Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California

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. Amerique^dialectics 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. Amerique^dialectics 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 (talk • contribs) 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. OhanaUnited^{Talk 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)

Herburger publications

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.

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.

	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. Amerique^dialectics 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:

• Ridge Route
• Pioneertown, California
• U.S. Highway 99
• California State Route 60
• California State Route 86
• California State Route 111
• Palm Springs Aerial Tramway
• La Quinta Resort and Club
• La Cienega Boulevard
• Figueroa Street
• Automobile Club of Southern California
• Goffs, California
• Arizona and California Railroad
• Los Angeles and Mount Washington Railway Company
• Shields Date Gardens
• Summit Inn
• Slab City
• Old Plank Road
• Pan-Pacific Auditorium
• Original Spanish Kitchen

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 (talk • contribs) 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)

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)

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)

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)

{{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)

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)