/100th of a percent in this data is False precision, particularly in small communities. 2. The data gets old and Significant figures should be considered in the presentations. 3. Somewhere in WP:MOS it says that consistency in presentation of the numbers should be followed. BUT, I have not been able to find a standard template for the layout of the city articles even though it seems editors have been following one. Can anyone tell me where to find the/a standard layout? I'd like to modify it (or its guidance) to specify that 1/10th of a percent is preferred in the layout. Thanks. --S. Rich (talk) 04:11, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

I think most of the articles about small cities and towns were created by an automated tool, which didn't leave us with a template in the wikimedia sense of the word. There are some guidelines at Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline that might help you. --Stepheng3 (talk) 17:36, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Request: Downgrade Government of California

It's definitely not a B-class article.

Done. Next time please perform the downgrade yourself. Best wishes,--Stepheng3 (talk) 18:57, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
I'm not a member of this WikiProject, I didn't think I had the authority.--occono (talk) 20:32, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
You're welcome to add yourself to the WikiProject and make changes based on that "authority" :) --Stepheng3 (talk) 22:10, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
Bah, you don't have to be a member of any wikiproject to change article assessments. Some projects like WP:MILHIST you might want to review their assessment guide, but for the most part you should be fine with the general guide. Killiondude (talk) 04:01, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

WP California in the Signpost

"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on WikiProject California for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 03:27, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

WPCAL is a mess. :-( Killiondude (talk) 04:02, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure it is a good idea to feature it in the Signpost because it has not been historically easy to attract active Wikipedians. I think the problem has to do with the Culture of California itself. Even though it is the most populous U.S. state, it has a very diverse population with a wide variety of interests and tastes. So it is more likely that a Wikipedian from California would be more interested in joining a WikiProject that is focused on a more specific topic than here. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:21, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
California articles independently are good except the actually wikiproject is a mess(like said above). Spongie555 (talk) 03:13, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
I would say the article quality varies greatly, but what do you need a wikiproject for but to develop consensus on some immediately pressing issue? By that metric, I would say the CA wikiproject is great. Ameriquedialectics 03:27, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
Yes, it's a good place to come and ask questions from people familiar with WPCAL, but have you looked at those questions the Signpost rep posted? After reading them and pondering about the project, I was a bit nervous to answer. I mean, I'm not saying WPCAL is a lost cause--there are probably hundreds of abandoned wikiprojects and/or projects that don't have nearly as much conversation. However, I think (at this) there are much more organized and collaboratively driven wikiprojects than WPCAL is. Killiondude (talk) 03:54, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Meh, what's the worse that could happen? We get a bunch of fly-by participant list adds that never do anything? We cop to the fact that we haven't been cranking out FAs on a monthly basis? Based on Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/WikiProject desk#Workspace it looks like we're 3rd string anyway. I don't think this project has been central in a lot of featured content with specific editors doing most of the heavy lifting on their own. I'm not sure how many projects can honestly claim to be amazing juggernauts of featured content. Most of my work has been cleanup at some articles, but have never been great at doing lit reviews and hammering out the content, and that's just fine. I'll try to answer some of these questions if I have time. My main concern at this point is that I've been busy, and haven't been nearly as involved as I used to be, so I can't really speak effectively about the project for the past six or seven months. -Optigan13 (talk) 05:57, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

I went ahead and replied; I encourage others to do so, as whether WP CAL is a good WikiProject or not the rationales as to why might be interesting to talk about. Ameriquedialectics 19:35, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

To everyone who replied on this talk page, please go ahead and add your comments to the "anything else" question on the interview. The struggles of your project are just as important as how many FAs can be produced. Plus, the ideas that the culture of your subject impacts the project's membership and activity could make for a really interesting article. No project is perfect, but the responses on this talk page are more than we (the Report writers) usually get from other "active" projects. I think it would be worth your time. Cheers! -Mabeenot (talk) 17:04, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

Invitation to help with WikiProject United States

WikiProject United States logo.svg

Hello, WikiProject California/Archive 5! We are looking for editors to join WikiProject United States, an outreach effort which aims to support development of United States related articles in Wikipedia. We thought you might be interested, and hope that you will join us. Thanks!!!

--Kumioko (talk) 20:15, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Sugarloaf Mountains

While Stub-sorting I found what seemed a muddle Sugarloaf Mountain (Riverside County, California) and Sugarloaf Mountain (Butte County, California). I did my best to create two separate stubs, both linked from Sugarloaf (mountain), but someone might like to sort them out! PamD (talk) 14:01, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

This seems up my alley. I'll clean this up. --Stepheng3 (talk) 15:32, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject cleanup listing

I have created together with Smallman12q a toolserver tool that shows a weekly-updated list of cleanup categories for WikiProjects, that can be used as a replacement for WolterBot and this WikiProject is among those that are already included (because it is a member of Category:WolterBot cleanup listing subscriptions). See the tool's wiki page, this project's listing in one big table or by categories and the index of WikiProjects. Svick (talk) 20:57, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Iowa Hill, California

I created Iowa Hill, California. Someone who is familiar with the community or with Placer County, California might want to expand the article. Eastmain (talkcontribs) 20:31, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

A consideration for cross project consolidation of talk page templates

I have started a conversation here about the possibility of combining some of the United States related WikiProject Banners into {{WikiProject United States}}. If you have any comments, questions or suggestions please take a moment and let me know. --Kumioko (talk) 04:58, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

I am not sure how you would be able to add all of the unique features (i.e. task forces, collaboration of the week, selected article, etc.) of the Template:WikiProject California to the Template:WikiProject United States. If these could somehow be incorporated into the US template, then it could be worth pursuing. Cmcnicoll (talk) 19:16, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

CA Legislature Pages Need TLC

I am looking through the various pages for members of the legisature and lots of things look good, but there are some things missing. Some members do not have succession boxes. At times, the sucession box includes just years (example "2006-2080", instead of full date). At times, the exact dates are available in the infobox. And others are also missing an infobox. At least one legislator is missing (Steve Knight, elected to Assembly district 36). And we just had an election, so I can imagine that lots of the info needs to be updated. I am willing to do some heavy lifting. Does anyone else want to assist, or are there ideas of how to proceed?

RayKiddy (talk) 04:24, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Orange County redirect?

I am aware that this issue was decided back in 2006, HOWEVER, I would like to bring up the possibility of having Orange County redirect to Orange County, California and create a disambiguation page for the others. The most famous Orange County is the one in California, an it's not even close. When traveling around the United States or abroad, I say I am from Orange County and people immediately know where I am from, no one asks "which one?" Also, if Orange County is to be lumped together with all other counties of the same name, then we should do the same for the many different cities and locales that go by Los Angeles, San Francisco, London, or even California (there is a California, Pennsylvania). Thank you for your feedback and the support of those who are part of this Wikiproject would be greatly appreciated. --CASportsFan (talk) 06:38, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Initiate a move request if you wish, but I don't think your personal experience is enough to justify a move at this time. Does whatlinkshere, traffic ststs, or google searches support your assertion? -Optigan13 (talk) 07:12, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
I've replied at Talk:Orange County, which is probably the best place to discuss this.   Will Beback  talk  07:29, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

I have placed a move request on both Orange County, I figured it would be easiest to discuss the matter at Talk:Orange County. --CASportsFan (talk) 08:09, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

US Collaboration reactivated & Portal:United States starting next

Casliber recently posted a suggestion on the talk page for WikiProject United States about getting the US Wikipedians Collaboration page going again in an effort to build up articles for GA through FA class. See Wikipedia:U.S. Wikipedians' notice board/USCOTM. After several days of work from him the page is up and ready for action. A few candidates have already been added for you to vote on or you can submit one using the directions provided. If you are looking for inspiration here is a link to the most commonly viewed articles currently under the scope of Wikiproject United States. There are tons of good articles in the various US related projects as well so feel free to submit any article relating to US topics (not just those under the scope of WPUS). This noticeboard is intended for ‘’’All’’’ editors working on US subjects, not just those under WPUS.

The next item I intend to start updating is Portal:United States if anyone is interested in helping. Again this is not specific to WPUS and any help would be greatly appreciated to maximize visibility of US topics. The foundation has already been established its just a matter of updating the content with some new images, biographies and articles. Please let leave a comment on the Portals talk page or let me know if you have any questions or ideas. --Kumioko (talk) 19:04, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

"The" Los Angeles Times?

Somebody has changed the category name to "The" Los Angeles Times people. What is going on? The name of the newspaper is Los Angeles Times. Category talk:The Los Angeles Times people. Really confused I am, sincerely yours, GeorgeLouis (talk) 19:53, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

You're right, George, doesn't make sense. I know the NYT cats and pages are like that, but the LAT doesn't put the "the" on the front page every day. I've started Categories for discussion regarding Category:The Los Angeles Times people and Category:The Los Angeles Times, which you and other members of WPCali are welcome to participate in Purplebackpack89 15:43, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

California Collabaration?

We should make a Collabaration of the month like WikiProjct USA is doing. If we get people to work together on articles maybe we can get more GAs and FAs about California. Article like Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo and Junípero Serra would be perfect articles to collaborate on since they are very important in California history but the articles arnt as good as they should be. Spongie555 (talk) 06:41, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Relationship with WikiProject United States

People from a variety of WikiProjects have had concerns about the scope of WikiProject United States and its relationship with other WikiProjects. We have created an RFC and invite all interested editors to discuss it at: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject United States#Mission statement for WikiProject United States. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 15:33, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Just to clarify the misrepresentative statement left above. 4 or 5 editors (most work on the same couple projects) have voiced concern of the Scope of the project of which Racepacket is the main voice. The project has tried to work with them on adjustments to the Mission statement and defining the importance descriptions but they will not relent until WikiProject United States agrees to resitrict its scope to only include National importance articles which would require that any projects associated with WPUS be disassociated and cut lose to succeed or fail on their own. I do encourage you to way in on the discussions. --Kumioko (talk) 15:40, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

(Responding to the GeorgeLouis (talk · contribs) revert and edit summary) Racepacket's notice was "There may be a problem, come tell us what you think", which is within the rules for WP:CANVASSing. Kumioko's was "Rackpacket is trying to mess up my project, help!" -- which is quite a ways outside them. That's why I reverted. Everyone is of course free to weigh in on either side -- I haven't quite decided what the dispute is about yet, never mind which side I'm on. :-)--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:33, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

I don't believe that comments on a talk page should be reverted; there is allowance for removing a comment on your own talk page per WP:UP#CMT, however last I was aware (and please do tell me if I am wrong (I am human, and thus fallible)) other users comments shouldn't be edited or removed on a discussion page of an article or elsewhere. I understand that you may have an issue with what another user is doing, but this can be discussed civily without blanking another user's comments; furthermore removal of the comment in question, I don't believe, is not covered under WP:TPO. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 21:41, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
You may be right. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 22:05, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Greater Santa Barbara Ice Skating Association

It is proposed that this article be deleted because of the following concern:

"This is an advertising page to solicit donations build an ice rink. This campaign, nor the Greater Santa Barbara Ice Skating Association itself, have received independent coverage. "

 Chzz  ►  09:53, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject San Diego

I have formed a WikiProject to organize San Diego. If anybody interested, please add your name on the participants. If have have questions about it, please feel free to add comments. JJ98 (Talk) 21:41, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

So you know, depending on what activity and participants it might get, this new San Diego WikiProject may eventually be relegated to a task force instead, just like what happened to those pertaining to Southern California, Santa Barbara County, Los Angeles, Inland Empire, and San Francisco Bay Area. Zzyzx11 (talk) 23:45, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
Zzyzx is probably right. The aforementioned projects have had some problems with getting participants, as has this project Purplebackpack89 23:58, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
I agree, I might convert into a San Diego task force just like Southern California, Santa Barbara County, Los Angeles, Inland Empire, and San Francisco Bay Area. JJ98 (Talk) 01:43, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Drop me a note on my talk page if you want to convert San Diego to a task force. I've done all the other ones so I should be able to knock it out fairly quickly. I'd also echo the others comments about it being difficult to recruit and maintain members for a project. I would go so far as to recommend talking to the other state projects and possibly merging everyone up into the US one. While having the local regional/identity is nice, the ratio of project participants to project work in addition to article work makes it difficult not to get bogged down in bureaucracy. -Optigan13 (talk) 05:13, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
I agree with making San Diego a task force.
I also linked it with the Spanish Wikipedia San Diego project and notified User:Alex537, who created the Spanish project and is active on both the English and Spanish wikipedias.
WhisperToMe (talk) 09:13, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
I agree that this should have been made into a task force. As far as the merging of state WPs up to WPUS, Kumioko is trying to merge the state talk banners under the U.S. one currently, and is having difficulty getting consensus. Cmcnicoll (talk) 19:55, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
I concur with this notion. --PCB 06:11, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

New article: T. Arthur Cottam - film director

New article, created, at T. Arthur Cottam. Additional assistance in research would be appreciated, feel free to help out at the article's talk page. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 21:26, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

New article = Richard Smith (Silent film director)

New article, created, at Richard Smith (Silent film director). Additional assistance in research would be appreciated, feel free to help out at the article's talk page. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 16:05, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Proposed change to USCongDistStateCA

I just started a discussion here about a change to {{USCongDistStateCA}} Thanks. 67.100.125.181 (talk) 04:08, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

Two editors have weighed in so far, but still welcoming comments. 67.100.125.157 (talk) 01:07, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Merge discussion for Los Angeles County Young Democrats

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Young Democrats of America. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 08:12, 30 March 2011 (UTC) (Using {{pls}})

Merge discussion involving Greater Los Angeles Area metropolitan area articles

A discussion of interest to WikiProject California on merging the Los Angeles metropolitan area and Inland Empire (California) articles into the Greater Los Angeles Area article is going on at Talk:Greater Los Angeles Area#Merge Los Angeles metropolitan area and Inland Empire (California) into this article?. 08OceanBeachS.D. 02:55, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

List of California public officials charged with crimes

You are invited to add to the above list. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 15:58, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

Notability - County Supervisor - John Gioia

Does a County Supervisor pass WP:POLITICIAN? Someone who knows more than me about US local govt might like to have a look at John Gioia and pass an opinion! PamD (talk) 12:47, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

The article has grown quite a bit since I prodded it, but he still looks pretty un-notable. PamD (talk) 12:49, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
See part three of WP:POLITICIAN, fails parts one and two, therefore, subject must pass WP:GNG in order to be considered notable, IMHO. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 20:03, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Uhh. Yes, he is notable. Contra Costa County is not exactly a cow county. For coverage, see the Contra Costa Times at http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_product=CC&p_theme=cc&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&s_dispstring=headline,lead(john%20gioia)%20AND%20date(all)&p_field_advanced-0=title&p_text_advanced-0=(john%20gioia)&p_bool_advanced-1=OR&p_field_advanced-1=Lead&p_text_advanced-1=(john%20gioia)&xcal_numdocs=20&p_perpage=10&p_sort=_rank_:D&xcal_ranksort=4&xcal_useweights=yes . Sincerely, your friend, GeorgeLouis (talk) 05:30, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

I am not sure that the multiple minor mentions of the subject of the article are sufficient to be considered significant coverage under WP:GNG. One can always bring up the article up for AfD, if one is highly concerned about the notability of the subject. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 19:32, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
Out of interest, how many people does this guy represent? I know that the LA Sups represent almost two million people each and have large discretionary budgets...is Contra Costa anywhere close? Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 21:00, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Each of the five supes represents about 200,000 people. GeorgeLouis (talk) 23:48, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Image:Battle of Los Angeles LATimes.jpg

File:Battle of Los Angeles LATimes.jpg has been nominated for deletion. 65.93.12.101 (talk) 04:11, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

California Proposition 19 (2010)

Please help with this article.

It has been developed by students liaising with Wikipedia as part of an important liaison project with universities - Wikipedia:WikiProject United States Public Policy - which, if successful, will expand to bring many more quality editors to Wikipedia.

The course ends in a few weeks.

Please make comments, suggestions, etc. on Talk:California Proposition 19 (2010). Many thanks,  Chzz  ►  03:51, 16 April 2011 (UTC) ([[Wikipedia:WikiProject_United_States_Public_Policy/Online_Ambassadors|Online Ambassador for this specific course)

"Bear Flag" Ensign

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Flag of California#State Ensign. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:42, 18 April 2011 (UTC) (Using {{pls}})

California Arts Council

I am working on a page for the California Arts Council - but because I work for the California Arts Council, Wikipedia thinks I may have a conflict of interest. (I also suck at putting the page together because I don't understand html, but that's another issue!) Can anyone help clarify this for me? Should I go ahead and put in what I have? Can't imagine that anyone outside the Council would have all the pertinent info, so we just assumed we were the logical people to write the page. - user DGol

For starters, I suggest reading Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. If the pertinent information is unavailable outside your organization, then it is probably not verifiable and should not appear in the encyclopedia.—Stepheng3 (talk) 19:15, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Stepheng3 ... the COI rules are hard to interpret/apply, since we're a government agency providing services to the public, not a corporation trying to hawk its wares. But we'll continue wading thru them & will discuss at our next web team meeting. There are Wikipedia pages for other state agencies, so maybe we will just ask them how they did it - or whether someone else put the pages up. ?? - DGol — Preceding unsigned comment added by DGol (talkcontribs) 19:00, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

Membership discrimination in California social clubs

Your attention is called to the above article, which is now live. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 02:51, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Recent articles

These articles about Los Angeles have been rewritten within the last month and are available for all to see:

Yours sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 16:39, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Reliability of source

You are invited to join the discussion at WP:RSN#sandiegostreetcars.org. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:35, 28 April 2011 (UTC) (Using {{pls}})

Notice

The Starhawk article was moved/renamed today to Starhawk (author) without discussion by a proponent of the new video game of the same name. Now Starhawk (and all 100 Wikilinks to her name) redirects to a disambiguation page. Please note the Requested Move discussion about moving it back to the original article title. If inspired to vote, please note Wiki policies that support this, such as WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, etc. Softlavender (talk) 12:27, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Not sure "vote" is the correct word. Yours, GeorgeLouis (talk) 04:17, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Balboa Park GLAM project

A new GLAM project page has been created to organize collaboration with Balboa Park to improve articles on the park, its museums, and southern California topics. I'm leaving a notice on WP:CAL's page to determine if any members would be interested in participating in the project. The staff there would like to meet with a group of Wikipedians to eventually lead to tours of the museums, image donations, editing collaborations, contests, and other events. If you have any interest at all in helping in any capacity (even if only online), please list your name at WP:GLAM/BP so we can determine what size group we're looking at. As this collaboration has just started, if you have any questions, comments, ideas, etc., please leave them on the project's talk page. Thank you! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talkcontrib) 01:09, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Request for NPOV review

  • Recently an editor has raised concerns regarding NPOV with some articles I had worked on prior to an extended wikibreak.
  • I have committed to no longer edit or watch these pages.
  • However, I would appreciate it if others could look them over with NPOV in mind, and discuss on their talk pages and make appropriate changes if need be.

One of the articles was related to California:

  1. Joel Anderson

I will not object to any changes proposed, discussed, or implemented.

Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 20:49, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

I have tagged the political career section, and will do a further review as time allows. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 21:09, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Trona disambiguation lists town in two counties

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trona,_California

lists two entries, one for Inyo and one for San Bernadino county.

Both have roughly the same lat/long... However Trona is most definitely in San Bernadino county.

The Inyo county entry lists references that are dead as well, or at the least don't go directly to anything useful that I could find.

I hope I'm going this right, pretty new here.. Braindead0 (talk) 19:09, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

The Geographic Names Information System seems to think there are Trona placenames in Inyo County (see U.S. Geological Survey Geographic Names Information System: Trona Census Designated Place for instance) but the coordinates it gives for them are clearly not in that county. Strange. —Stepheng3 (talk) 23:56, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Good article nominations currently has a backlog!

All editors willing and able to review articles are needed! Please contribute to the consensus of these articles by choosing 3 or more nominations to review in any of the catagories of interest to this project!

Please visit Wikipedia:Good article nominations now and begin! Thanks you! --Amadscientist (talk) 03:42, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

1986 California Supreme Court retention election

I've just completed a copy-edit on Cruz Reynoso that turned into a major rewrite. In the course of researching this fascinating man, I turned up a wealth of sources. Many of them could be used to improve the articles for Rose Bird and Joseph Grodin, the two other justices who were ousted in the 1986 California Supreme Court retention election. For that matter, I'm surprised that last is a red link, given its lasting impact! I'm sort of burned out after the work on Reynoso, so I'm hoping someone else would like to pick up the ball and run with it. I'm cross-posting this invitation to WikiProject United States courts and judges as well. // ⌘macwhiz (talk) 03:22, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Template:WPLA

{{WPLA}} is under discussion, see WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2011 June 15 . 65.94.47.63 (talk) 09:44, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Los Angeles City Council District 1

Hello, project participants: Some good Wikipedian — I am sure with the best of intentions — keeps removing the graphic for the above article, an election flier which I went to some great degree of trouble to find and upload. I am sure this fine person will be glad to describe the reason for the removal because it has not been done anywhere, at least I can't find it. I must say with the greatest humility that this contretemps is very distressing for me and, speaking frankly, has caused me to lose some sleep. (Maybe I am just a sensitive guy.) In the meantime, I will continue my self-assigned endeavor of completing the biographies of all Los Angeles City Council members and hope to put this matter to rest — as I would like to get some, too. I hope the members of this project will stop by the talk page for the above article and leave their opinion of just what is going on. Sincerely, and with my very best wishes to all, GeorgeLouis (talk) 16:36, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Request for Capital Region Task Force

I know that this has been suggested before and did not come to much, but I want to suggest it again and see if there is any interest. My thinking is that the task force would cover the Sacramento metropolitan area, not just the city itself. I am not sure I know how to create a task force but I am up to the task of figuring it out and I think it should be done. Toyz1988 (talk) 17:42, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

I would support a Sacramento Taskforce, covering all things under Sacramento's scope. If sufficient numbers exist a may be justifiable to make it a WikiProject. 08OceanBeachS.D. 18:17, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
If there are sufficient editors, I say why not; however, perhaps the scope should be larger still, and include all of Northern California, not presently supported by SFBA task force, this way this new task force may draw a larger group of interested editors.
Personally, I attended CSUS, but am busy with SoCal Task Force, and San Diego WikiProject to focus on a new task force. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 19:07, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
I would be completely ok with a Northern California Task Force. I am envisioning a triangle between Lake Tahoe, Clear Lake (or Fort Bragg because it goes to the coast) and Stockton. That triangle and everything north of it (in CA). That is just my rough idea.Toyz1988 (talk) 19:33, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
I will join in the even that one is created, but I spend a lot of my time on articles under the scope of WikiProject San Diego. 08OceanBeachS.D. 19:45, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Why not everything North of the Kern County line, that isn't already covered by the SFBA task force? --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 19:47, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
I think we should stick to Sacramento as originally proposed; it's the only other large region (population) in Northern California not covered by its own task force. 08OceanBeachS.D. 20:04, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
How about then we provide it the scope of the Sacramento MSA? --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 20:18, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Well that's what I was thinking; it's just called the Sacramento Task Force. Similar to how we do it with WP San Diego. 08OceanBeachS.D. 20:20, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
I am good either way. I want Sacramento but if we need more people from NorCal then that is ok with me.Toyz1988 (talk) 20:23, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
I would include everything in the article, Sacramento metropolitan area, and maybe Stockton/San Joaquin Co.Toyz1988 (talk) 20:29, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
I would not be opposed to adding the Stockton MSA to the task force scope. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 22:41, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
A Sacramento Task Force (WikiProject?), with everything under Greater Sacramento - including the Stockton MSA, sounds like a good idea for WP California. 08OceanBeachS.D. 21:04, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
When I first posted this I imagined that the task force would be for the region around the Capital (ie. Sacramento) that is within its general sphere of influence. That to me is mostly the counties that touch Sacramento County minus Solano and Contra Costa (they are more SF Bay Area). Area media often encompasses cities like Stockton, Modesto and even to Tahoe/Reno area. That is what I am thinking in regards to this task force. That is part of the reason I called it Capital Region rather than Sacramento Region, so that people would not get too bogged down in the city limits of Sacramento or Sac. County. This region is not as well defined as SoCal or SF Bay, so that makes it hard. But here is my idea: Sacramento County plus Counties touching minus Solano and Contra Costa plus Stanislaus. Or just let people choose what articles to place in the Capital Region on a case by case. Is that acceptible, Capital Region Task Force? Now we just need someone that knows how to create a task force. If no one voluteers I will try it myself.--Toyz1988 (talk) 20:49, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
Have you looked at the boundaries of the Stockton, CA MSA & Sacramento–Arden Arcade–Yuba City, CA-NV CSA? The Boundary lines encompass what you are mainly looking for, and has the added benefit of being pre-defined from a reliable source, outside body. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 03:34, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
I don't know what I was looking at before but I just saw a map with the MSA's for the Sacramento Region and those 3 MSAs look perfect. Sac-Arden-Roseville, Stockton and Yuba City is a well defined region for a task force. I am totally ok with that. What should the name be? Sacramento Area Task Force or... --Toyz1988 (talk) 23:12, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
The original name sounds fine to me. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 00:18, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
I agree as well. Should we begin it's creation? 08OceanBeachS.D. 00:27, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
I don't see why not. I'll join, after all, but I don't know how active I will be, initially. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 02:47, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
I started a draft at User:Toyz1988/Capital Region task force. It is just the template for task forces. I will be making it into a real task force page little by little. Feel free to help make it. When it is done, myself or someone else can transfer it to Wikipedia:WikiProject California/Capital Region task force.--Toyz1988 (talk) 22:15, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
It should follow the format all California projects do. I can assist in it's creation as it's a little more complex if need be. 08OceanBeachS.D. 22:22, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Upon review of the name "Capital Region" it seems to more commonly refer to the Albany region of New York among other places outside of the United States. It may be better to rethink the name of the task force. A name I was thinking of is Cal Capital task force. Cal is an abbreviation of California, common in many of the state organizations and bureaus; and it emphasizes the fact that it is the California Capital region. I did a search of Cal Capital on Google and it appears to be in relatively common usage. Thoughts? 08OceanBeachS.D. 01:37, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

We can go with Greater Sacramento Region task force? --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 02:21, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Greater Sacramento would work, but I think Toyz1988 had the idea of "Capital" somewhere in the name to place greater emphasis on the fact that it's not just Sac-Town. But then again it is the Capital. A title that is representative of the fact that its in California is all that is needed, regardless of the combination of words we end up with. 08OceanBeachS.D. 03:00, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
How about then Golden State Capital Region task force? --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 03:12, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
That could also work. One thing I noticed on WP:California is that there is a "stub project" for the California Delta. The Delta area's influence and region seems to fit neatly with the Capital Region, with the exception of the Sierra counties and Modesto. 08OceanBeachS.D. 04:19, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
I say add it, given the connection of Sacramento County and San Joaquin County's to the Delta region. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 04:23, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Could the Delta WP be a small part of the Cal Capital Region task force? That would make sense to me.--Toyz1988 (talk) 16:31, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
I would redirect the Delta Task force to the Cal Capital Region task force since the Capital Region envelops the area. 08OceanBeachS.D. 21:01, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
That makes sense. I am glad to see this taking shape.--Toyz1988 (talk) 23:14, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Instead of abbreviating, why not spell out California? --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 02:22, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
I figured "Cal" was standard when naming California related things. Not to mention when creating all the categories necessary and what not, it becomes easier to type out then all of California.08OceanBeachS.D. 02:35, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
Looking at List of U.S. state abbreviations it shows that the two most common abbreviations for California are the postal abbreviation/GPO abbreviation of CA or Calif. Personally I don't like Calif. Whereas the "Golden State" is the official state nickname and IMHO evokes a nicer image. Furthermore given the history of Sacramento and it being chosen as the State Capital over Monterey, San Jose, Vallejo, San Francisco, or Benicia due its closeness to the Gold being mined from the Sierra Nevada's Mother lode, the term Golden State rather than spelled out California or an abbreviation would look nicer IMHO. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 02:50, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
I wouldn't mind "Golden State." 08OceanBeachS.D. 04:56, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Assuming everyone agrees on Golden State Capital Region taskforce, someone should be found to create the page that preferably has experience creating California task force pages. 08OceanBeachS.D. 21:54, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

I like Golden State Capital Region Taskforce (GSCR). Is there anyone that has been discussing or reading these posts have experience in creating taskforces? Even though I was the one to bring it up, I don't have any experience creating them. I am willing to try it, if there are no takers but I would rather someone with at least a little experience be involved in an advisory/supervisory capacity.--Toyz1988 (talk) 20:52, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
I have a degree of experience, but I feel that someone with more experience should try. We should post a formal request here. 08OceanBeachS.D. 22:17, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
I've converted the various projects into the task forces under the California umbrella, but I'm not inclined to add a new one just yet. From what I can tell there are only three people with varying degrees of interest at the moment. You have an unclear definition of what the region would consist of, and don't seem to have a clear identity as a region. The bureaucratic overhead of the various task forces is a lot to properly maintain compared to the actual article work that gets done. At this early point I would suggest picking some content work, maybe an article or two to work on via this project talk page and see how that goes. -Optigan13 (talk) 04:53, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Yeah I was starting to think that myself. I am just going to continue on my Sacramento concentration and see what good I can do.--Toyz1988 (talk) 20:39, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
Another idea would be to simply operate through the Delta task force. It covers a similar area. 08OceanBeachS.D. 02:27, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
The aforementioned task force can always be expanded in scope, and its name changed given sufficient consensus. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 04:08, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
I inquired about an expansion of scope of the CA Delta task force. Click here to see.--Toyz1988 (talk) 20:57, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Surfing Madonna AfD

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Surfing Madonna (2nd nomination). I wasn't aware of this until I saw the wikipedia page. Take a gander and weigh in your opinion. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 03:27, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

San Diego peer reveiew

I have listed San Diego for peer reveiew. Please comment here. Thank you. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions) 00:44, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

McCloud River article

In the McCloud River article, there is a claim that that the train bridge scene from the movie Stand By Me was filmed on a trestle over this river. However, I believe that scene was filmed using the train trestle over Lake Brtitton. There are a couple youtube videos which show that the backdrops of the scene in the movie match the bridge over Lake Britton. Sorry, I don't have the links handy. There are also online movie film location websites which make the same claim, but I cannot vouch for their reliability.67.164.10.16 (talk) 19:08, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

{I just removed the unsourced claim. It would be helpful if anybody interested in this article would find sources for the other information as well. It has been tagged for a long time. GeorgeLouis (talk) 14:06, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Reversion of article name change request

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Adrián González#Requested move. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:58, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Asking for a FAR of the article Sharon Tate

I believe it no longer meets FA status and have nominated it for FAR. Per wiki rules, I am notifying all of the article's involved wiki projects. Crystal Clear x3 03:29, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

It would be really nice if somebody could explain the acronyms, or initials, or whatever they are. GeorgeLouis (talk) 06:49, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
FA = Featured Article
FAR = Featured Article Review
I hope that helps. Cheers,—Stepheng3 (talk) 07:12, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
Thank you very much, and HAGD (Have a great day!)! GeorgeLouis (talk) 07:37, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Changing WikiProject San Diego into a task force?

Hi, is it possible to convert WikiProject San Diego into a task force into this? I left a note at WikiProject San Diego for any concerns. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions) 19:03, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

China Clipper flight departure site

Comments are invited on the discussion page for subject article about California Historical Landmark #968 and alleged duplication of coverage in articles about historic aircraft using the site.Thewellman (talk) 01:24, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Mass changes to Demographics sections

An IP user (75.36.142.226) seems to be going around editing the demographics sections of a huge bunch of articles on California cities. I lack the sources, expertise, and time to audit their many changes for accuracy, so I thought I'd bring it up here. --Cybercobra (talk) 05:35, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Illiterate, as well: You can't say that households "live" in a city. Don't know where this joker gets his information, which may or may not be accurate, but it is extremely odd. Yours, GeorgeLouis (talk) 06:37, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
It better be stats and results from the 2010 U.S. Census or equivalent. Many such articles have not been updated yet, unfortunately. Zzyzx11 (talk) 07:08, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
It's the same boilerplate that was used in 2000. Really awful writing and figures that mean nothing because they are not compared with anything else. I tried to warn about using this stuff before the 2010 census figures came out, but to no avail. GeorgeLouis (talk) 21:25, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Request for comment from supporting WikiProjects

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:1st Filipino Infantry Regiment (United States)#Before FAR. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 21:50, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Publicity agency for Kevin A. Ross

A publicity agency for Kevin A. Ross is going into several articles and making changes in Mr. Ross's favor. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/3BAAS_Media_Group, It is annoying to have to clean up after this outfit. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 21:22, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Perhaps you can report the user to WP:COIN? --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:39, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

OK. I did it. Thanks. GeorgeLouis (talk) 06:39, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Questionable notability of Mariano Laya Armington

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Mariano Laya Armington#Notability. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 15:35, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

FAC for 1st Filipino Infantry Regiment (United States)

I have nominated the article 1st Filipino Infantry Regiment (United States) for FA. The review can be found here. Comments from reviewers are needed to help determine whether the article meets the criteria for featured articles; all editors are invited to participate. Any assistance with this nomination would be greatly appretiated. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 00:40, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Request for comment . . .

Your attention is called to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raymond A. Watson. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 18:21, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Featured article review for Island fox

I have nominated Island fox for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Brad (talk) 09:58, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Re-Assesment of California Trail

I was wondering if you could re-assess California Trail on your quality scale. There has been a good amount of cleanup and copyediting done on it recently, although the article may still be too long. Thanks! Dac04 (talk) 19:04, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

TOMS Shoes

Hello! The CEO of this organization was involved in a contentious event and the paragraph in the article that describes the event has been changed several times to represent a few different view points. I think the article is mostly in good shape and that the paragraph could use some attention from more editors. The section mentioned is TOMS_Shoes#Focus_on_the_Family. I started this section on the talk page but so far, no one has joined the discussion (only edited the section). Any help there would be greatly appreciated. OlYellerTalktome 13:49, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

I will leave a comment over there.GeorgeLouis (talk) 05:24, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Please comment . . .

Should party labels (D) and (R) be added to List of California public officials charged with crimes? See Talk:List_of_California_public_officials_charged_with_crimes#Parties. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 19:27, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

How to research Los Angeles topics

This came across my reader today:

Cheers, tedder (talk) 04:36, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Olympic Valley - Squaw Valley Naming Issue Discussion

I would like to create a discussion on the naming of the Placer county unincorporated area that is Olympic Valley. In Wikipedia it is referred to as Squaw_Valley,_Placer_County,_California. This community should be called Olympic Valley, as that is the official name. You will also notice that Placer County, California also refers to this article as Olympic Valley, not Squaw Valley. Squaw Valley is the name of a ski resort that is located in this valley. If you guys feel this is not under the jurisdiction of the SF Bay Area, please suggest a more relevant location for this discussion and ask an admin to move it there. I propose this article be renamed Olympic Valley Thanks. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 10:24, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Per wikipedia:Article titles#Common names, Wikipedia usually uses the common name, not the official name. The area is commonly referred to as Squaw Valley. This is why that is used over the official name of Olympic Valley. Alternative names that may be used on other articles that link to it are irrelevant to Wikipedia's rules on article titles. Zzyzx11 (talk) 11:28, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Re-Assessment of John Wayne Airport

Is it possible for someone to re-assess the John Wayne Airport article. I've cleaned up a lot of stuff in the article and tried to make it more factual and less opinon - a lot of others have also contributed to this. Would love to hear any feedback on anything that you deem is keeping it at the rating it is. More than happy to spend the time to tweak and re-write further. Np sca (talk) 04:21, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

New task force: California State University

Greetings, I've converted California State University WikiProject into a task force of WikiProject California since it has been inactive, which will be added to the banner soon. If you have any comments, please discuss here. Thank for your time. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions) 06:11, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

mis-labeled photo?

I'm probably not a picture of Redrock Island

I'm pretty sure the 3rd photo in the Red Rock Island article is not a photo of Red Rock Island. Just from looking at it, the photo seems to depict a different island. The characteristics: there is no Coast Guard structure on the other pictures of the island (the island is private, so I think it would be odd to have a Coast Guard structure). Also in the foreground of the picture, you can see rocks that look a lot like they are on the shore (which would also explain the photographer's proximity to it without being on a boat) and a small wave emblematic of the coastline. Red Rock Island, however, is quite far from the shore. It is also bigger than what appears in the photo in question. Is there some format for dealing with this? I'd just assume erase it, but I don't want to be presumptuous. It's also being used in another article, Richmond. Lastly, the photographer who uploaded it is red-linked, so I don't imagine he/she's coming back soon. Advice?

Almonroth 23:52, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

I believe the photo is authentic, even if the caption is misleading. I've commented further at Talk:Red Rock Island. —Stepheng3 (talk) 00:19, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
thanks, Stepheng3. I responded to you there. Probably a rather trivial issue, but I appreciate your feedback! Almonroth 00:41, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Photo requests

Are there any users in the Bel-Air/Westside area of Los Angeles? If so, would anyone mind photographing the Community Charter Elementary and Roscomare Road Elementaries for the Bel-Air article? Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 06:13, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Leon Panetta as a United States Wikipedians' Collaboration of the Month candidate

Greetings, as a WikiProject that relates to this article, this notice was sent to let you know that the article, Leon Panetta, has been nominated to be a future Collaboration of the Month article. All editors interested in voting for or improving these article are encouraged to participate. You can cast your vote here. --Kumioko (talk) 16:41, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

WikiWomen's History Month

Hi everyone. March is Women's History Month and I'm hoping a few folks here at WP:California will have interest in putting on events (on and off wiki) related to women's roles in California's history, society and culture. We've created an event page on English Wikipedia (please translate!) and I hope you'll find the inspiration to participate. These events can take place off wiki, like edit-a-thons, or on wiki, such as themes and translations. Please visit the page here: WikiWomen's History Month. Thanks for your consideration and I look forward to seeing events take place! SarahStierch (talk) 23:53, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Rodeo Cove/Beach merger proposal

Hello Bay Area editors. I'm proposing merging Rodeo Cove into Rodeo Beach. You can add your thoughts here. Rupert Clayton (talk) 00:57, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

San Francisco Bay Area AfD'd discussion

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#Revisiting AfD. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 06:03, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Jose Vargas

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Jose Antonio Vargas#Immigration status. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 17:40, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

History of the Hmong in Merced, California

You are invited to join the discussion about History of the Hmong in Merced, California at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Asian_Americans#History_of_the_Hmong_in_Merced.2C_California WhisperToMe (talk) 18:15, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

AFD filed: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of the Hmong in Merced, California WhisperToMe (talk) 18:53, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Notability of possible article subject

You are invited to join the discussion at WP:N/N#Death of Sgt. Manuel Loggins Jr.. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 20:05, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

OR-7, Journey the Wolf

Informing project members that I have started an article for OR-7, the wolf also known as Journey, who has traveled throughout Oregon and California and captured the attention of many people in the process. No question about notability here, as far as I am concerned, given the amount of attention this wolf has received. This article would make a great collaboration for WikiProject California, WikiProject Dogs and WikiProject Oregon. May the adventure continue... --Another Believer (Talk) 15:22, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Assessment updates

Anyone know how often, or when, or how, the assessment summaries shown here are done? i want to see the current numbers for the sfba task force. are the dates given the dates this program is run? really ignorant so far.(mercurywoodrose)75.61.128.131 (talk) 03:39, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject University of California

I noticed that WikiProject University of California is currently in an inactive status and would like to add it under the supported projects list of WikiProject United States. before I do that though I wanted to give you first dibs on adding it under your scope. Please let me know if you have any questions. Kumioko (talk) 18:00, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

I think that it should go under WPCalifornia, perhaps as a task force or work group, like whatever SFBA is.--Hjal (talk) 19:30, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, thats fine by me I'll scratch that one off my list. Kumioko (talk) 19:36, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Adjusting the page by adding few more facts.

I'm planning to contribute to the page by adding the follwing facts: The page should also talk about the De Anza College clubs origin, activities, contribution and schedule link. De Anza club catagories: •Academics •Community Service •Diversity •Political •Religious •Special Interest •Sports •Support Also noting the fact that there is one club day every quarter. In addition, the statement in the De Anza wiki page "One of the well known internships they have available to its students is at the NASA Ames Research Center." is not true anymore because of the budget cuts it has been revoked. But the OTI ( Occupational Training Institute ) in deanza is still active and provides internship for computer major studens in one of its program called CalTechs. References: <http://www.deanza.edu/oti/> <http://www.deanza.edu/clubs/clublist_category.html> Cynide45 (talk) 05:19, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Unit history discussion

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:79th Infantry Brigade Combat Team (United States)#Differing histories. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 16:33, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Morse High School Alumni List

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Morse High School (San Diego, California)#IAR Petition. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:50, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Indigenous languages of California

Hello, we have been working to activate WikiProject Indigenous languages of California. How does this project fit in with WikiProject California? Djembayz (talk) 14:40, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

Content weight discussion

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station#Anti-nuclear protests section. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 17:47, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

WikiProject Westerns

Westernsfilm.png Howdy, WikiProject California!
Your editing history indicates that you may be interested in joining the new Westerns WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve and maintain Wikipedia's coverage of fictional Wild West articles. If you are interested in participating, you are welcome to sign up at the project page. We hope you will join us!
Ma®©usBritish{chat} 01:44, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Well, it's not particularly well worded for non-userpages, but yeah, this WikiProject is now setup and still in the early stages of building its project area before user-participation can really begin to function. Anyone interested, please feel free to join. Note, this project not only covers film and TV, but Western novels, comics, actors, directors and authors, etc who make the fictional-Wild West possible. Thanks, Ma®©usBritish{chat} 01:44, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Notability tag on Eldad Matityahu bio

I have written a basic bio of Eldad Matityahu, the founder of Net Optics. Other editors have now twice added a notability flag, without commenting on the talk page. I removed the flag myself the first time, after increasing the number of references from 2 to 11, with an explanation on the article's talk page.

I'm reluctant to remove the flag myself again without any discussion or input from others, but I believe notability is not a problem. The article is based on 11 independent citations. Several are general profiles about Eldad. Coverage also ranges beyond his role as an entrepreneur -- including his interest in classic cars and his philanthropic endeavors.

Could somebody take a look and remove the notability flag if you agree, or else share your views in the thread I started on the article's talk page? Thanks, -RonnyG1 (talk) 21:13, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Julia Morgan 2012 Celebration, Landmarks California

Landmarks California is kicking off their first event and they have chosen California architect Julia Morgan as a way to highlight the importance of the historical preservation of buildings. October and November 2012 are going to be the active months. It would be fantastic if editors here could buckle down and make improving the Julia Morgan biography a priority. Articles about her buildings could be improved, too.

A new book has been written about Julia Morgan's life and career: Julia Morgan: Architect of Beauty, by Mark Anthony Wilson, an architectural historian. Interested editors would be encouraged to locate a copy of this book because it brings some new information to light. Binksternet (talk) 22:56, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Which county is this address in?

Hi! This district list http://www.losal.org/14631062413460983/lib/14631062413460983/Attendance_Boundaries_Summary-One_Sheet.pdf mentions the even number streets of "Claremore Lane 2900 - 2972" as being within the school district. Are these residences really in Long Beach city? What county is this portion in?

Also what city is "Huntington Harbor Boats Dock F" inside? Thanks, WhisperToMe (talk) 03:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Fix Cleanup listing

Can someone please fix this page? Wikipedia:WikiProject California/Cleanup listing The bot which updates it has been inactive since March 2010 and the page itself is impossibly long. Thanks. --S. Rich (talk) 23:35, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Article idea

There is presently an article Greenmail, however, I have found sufficient reliable sources to support notability of an article about Greenmail (California) or some other name, or as a new section in a relevant article.

--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 21:32, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Antonio Miranda Rodriguez

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Los Angeles Pobladores#Filipino Pabladore?. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 22:36, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

Category:Alcatraz inmates

Category:Alcatraz inmates, which is within the scope of this WikiProject, has been nominated for renaming to Category:Inmates of Alcatraz Federal Penitentiary. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 14:27, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

New importance rating

WP has used Category:Bottom-importance articles for a while now, and i am curious why its so rarely used. I think it would be appropriate here.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 18:21, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

I don't think it's necessary for this wikiproject. We have done well without it since the creation of the project.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:20, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

184th & 185th Infantry Regiments

Although this might be better directed to WP:MILHIST, I would like to ask here first. I see that the articles of the 184th & 185th Infantry Regiments both state that they are active. However, only one (184th) is part of the present 79th Infantry BCT that is almost half of the California Army National Guard (the other part being the Aviation Brigade of the 40th ID, and other miscellaneous units). That being said, there is an article, as recently as 2011 stating that a regiment member was killed in action, and I cannot find any reliable source stating that the unit has been deactivated. Any assistance regarding this inquiry would be appreciated.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:00, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

  • One company returned from OIF in March 2008.
It is presently listed as inactive.
As no answer has yet been received, I will ask MILHIST folk to comment.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 06:39, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
  • Update

I have received a reply from the curator at the California Military Museum regarding my inquiry. Here it is below:

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED

Caveats: FOUO

J****. I am assuming that the 1/185 Inf was reorganized out of existence in 1976 when the HHC 49th Inf Bde was converted to an MP Bde. The battalion was reraised in 2003 and did mobilize separate companies to Iraq. It appears to have been reorganized into a CSS Bn. These is a lot of confusion since the 1/185th Armor was reorganized into a hybrid combined arms battalion.

I will check with the Force structure people in DC and see if they have any clearer information.


D** S****, Sergeant Major (Ret)
Curator, The California State Military Museum
Part of the U.S. Army and U.S. Air Force Museum Systems

1119 Second Street

Sacramento, California 95814-3202

I have redacted my name, as well as the Sergeant Major's. This is a good start, but I wrote back that Wikipedia requires somewhere where there is a reliable source that we can point to to correct the 185th's article, as well as the date when the regiment was inactivated. Additionally, through him, I have asked if it were possible to request a new "Lineage and Honors" document from the United States Army Center of Military History.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 23:34, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Charlie company, 1/185 Infantry received a Meritorious Unit Commendation for their Iraq deployment in 2007-2008. These orders may help with the search.--Mattmc76 (talk) 19:38, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

So at minimum the Regiment was active until at least March 2008, but when was it deactivate and redesignated?--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 03:51, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
I don't have exact dates, but I recall in early 2006 that their Charlie company from San Jose was deactivated and some of the Soldiers were reassigned to Bravo company 1/184 Infantry. It appears that the 1/185 Infantry was a drilling ARNG unit before then, as they were called up for Operation Noble Eagle immediately after the 9/11 attacks. They may now be a drilling unit out of Los Alamitos, since this article mentions that their Bravo company is based there.--Mattmc76 (talk) 20:25, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

New article on novel Donkey Punch

I've created this new article. If you've got additional input for secondary sources, please feel free to suggest them at the article's talk page, I'd really appreciate it. :) Cheers, — Cirt (talk) 18:19, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion: Ecology of California

Ecology of California has been proposed for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ecology of California. Please feel free to join in the discussion. —hike395 (talk) 02:58, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Is "The Bungalows" in Long Beach?

Hi! Please see this ref desk post Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities#Location_of_street_address_in_California_and_attributes on whether "The Bungalows" is in Long Beach Thanks WhisperToMe (talk) 18:39, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

California State Assembly vs. U.S. House of Representatives

There is an error in displaying the California State Assembly in the articles of current and former members in their infoboxes on the right side of the page. Instead it shows the U.S. House of Representatives, which is wrong. Looking over most articles you can clearly see which is the CSA tenure and which is the USHOR tenure (if that person has been in both bodies). If someone with familiarity with this particular infobox could look into and fix this issue that would be ideal.-Toyz1988 (talk) 22:27, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

Wikimedia Cascadia

There has been a little bit of activity at the Wikimedia Cascadia page at Meta, along with its associated talk page. If you have any thoughts on this proposed organization, I am all ears (as I know others are as well). Feedback? Interest? Questions? --Another Believer (Talk) 03:56, 29 November 2012 (UTC)

Template:California topic

I have created Template:California topic and as an example converted Template:California history to use it. A good example of the usefulness of such templates, the History of Visalia, California is now automatically included, and there is no need to constantly update the template as new cities get articles. I believe a large number of California topical navboxes can be converted and would be easier to maintain, especially with city-by-city articles.

The one question is whether to include all cities, and if not which ones and how to override it, and whether to set the color to {{California/color}} by default... Int21h (talk) 01:51, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

California Elections / Ballot Measures Pages

I've just started editing Wikipedia and found incomplete information about California ballot measures for 2012. I'm curious whether this was intentional?

Are there others interested in election information in this project, who can tell me more about the philosophy behind creation (or the decision not to create) pages for ballot measures?

I'd like to add more content, but would add it to Ballotpedia, for example, if you think that is a better approach.--Jennywaggo (talk) 00:57, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Category:California

Category:California has the {{container category}} template yet it has pages as well as subcategories in it. Also, it has template and WikiProject sub-categories in it. From what I have seen the other US state categories do not do this, or most other categories for that matter. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 00:05, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Chinese-language newspapers in LA/Orange counties in the 1990s

Hi! What are some Chinese-language newspapers active in LA and Orange counties in the 1990s?

At Talk:Murder_of_Stuart_Tay#Chinese names I'm trying to find the Chinese names of two of the perpetrators but can't find anything online - Perhaps a Chinese-language newspaper in California has written an article about the case, but the article isn't online?

WhisperToMe (talk) 04:52, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

Issue at Government of California

I have an issue with the opening sentence at the article Government of California, which begins "The government of California comprises a democratic republic ..." I don't think that is an accurate description of the state, or an appropriate use of the phrase Democratic republic. I'd appreciate any input at Talk:Government of California#Democratic republic???. Thanks. --MelanieN (talk) 20:21, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

The problem has been fixed. Thanks. --MelanieN (talk) 16:12, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Talk:David Westerfield

At Talk:David Westerfield I am concerned about some of the talk page arguments made by some posters. It seems like they are using OR research points, not realizing that analysis should be left up to secondary sources. Since it's a BLP it's something to be cautious on. WhisperToMe (talk) 05:31, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't see any recent edits to the Talk Page over there. Which sections trouble you? GeorgeLouis (talk) 09:37, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Talk:2012 Benghazi attack/Archives/2013/January#Pruned information regarding Wood & Doherty

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:2012 Benghazi attack/Archives/2013/January#Pruned information regarding Wood & Doherty. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 08:46, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Hey There

There is currently a discussion regarding the lead paragraph on the talk page of Sony Pictures Entertainment. As it according to it's talk page banner falls under this project, some input from participants of this project would be appreciated. Regards. MisterShiney 08:36, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Removal of burrito content RfC

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Burrito#Request for comment. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 20:39, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

RfC: deprecate articles by importance

No consensus to deprecate article importance.

Oppose !votes: Binksternet (talk · contribs) RightCowLeftCoast (talk · contribs) Miniapolis (talk · contribs)

Support !votes: Mcd51 (talk · contribs) BDD (talk · contribs) Viriditas (talk · contribs)

Non-admin close by request at WP:ANRFC by VanIsaacWS Vexcontribs 13:58, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

The following discussion 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.

Choosing and sorting articles by importance is an arbitrary and mostly misunderstood process that no longer serves this project. In fact, the most active WikiProjects no longer use the importance rating at all and have opted to go with a streamlined "core" article rating in its place. This is a proposal to deprecate all articles by importance (including task forces) and to use a core rating for all articles in its place. Arguments for maintaining the status quo and opposing this proposal should demonstrate how sorting California articles by importance is accurate, helpful, and necessary. Viriditas (talk) 01:44, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Discussion

  • Comment. What are other state wikiprojects doing? USA? Binksternet (talk) 02:00, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

Oppose Although some active WikiProjects don't use the importance scale, I think most still do for a good reason: while the quality scale is an encyclopedia-wide assessment, the importance scale is helpful in determining how best to use the resources of a given WikiProject. The scales complement each other, and one extra parameter on the template doesn't seem too time-consuming. Miniapolis (talk) 03:56, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Support, with the caveat that I'm unaffiliated with the project and was simply recruited by the RFC bot. Importance ratings are always arbitrary and frequently ignored, at least from what I've seen. Perhaps some WikiProjects make good use of importance ratings; if so, I wouldn't begrudge them the option. --BDD (talk) 21:49, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose, I do not see any major issue with the importance rating continued use.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 21:37, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I get the sense that California editors have made fairly good use of the importance rating system, enough to make it useful for this project if no other. When you check the Category:Unknown-importance California articles, you'll see there is definitely some work to do—13,800 articles need attention versus 27k that have been assessed for importance. Especially notable is the yeoman work done primarily by Mercurywoodrose to completely empty the Category:Unknown-importance San Francisco Bay Area articles. If someone were to pick up the torch for Southern California articles the state could start looking more together. In the larger picture the USA needs 20k articles seen to vs 320k that have been assessed by importance. I should think that all the effort put into this classification scheme should be kept in place. Binksternet (talk) 22:28, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
Don't you think the very large number of unassessed articles shows precisely that this project isn't using importance ratings, though? By contrast, the numbers for WPUSA seem to suggest the ratings are relatively important, though I'm sure that's skewed by the fact that some of its child projects are automatically marked as low importance (take it from this forlorn Idaho resident). --BDD (talk) 01:09, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Weakly support. Agree with the criticism that the importance ratings for this project seem pretty arbitrary; when I used to work on this project the ratings seemed biased towards giving greater importance to NorCal pages over similar SoCal pages. I guess I'd care more about this if anyone did anything with the articles after they've been rated, but it doesn't seem like the ratings ever amount to any real changes to the articles. If people want to keep on arbitrarily assigning importance ratings, it probably wouldn't hurt. mcd51 (talk) 05:24, 4 January 2013 (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.


Congressional district maps

At the articles about the state's congressional districts, such as California's 53rd congressional district, the congressional district maps are outdated. I have started updating the descriptions of the districts, but I don't know how to put in the new maps. One source for the new maps is at wedrawthelines.ca.gov - District 53 for example. This looks like a state government site but I'm not familiar enough with Wikipedia image and copyright guidelines to know if we can use it. Anybody want to take this on? Thanks. --MelanieN (talk) 16:19, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

You may want to also ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Congress, where they may know a better source for updated congressional maps. Zzyzx11 (talk) 16:43, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
It is a California government site. Images produced by California Citizens Redistricting Commission, are in the public domain, see the ownership section here.
Good luck in updating the district information!--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:49, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
Do you want to take on the maps? I don't know the first thing about uploading images. --MelanieN (talk) 00:29, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
I can, the Commision's website, only has state wide maps, congressional map are presently not hosted anywhere, as the UC Berkeley hosted map website is down. So we may have to wait a month or so.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:52, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
It appears that the maps have moved to this website, however they districts are not individually rendered as they were on the State Assembly website for that 2001 maps. I do not know how to extract each map individually; however, one potential way is to get a screen capture of each district and upload it to Wikicommons.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 05:57, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Article name

I moved an article. There is some disagreement. See Talk:List_of_native_plants_in_California#Name_of_article. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 18:50, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

Scope

Are biographies about people from a certain region, including a state, fall within the scope of a WikiProject that covers that region (or state)? For example, how about Gray Davis or Emperor Norton or Cheryl Cox?--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 03:43, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Makes sense to me, especially for people who are strongly associated with the region (didn't just attend school there for a year or two). —Stepheng3 (talk) 19:06, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
How about members of the military who reside in California? Say Rudolph B. Davila?--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 19:11, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
Or how about Alfred V. Rascon?--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 19:12, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
Not so clear in those two cases. —Stepheng3 (talk) 21:09, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

New Task Force proposal

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California/Southern California task force#Baja California. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:46, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

2013 Southern California shootings

2013 Southern California shootings has been requested to be renamed, see talk:2013 Southern California shootings -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 23:33, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Jose Antonio Vargas

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Jose Antonio Vargas#Blanking of content verified by multiple reliable sources. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:30, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Larry Thomas (actor)

Larry Thomas (actor) is at WonderCon Anaheim March 29 - 31. We could use a picture of him in character for his article and The Soup Nazi. Does anyone know anyone who is going? If they mention the shots will be for Wikipedia he may pose for some good ones.--Canoe1967 (talk) 10:45, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

HuntingtonBeach-1904.jpg

file:HuntingtonBeach-1904.jpg has been nominated for deletion -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 01:30, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Requested Articles

I created a new subpage of the project, Wikipedia:WikiProject California/Requested Articles, which is linked to at the "to do" list, but i thought people should know its here now. I scoured the WP:Requested Articles for "calif", found a good collection.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 06:02, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for doing this. Barnstar search is under way. GeorgeLouis (talk) 18:08, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

Portal:California/Did you know/6

in Portal:California/Did you know/6, the third item, Julia Tuttle, has absolutely no California connection. i removed the info, and placed a placeholder there until a replacement is found. I don't know how active the DYK section of the portal is. if no one does, I may add a selection at some point.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 04:01, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

An MfD concerning your WikiProject

Not sure if you guys are aware of this, but a subpage of your project has been sent to MfD. The nominator probably should have brought this up here before nominating it. Please feel free to leave comments. TCN7JM 00:06, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

That was me, also creating the list of requested articles i was just lauded for. I guess i figured notification of this would appear here automatically. If i should have known to bring it here first, my apologies, and i get that it can stay as historic. but im not giving my barnstar back!Mercurywoodrose (talk) 04:03, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
LOL! Binksternet (talk) 04:28, 3 April 2013 (UTC)
There is actually a second page nominated as well (by the same editor). ···日本穣? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 04:39, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Klamath Mountains

Huge difference between numbers given by different sources. Would anyone mind looking into this? Jsayre64 (talk) 18:44, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Request for comment

Your attention is called to this section, Use Mapping L.A. as reliable source?, which could use your expert input. GeorgeLouis (talk) 16:03, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Mendocino War

Hi All! I just updated and wrote an article for the Mendocino War because it was previously a stub. Check it out and see what you think! Feel free to edit or provide any feedback!Bellitan (talk) 20:11, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Largest cities of California

Ambox warning pn.svgTemplate:Largest cities of California has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. I am not the nominator for this deletion. It was nominated March 31 and I did not see a notice on this projects talk page. CRwikiCA talk 18:40, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Anyone in LA to take pictures?

Hello. Could anyone in LA take pictures of this place: Hillside Memorial Park Cemetery? If you are interested in working with me, there is a series of other locations and historic residences to take pictures of. I thought I would ask here to speed things up. Please reply on my talkpage if interested. Thank you.Zigzig20s (talk) 03:08, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Meet up suggestion

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Meetup/LA#San_Diego Comic Con. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:04, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

FYI, the discussion has moved to Wikipedia talk:Meetup/LA/SDCC1.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 19:26, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Central California

The article Central California is suffering from a grossly poor definition of Central California, one that often contradicts the sources cited in the article. Thmazing (talk) 21:46, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

General Grant Grove

Hello Wikipedia! I recently updated the article on General Grant Grove, which previously was a stub. Please check it out and see what you think! I'd value feedback and a rating! Newhousj (talk) 20:50, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Content dispute discussion

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station#Call for criminal investigation by Senator Barbara Boxer: section added, deleted, reverted back. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 22:01, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

Quality improvement project for Chris Field (Los Angeles musician)

I've rewritten the article Chris Field (Los Angeles musician), DIFF.

Further suggestions for additional secondary sources would be most appreciated, at the article's talk page, at Talk:Chris Field (Los Angeles musician).

Cirt (talk) 02:37, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

Input needed at Talk:History of California

A significant discussion is underway at Talk:History of California#Dublin IP editor contributions. Additional input would be appreciated. --MelanieN (talk) 18:10, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

James Boon Lankershim

Hi. I just created James Boon Lankershim's page (and also his father's, Isaac Lankershim), two major landowners from California who developed the San Fernando Valley and buildings in downtown LA. However, the editing process has changed and I've just tried to add a 'legacy' section to James's page, but Lankershim Boulevard is not wikified. I don't understand why. Is there a way to revert to the old editing process? This looks like a nightmare to use. By the way, feel free to expand those pages and, if you can figure out how to add their pictures, you can find them on FindAGrave (old enough to have no problem with copyright I think). Thanks.Zigzig20s (talk) 05:38, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

The wikify was just fixed by someone else. Do help with expanding the pages and adding pictures if you can though. Thanks.Zigzig20s (talk) 05:39, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Help finding reliable California elections history for 1966 and 1970 gubernatorial elections

Hello, I am working to get Electoral history of Ronald Reagan into a much better state than it is currently. I have the bare bones of the article ready in my sandbox, but have run into a very significant hurdle - I cannot find any reliable source relating to the 1966 and 1970 gubernatorial election primaries. I have looked all over the place, including the website for the Secretary of State, but there does not seem to be any record of elections prior to 1992 on that website. These should exist, because the Secretary of State of California issues a Statement of Vote for all elections, including primaries. I was wondering if any of you here at WikiProject California know of or have access to these records - it is important to documenting thoroughly the electoral history of Reagan in California. Thank you in advance for any help you can offer. :) Toa Nidhiki05 21:13, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

I suggest you contact the California State Archives.—Stepheng3 (talk) 21:29, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Does the archive provide services to people who are not citizens of the state? I am from North Carolina (quite a ways away from California). Toa Nidhiki05 21:49, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
You need to find somebody with a Los Angeles Public Library card who can access the L.A. Times archives from a library computer. Unfortunately, the LAPL has put an end to the LAT archive service to offsite computers. Of course many other news sources carried stories about those two races as well. GeorgeLouis (talk) 22:54, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Hm... I don't know anyone in the LA area, let alone with an LA card. I've checked news outlets as well as HighBeam, but neither really seem to have exact primary details. The only website that has them is OurCampaigns.com, which doesn't seem to be very reliable to me. Toa Nidhiki05 01:24, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Request for comment

Your attention is called to this discussion. GeorgeLouis (talk) 05:26, 9 July 2013 (UTC)

First San Diego Comic-Con International meetup location renewed discussion

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Meetup/LA/SDCC1#Location. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 06:33, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

For those able to attend, the meetup (Wikipedia:Meetup/LA/SDCC1) is today.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 11:15, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Image discussion at article 17 Mile Drive

Please help find a consensus on images for the article stub at: Talk:17-Mile Drive#17 Mile Drive info box and section images replacement.--Amadscientist (talk) 04:15, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

New article stub

I just created 2013 California prisoner hunger strike, obviously notable, but i would like help in fleshing it out. its pretty well linked, categorized and connected to projects, but needs many more references and of course more detail.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 18:57, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Assistance, please

Are there any project members who might be willing to take a quick look at this article? I have requested a copy edit from the Guild of Copy Editors and I have also nominated this article for Good status. My concern, though, is that my account of the statue's location within the Civic Center is accurate. What confuses me is the timeline for construction of the Civic Center, movement of the library and Asian Art Museum, etc. I found one location for the unveiling and another for its current location. Might contributors with more familiarity with the history of San Francisco be able to help? Any assistance is greatly appreciated. --Another Believer (Talk) 15:38, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

Notification of nomination for deletion of Sunrise Aviation

This is to inform the members of this Wikiproject, within the scope of which this article falls, that this article has been nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sunrise Aviation. - Ahunt (talk) 22:24, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Museum Looking for GLAM Contacts in California

Hi, I'm the Wikipedian in Residence at the Metropolitan New York Library Council in New York. I'm looking for Wikipedians and GLAM contacts in the L.A. area to connect with a contact at a museum in L.A. who is interested in the Wikipedian-in-Residence program and GLAM-Wiki. She is also affiliated with the L.A. as Subject program. Please contact me if you are interested. OR drohowa (talk) 15:34, 27 September 2013 (UTC) Special:EmailUser/OR drohowa.

Drake's Cove, Drakes Bay, California, 1579.JPG

image:Drake's Cove, Drakes Bay, California, 1579.JPG has been nominated for deletion -- 65.92.181.39 (talk) 06:06, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Request for Comment

Regarding a merge of Rancho New Helvetia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) to New Helvetia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). >>>Discussion is Here<<<; Dated October 17 2013

Any opinions on merging Rancho New Helvetica and New Helvetica? One is the land grant, one is the settlement. There is a bit of confusion as to a second possible location. Not sure which should be the article name, and which the redirect. Djembayz (talk) 17:27, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of Beatrice Kozera for deletion

Beatrice Kozera was the Mexican farmworker girlfriend who inspired one of Jack Kerouac's characters, and the subject of a film and an upcoming fictional biography. Djembayz (talk) 00:04, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Uh oh

When I type in "Silicone Valley" into the search field ... I'm sent to the Adult Entertainment of the San Fernando Valley page. Seems wrong but I haven't a clue how to fix. Please help. 98.125.230.21 (talk) 01:47, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 December 25#Silicone Valley -Optigan13 (talk) 19:28, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

If someone has time/interest the banner ad needs fixing. When it says "¿Sabes So Cal?" it should be "¿Conoces California?". Originally I had taken the File:Flag_of_California.svg, stretched the red and white across the page, and put some animated text in flash. But I can't locate any of my project files for when I made it so it would be from scratch again. Someone let me know about this months ago and just haven't had any time or interest in fixing it diff. See File:Qxz-ad182.gif -Optigan13 (talk) 19:35, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Silicone Valley

At Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 December 25#Silcone Valley discussion reached consensus to retarget the Silicone Valley redirect to Silicon Valley. Your opinion would now be welcome about whether Silcon Valley should have a hatnote pointing to San Fernando Valley#Adult ednterainment, the former target of the redirect and only other notable meaning of the term. Please comment at Talk:Silicon Valley#Hatnote, thanks. Thryduulf (talk) 23:54, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Invitation to User Study

Would you be interested in participating in a user study? We are a team at University of Washington studying methods for finding collaborators within a Wikipedia community. We are looking for volunteers to evaluate a new visualization tool. All you need to do is to prepare for your laptop/desktop, web camera, and speaker for video communication with Google Hangout. We will provide you with a Amazon gift card in appreciation of your time and participation. For more information about this study, please visit our wiki page (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Finding_a_Collaborator). If you would like to participate in our user study, please send me a message at Wkmaster (talk) 18:34, 22 January 2014 (UTC).

Category:History of the San Joaquin Valley Area

A CFD discussion has been started on a proposal to rename this category, hinging on the question of whether it is appropriate to include the Sierra Foothills as part of the "SJV Area" along with the SJ Valley proper. Please join the discussion. Cgingold (talk) 17:59, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Adrianne Wadewitz deletion discussion notice

  1. Adrianne Wadewitz
  2. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adrianne Wadewitz

There is an ongoing deletion discussion taking place now about whether or not to have a biographical article about Adrianne Wadewitz on Wikipedia.

The discussion is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adrianne Wadewitz.

For those newer to Wikipedia, you may wish to read Wikipedia:Articles for deletion and Wikipedia:Notability.

Cirt (talk) 15:15, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Just to let you know

I tried to use this project's watch list at: Wikipedia:WikiProject_California#External watchlist, but I get this error message: "Query error: Query execution was interrupted" XOttawahitech (talk) 21:33, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

It works today - thanks so much to whoever fixed it. XOttawahitech (talk) 20:19, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Comic-Con Panel ideas discussion

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Archive 45#Comic-Con Panel. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 11:32, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

Popular pages tool update

As of January, the popular pages tool has moved from the Toolserver to Wikimedia Tool Labs. The code has changed significantly from the Toolserver version, but users should notice few differences. Please take a moment to look over your project's list for any anomalies, such as pages that you expect to see that are missing or pages that seem to have more views than expected. Note that unlike other tools, this tool aggregates all views from redirects, which means it will typically have higher numbers. (For January 2014 specifically, 35 hours of data is missing from the WMF data, which was approximated from other dates. For most articles, this should yield a more accurate number. However, a few articles, like ones featured on the Main Page, may be off).

Web tools, to replace the ones at tools:~alexz/pop, will become available over the next few weeks at toollabs:popularpages. All of the historical data (back to July 2009 for some projects) has been copied over. The tool to view historical data is currently partially available (assessment data and a few projects may not be available at the moment). The tool to add new projects to the bot's list is also available now (editing the configuration of current projects coming soon). Unlike the previous tool, all changes will be effective immediately. OAuth is used to authenticate users, allowing only regular users to make changes to prevent abuse. A visible history of configuration additions and changes is coming soon. Once tools become fully available, their toolserver versions will redirect to Labs.

If you have any questions, want to report any bugs, or there are any features you would like to see that aren't currently available on the Toolserver tools, see the updated FAQ or contact me on my talk page. Mr.Z-bot (talk) (for Mr.Z-man) 04:56, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

AfD: Telegraph Berkeley

This article for deletion is relevant to your wikiproject, so your users may be interested in commenting. 0x0077BE [talk/contrib] 23:23, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Additional opinions needed...

...at Talk:Santa Ana Mountains BMK (talk) 13:21, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Where is he?

Can we get a photo for Rick Dore Kustoms? dont know what city he is in.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 07:51, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

indigenous people RMs concerning California

Some include dab/primarytopic issues, please see current discussions WP:RM. I haven't covered the whole of California yet.Skookum1 (talk) 08:40, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Invitation to Participate in a User Study - Final Reminder

Would you be interested in participating in a user study of a new tool to support editor involvement in WikiProjects? We are a team at the University of Washington studying methods for finding collaborators within WikiProjects, and we are looking for volunteers to evaluate a new visual exploration tool for Wikipedia. Given your interest in this Wikiproject, we would welcome your participation in our study. To participate, you will be given access to our new visualization tool and will interact with us via Google Hangout so that we can solicit your thoughts about the tool. To use Google Hangout, you will need a laptop/desktop, a web camera, and a speaker for video communication during the study. We will provide you with an Amazon gift card in appreciation of your time and participation. For more information about this study, please visit our wiki page (http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Finding_a_Collaborator). If you would like to participate in our user study, please send me a message at Wkmaster (talk) 00:56, 27 March 2014 (UTC).

Afc/Rotating Armature Alternators- Folsom Powerhouse State Historic Park

I want to help the Article Folsom Powerhouse State Historic Park.
Please find my article for creation and my credentials in user: Douglas Nelson Turner (talk) 14:17, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

I have worked out how the generators are wired and the three phases developed. I would like to add a table of Contents and a "heading" about the generators.
If that is not appropriate, I would like to make a new Atricle on the subject.
Answer at my user talk, please. Thank you
Douglas Nelson Turner (talk) 14:17, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Deletion discussion for Wiki Education Foundation

  1. Wiki Education Foundation
  2. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wiki Education Foundation

There is a deletion discussion ongoing for article Wiki Education Foundation.

Discussion page is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wiki Education Foundation.

Cirt (talk) 18:29, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Request for copy of master's degree thesis at California State University LA for Spanish-language AFD discussion

Please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_California/Los_Angeles_task_force#Request_for_copy_of_master.27s_degree_thesis_at_California_State_University_LA_for_Spanish-language_AFD_discussion

If anybody lives in or near California State University, Los Angeles, are you willing to scan copies of this master's thesis for me:

It is important because there is an AFD on the Spanish Wikipedia about the es:Liceo Mexicano Japonés (English article) es:Wikipedia:Consultas de borrado/Liceo Mexicano Japonés

Thank you WhisperToMe (talk) 05:36, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Here's the library record of the thesis: http://xerxes.calstate.edu/losangeles/books/record?id=b1577414 WhisperToMe (talk) 08:59, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Yes check.svg Done I have received a copy of the relevant pages of the thesis. WhisperToMe (talk) 03:05, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

May 10 Asian Pacific American edit-a-thon in LA

LA Meetup: May 10 Asian Pacific American edit-a-thon
Smithsonian logo color.svg

Dear fellow Wikipedian,

You have been invited to a meetup and edit-a-thon at the Junipero Serra Branch of the LA Public Library (4607 S. Main St., 90037) on Saturday, May 10, 2014 from 10 am to 4 pm! This event is sponsored by the Smithsonian Asian Pacific American Center and the Asian Pacific American Librarians Association and aims to improve coverage of Asian Pacific American topics, particularly as they relate to southern California. Please RSVP here if you're interested.

I hope to see you there! Calliopejen1 (talk) - via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:11, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list.

Wiki Loves Pride

Are there any Californians interested in participating in Wiki Loves Pride 2014, a multi-national effort to improve coverage of LGBT-related content at Wikimedia projects? Perhaps an edit-a-thon in San Francisco or Los Angeles? Please visit the project page for details or let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! --Another Believer (Talk) 17:27, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

LA edit-a-thons on May 23 and 31

LA meetups: Adrianne Wadewitz memorial edit-a-thons on May 23 and May 31
Adrianne Wadewitz-6727.jpg

Dear fellow Wikipedian,

There are two LA edit-a-thons in memory of Adrianne Wadewitz, a prolific Wikipedia editor, in the coming weeks. Please join us May 23 at Occidental College and May 31 at the Institute of Cultural Inquiry to combat systemic bias and help further Adrianne's legacy. No experience needed! Please RSVP at the relevant page(s) if you plan to attend.

I hope to see you there! Calliopejen1 (talk) - via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:28, 14 May 2014 (UTC)

To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list.

Peer review

Requesting input here, please. Snuggums (talkcontributions) 21:04, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

L.A. events on June 21 and July 6

Upcoming L.A. events: Unforgetting L.A. edit-a-thon (Saturday, June 21, 12-5pm) and Wiknic (Sunday, July 6, ~9:30am-4pm)

Gallery at 356 S. Mission Rd.
Get hungry for the Wiknic!

Dear fellow Wikipedian,

The L.A. Wikipedia community has two exciting events coming up in the next few weeks: an edit-a-thon sponsored by the online magazine East of Borneo, and the fourth annual Los Angeles Wiknic!

The East of Borneo event is an edit-a-thon that aims to build a better history of art in Southern California. This next chapter of their Unforgetting L.A. series will take place on Saturday, June 21, 2014 from 12pm to 5pm at 356 S. Mission Rd. (map). Beginners welcome! Please RSVP here if you plan to attend. For more info, see eastofborneo.org/unforgetting.

The Wiknic is a part of the nationwide Great American Wiknic. We'll be grilling, getting to know each other better, and building the L.A. Wikipedia community! The event is tentatively planned for Pan-Pacific Park (map) and will be held on Sunday, July 6, 2014 from 9:30am to 4pm or so. Please RSVP and volunteer to bring food or drinks if possible!

I hope to see you there! Calliopejen1 (talk) - via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:59, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list.

Quality scale/review request?

The FAQ says I should use this talk page to ask about reviewing article quality ratings. It doesn't seem like this page is used much for that, but I figured I'd ask anyway - happy to be pointed elsewhere!

All of these are CA people (mostly artists and historically significant women) who are all currently marked stub-class or start-class, and that I think could be C or B-class- I'm just not sure how best to go about that, or what things I'm missing when looking at them myself.

Reviews, or suggestions, appreciated! LuisVilla (talk) 15:54, 17 June 2014 (UTC)

Leaflet For Wikiproject California At Wikimania 2014

Project Leaflet WikiProject Medicine back and front v1.png

Hi all,

My name is Adi Khajuria and I am helping out with Wikimania 2014 in London.

One of our initiatives is to create leaflets to increase the discoverability of various wikimedia projects, and showcase the breadth of activity within wikimedia. Any kind of project can have a physical paper leaflet designed - for free - as a tool to help recruit new contributors. These leaflets will be printed at Wikimania 2014, and the designs can be re-used in the future at other events and locations.

This is particularly aimed at highlighting less discoverable but successful projects, e.g:

• Active Wikiprojects: Wikiproject Medicine, WikiProject Video Games, Wikiproject Film

• Tech projects/Tools, which may be looking for either users or developers.

• Less known major projects: Wikinews, Wikidata, Wikivoyage, etc.

• Wiki Loves Parliaments, Wiki Loves Monuments, Wiki Loves ____

• Wikimedia thematic organisations, Wikiwomen’s Collaborative, The Signpost

For more information or to sign up for one for your project, go to:
Project leaflets
Adikhajuria (talk) 14:52, 18 June 2014 (UTC)


Greetings from GLAM-Wiki US

Invitation to join GLAM-Wiki US
tight

Hello! This WikiProject aligns closely with the work of the GLAM-Wiki initiative (Galleries, Libraries, Archives, and Museums), a global community of volunteers who assist cultural institutions with sharing resources with Wikimedia. GLAM-Wiki US is a new community initiative focused on organizing cultural collaborations within the United States. GLAM organizations are diverse and span numerous topics, from libraries and art museums to science centers and historic sites. We currently have a backlog of interested institutions- and we need your help!

1rightarrow.pngAre you interested in helping with current or future GLAM projects? Join→ Online Volunteers

We hope you'll join the growing GLAM-Wiki community in the US. Thank you!
-Lori Phillips (Talk), US Cultural Partnerships Coordinator
For more information visit→ The GLAM:US portal or GLAM-Wiki on Outreach

— Preceding undated comment added 20:05, March 24, 2012

March 9 edit-a-thon at MOCA in downtown LA

LA Meetup: March 9 edit-a-thon at MOCA
Moca.jpg

Dear fellow Wikipedian,

You have been invited to a meetup and edit-a-thon at the Museum of Contemporary Art in downtown Los Angeles on Sunday, March 9, 2014 from 11 am to 6 pm! This event is in collaboration with MOCA and the arts collective East of Borneo and aims to improve coverage of LA art since the 1980s. (Even if contemporary art isn't your thing, you're welcome to join too!) Please RSVP here if you're interested.

I hope to see you there! User:Calliopejen1 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:02, March 2, 2014‎

Who wants to make articles on LGBT culture in California cities?

I had started Template:LGBT Americans by location after making LGBT culture-related articles on Houston and Detroit. I notice others have started articles on the LGBT of other cities, but California remains absent. WhisperToMe (talk) 18:16, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

Category:Suicides by firearm in California

This is currently subcategorized by county, which in my opinion is a bad scheme because it splits what appears to be only about 100 articles by (at present) over two dozen counties, half of which only have one article. No other state's firearm suicide category is split by county, nor is the county of particular significance. Unless there's some compelling rationale for doing it this way, I think the county subcats should all be nominated for upmerging at CFD. postdlf (talk) 22:27, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Unforgetting L.A. edit-a-thon on September 6

Unforgetting L.A. edit-a-thon: Saturday, September 6 from 11am to 4pm
Armory Center for the Arts.jpg

Dear fellow Wikipedian,

You are invited to meet up with online magazine East of Borneo for an edit-a-thon to build a better history of art in Southern California. This next event in their Unforgetting L.A. series will take place on Saturday, September 6, 2014 from 11am - 4pm at the Armory Center for the Arts in Pasadena (map). Beginners welcome! Please RSVP here if you plan to attend. For more info, see eastofborneo.org/unforgetting.

I hope to see you there! Calliopejen1 (talk) - via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:39, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list.

Content inclusion or exclusion

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Jose Antonio Vargas#2011 License revocation. Thanks. RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:36, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

L.A. Meetup on September 21

The 20th Los Angeles meetup: Sunday, September 21 from 11am to 4pm

Dear fellow Wikipedian,

Join us on Sunday, September 21, from 11am to 4pm at Kramer Studio in Mid-City (map) for a meetup and edit-a-thon! Get to know the Los Angeles Wikipedia community and do some editing (or learn to edit!) in a collaborative environment. Please RSVP and consider becoming a member of the SoCal task force to help us improve articles about everything in the region.

I hope to see you there! Calliopejen1 (talk) - via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:00, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list.


L.A. events on October 7 and 16

Upcoming L.A. events: Wik-Ed Women edit-a-thon (10/7, 6-10pm) and UCR edit-a-thon (10/16, 10am-4pm)

Dear fellow Wikipedian,

The Southern California Wikipedia community has two exciting events coming up in the next few weeks: a Wik-Ed Women editing session downtown designed to combat systemic bias, and a Wikipedia Loves Libraries event at UC Riverside!

Wik-Ed Women is a new monthly series of informal Wikipedia editing sessions for Los Angeles women-in-the-arts (though all are welcome) to contribute their expertise to Wikipedia, specifically expanding content about women artists. This second session will take place on Tuesday, October 7 from 6pm to 10pm at the Los Angeles Contemporary Archive downtown. Please RSVP here if you plan to attend.

The UC Riverside Wikipedia Loves Libraries event is an edit-a-thon targeting articles related to UC Riverside, SoCal, and beyond. Join students and faculty learning how to edit! This event will take place on Thursday, October 16 from 10am to 4pm at UCR's Tomás Rivera Library. Again, RSVPs are requested here.

I hope to see you there! Calliopejen1 (talk) - via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:47, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list.


SoCal edit-a-thons on October 21 and 25

Upcoming SoCal edit-a-thons: UC Riverside (10/21, 10am-3pm) and Unforgetting L.A. (10/25, 9am-5pm)
052607-014-DohenyLibrary-USC.jpg

Dear fellow Wikipedian,

The Southern California Wikipedia community has two more events scheduled for the month of October: a water-related edit-a-thon at UC Riverside, and an Unforgetting L.A. event at the Los Angeles Archives Bazaar in conjunction with L.A. as Subject!

As part of Wikipedia Loves Libraries and to celebrate Open Access Week, UC Riverside is participating alongside other Western Waters Digital Library members in an edit-a-thon focusing on water issues. Join students and faculty learning how to edit! This event will take place on Tuesday, October 21 from 10am to 3pm at UCR's Orbach Science Library (map). RSVPs are requested here.

The Unforgetting L.A. edit-a-thon and training workshop will take place at the 9th annual Los Angeles Archives Bazaar, and is hosted by online magazine East of Borneo in partnership with L.A. as Subject. Join us on Saturday, October 25 from 9am to 5pm at the USC Doheny Memorial Library (map). Beginners welcome! Please RSVP here if you plan to attend.

I hope to see you there! Calliopejen1 (talk) - via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:06, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list.


R U Professional peer review

I've started a peer review for the WP:GA quality article, R U Professional.

Comments to help further improve quality would be appreciated, at Wikipedia:Peer review/R U Professional/archive1.

Cirt (talk) 19:20, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

L.A. event on November 11, and a new Facebook group

Wik-Ed Women editing session (11/11, 6-10pm), and join our new Facebook group!

Dear fellow Wikipedian,

The LA Wikipedia community has a new Facebook group! Become a member to keep up to date with all of our upcoming events and to connect with local Wikipedians!

In addition, we have one upcoming event: the third Wik-Ed Women editing session will take place on Tuesday, November 11 from 6pm to 10pm at the Los Angeles Contemporary Archive downtown. This series of informal get-togethers is designed to encourage Los Angeles women-in-the-arts (though all are welcome!) to contribute their expertise to Wikipedia, specifically expanding content about women artists. Please RSVP here if you plan to attend.

I hope to see you there! Calliopejen1 (talk) - via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:20, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list.


L.A. event on November 11 CANCELED

Wik-Ed Women editing session CANCELED

Due to health issues affecting one of the organizers, the third Wik-Ed Women editing session (originally scheduled for Tuesday, November 11) has been canceled. We expect the series to pick up again sometime in December. Sorry for the inconvenience, and hope to see you in the near future! Calliopejen1 (talk) - via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:08, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

To opt out of future mailings about LA meetups, please remove your name from this list.

  1. ^ http://nisee.berkeley.edu/northridge/