This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
Someone has uploaded a photo of a what they claim is police brutality at a march through San Jose in 1969. There is no attribution for the photo, no evidence that it was taken in San Jose, no evidence that it is indeed police brutality, and the photo is strangely placed next to paragraphs talking about San Jose in the 1850s. For the lack of attribution, fact-free editorializing, and misplace meant, I am removing the photo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 04:35, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
Looks like it should be "San Jose" without the accent mark. The standard at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (geographic names) (and WP:COMMONNAME in general) is that we use the name that is most commonly used in English. (This is not necessarily the "most English" name: for example, "jalapeño" and "piñata" are English Wikipedia article titles.) It seems to me that most people use "San Jose" without the accent mark:
I haven't found any evidence of English-language TV stations using an accent on the name. TV stations with San Jose in their branding have not used the accent: see File:KNTV Logo.png, File:KSTS 1984.jpg, File:KTEH.jpg, all with a San Jose city of license. It's more difficult to tell recently, because owners don't care about their cities of license anymore, so they minimize any city name that has a more dominant city near it (e.g. "San Francisco" or "San Francisco / Oakland").
Also, the presence on the city seal and web page text is questionable: Section San Jose, California#History mentions (unsourced) a 1979 city ordinance to direct the use of the accent mark in text and the seal, but the overriding law is Article I of the San Jose city charter] of 1965, which says "shall continue ... under its present name of “City of San Jose.”". So the city's website may be more the result of a single 1979 city council vote rather than natural common usage by normal people. --Closeapple (talk) 02:44, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
On April 3, 1979, the San José City Council adopted San José, with the diacritical mark on the "e", as the spelling of the city name on the city seal, official stationery, office titles and department names. Also, by city council convention, this spelling of San José is used when the name is stated in BOTH upper- and lower-case letters, but not when the name is stated ONLY in upper-case letters. The accent reflects the Spanish version of the name, and the dropping of accents in all-capital writing was TYPICAL in Spanish. The name is still more commonly spelled without the diacritical mark as San Jose, but I think that the official and correct name is San José. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 09:17, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
Whatever the name should be, it can not be moved by copy and paste. You should use the "Move" link per Wikipedia:Moving a page. Sjö (talk) 20:20, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
I also agree that the article title should include the diacretic. Who are we to invalidate the decision of the City Council? HOWEVER, even if there is no consensus to do so we should amend the official_name field of the city infobox to City of San José in order to reflect the actual official name of the city. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 20:00, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Neutral - There is already a redirect at San José, California, so the only way the page can be moved is with a formal Move Request. Since this is the English Wikipedia and likely that most Readers do not have an "é" key, it's probably fine as is, but IMO the accent should be noted/used where ever possible in the article. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 20:58, 18 June 2014 (UTC)
Change to San José - San Jose, California would redirect to the page with the accented é. If it's the official name of the city, the Wikipedia article should reflect that. I also agree with those above, that the name with the accent should be used throughout the article in reference to the city.--22.214.171.124 (talk) 03:25, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
Under Wikipedia's guidelines for article titles, common names and spellings are preferred over the official ones. As Closeapple has stated, most third party reliable sources do not use the accent. As for the city council's policy (which is still irrelevant under Wikipedia's article naming guidelines), the only Google results I get are Wikipedia mirror sites. Thus there is no verifiable proof that this is even an official name, or a non-official rule of thumb by the council, or even merely the webmasters on www.sanjoseca.gov acting on their own. As of now, the only official evidence I can verify is the city charter, and it does not use the accent. How can we use the accent whenever possible in the article when there is no evidence that it is actually official? A stylized form of the subject's title on its seal or logo does not automatically make it official if it is used differently in most other cases. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:11, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
I agree that the unaccented e should be used for the great majority of this article. The accent should be used if it is quoted, or if the the text is referring to the early Spanish settlement or the city council decision. WP:COMMONNAME is only about article titles; the body of the article has no such guideline. The MOS:HAWAII guideline might provide guidance here as it describes the use of special characters; there ought to be a similar guideline for California. Binksternet (talk) 04:39, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
Except that the creation of a separate MOS:HAWAII guideline was warranted because many Hawaii-related articles were under such discussion. San Jose appears to be the only California-related subject with this dispute. If there is consensus to apply some of the MOS:HAWAII guidelines here, that is fine, but there are not enough subjects to warrant creating a separate California-related MOS page at this time. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:47, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
I have submitted Portal:San Francisco Bay Area to peer review. i would welcome any comments. i believe it is fully ready for featured portal status, but i have been just about the only editor there for a while.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 08:48, 28 June 2014 (UTC)
Both are based in Santa Clara and mentioned several times on that Wikipedia page. I modified the Sports section on San Jose's page to clarify the actual location. However, should the references to Levi's Stadium / 49'ers be removed entirely from the San Jose page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 14:04, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
Done Removed since its NOT actually in San Jose. I did add a mention of the 2005-2007 Grand Prix. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 16:16, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
its now officially 1,015,785 by us census data , but i cant parse the population table, so i hope someone else can add it.(mercurywoodrose)188.8.131.52 (talk) 14:42, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
It has been added in the introductory paragraph as: "The U.S. Census Bureau estimated the population of the city to be 1,015,785 as of July 1, 2014, making it the tenth U.S. city to reach a population of one million." This is technically incorrect; it is the 11th city to reach that mark as Detroit previously had over a million people (it's not even the first time the U.S. has had ten cities over a million at the same time - according to the Census Bureau, Phoenix reached the mark in 1991 and Detroit fell from the mark in 1996). That said, I'm not sure what the most efficient way to phrase this sentence would be, short of just stating the population. Dtcomposer (talk) 22:19, 2 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi. There is a table which cites a non-US Census page as its source at the beginning of the section. Then the same information is repeated in the first paragraph. There are a few problems. First, the numbers in the table do not jive with the numbers in the paragraph (and the numbers in the paragraph appear to be the correct ones, as per the US Census). Second, the table cites a non-US Census source, which shouldn't happen, all population numbers should be the official US Census. And third, isn't it a bit redundant to have the table, and then repeat the information in the paragraph? Onel5969 (talk) 13:41, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
The citation for San Jose being a global city is from 2008, before the economic collapse. I can't find any post-2008 citations, so unless someone can, we should remove this. BeIsKr (talk) 15:56, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Nevermind. Found a more recent reference BeIsKr (talk) 16:01, 21 July 2015 (UTC)