|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|Milpitas, California is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.|
|Current status: Former featured article candidate|
Article barely passes B level. lots of detail but needs line note referencing for this long an article. Really needs expansion and breadth in pollution, ecology, infrastructure. Anlace 05:28, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
I worked hard on this article and added a lot to this some time ago. Guys, keep up the great work. Milpitas is a great town full of culture and heritage. - Milpitas guy 22:21, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- especially its name LOL that can mean other things in other languages LOLOLOL. -Pedro 10:08, 23 May 2005 (UTC)
- Honestly, I think the name of the city should be changed. LOL. It is incorrect, the name is milpitas, but there are 60,000 people, so half must be women, so the name should be trintamilpitas. LOLOL. Sorry :S -Pedro 00:12, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- What do you mean? Milpitas guy 29 June 2005 01:07 (UTC)
- ho well, "trinta mil" means thirty thousand = there must be about 30,000 women in there. "milpitas" means in Portuguese "A Thousand p*ssies". So I think the name is incorrect because there are more than a thousand, there are about 30,000!!!! Just kidding. ;) -Pedro 29 June 2005 01:33 (UTC)
Page history: This article was only like this around New Year 2005. Several people improved the article then.  After that I came along, wrote most of the article and went for a featured article nomination.  Now it's even better.
Can anyone improve or tell me how to improve this article even more? Milpitas guy 6 July 2005 00:43 (UTC)
What's with "the correct diminutive is actually milpilla"? -ita and -illa are both acceptable diminutives in Spanish.
TV and radio
I'm not sure why that section is even there since Milpitas has no television broadcast facilities. The ones listed are San Francisco Bay area stations that are received in Milpitas and in cities and counties in every direction.
Furthermore, the information is wrong. The channel numbers were never valid digital channel numbers and were not correct channel numbers since analog TV went away. At least half of the channels are missing, no sub-channels are listed at all, and there's even a reference to a station's cable channel number, which is not TV by definition, and is no more relevant than its satellite dish channel number.
Channel 1 alone consists of 1.1 to 1.13, so 12 channels are left out, and there was NEVER a broadcast channel 1 (without the decimal point.)
If anybody can think of a reason why this information should stay, that person should read up on broadcast TV (TV is a broadcast medium by definition; you can look it up in Wikipedia) and put the actual broadcast channel numbers and their affiliations.
The ones that were there were scarcely accurate, and some were not even close to correct. For example, KTVU, which is a Fox network affiliate, was listed as Fox News, even though they have nothing to do with each other. One has prime time content, local news, etc. and the other is not even a TV channel but a conservative cable news channel. If it were a few minor errors I'd fix it, but it's so far off base that I wouldn't want to address it without appropriate discussion as to why it's there. Hagrinas (talk) 01:26, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
- I agree, it should only listed if they are located in, or broadcast from, the town. Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline#Media leaves some wiggle-room. tedder (talk) 01:34, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
The city has an unfortunate nickname that's well-known and used in the area. However, an edit to the effect was reverted by User:Stepheng3 because there's no scholarly article proving it. That's unfortunate, because visible evidence such as several years worth of people tweeting the term should IMHO be sufficient to prove that the term is, in fact, used by real people in the real world. Why should WP:CONTEXT not apply here? --elwood_j_blues (talk) 23:22, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
- WP:CONTEXT deals with what should be wikilinked. It looks to me like the issue is not WP:CONTEXT, since there is no Wikipedia article on the subject of Smellpitas (nor should there be). I think the relevant policy is Wikipedia:No original research. Searching through years of tweets to prove the nickname's currency means analyzing primary source material. If a nickname is in widespread use, then examples should appear in secondary sources, hopefully ones with a reputation for checking their facts.—Stepheng3 (talk) 23:36, 20 March 2015 (UTC)