Talk:History of California

message: An editor hjust added a "tooshort" tag to the article. IIRC it took a lot of work to get the article this short yet comprehenisve. Could the editor expand on his view of how the article should look?   Will Beback  talk   00:16, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm going to remvoe the tag, pending a discussion on what's needed in this article.   Will Beback  talk   16:29, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: the 'tooshort' tag says the introduction is not sufficiently descriptive of the article.  An intro of a short sentence does indeed seem not sufficient. Hmains (talk) 05:02, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I saw this thread and I think the "lead too short" still applies so I put it back. --Mcorazao (talk) 13:12, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I made a proposal for a change to the infobox. Please feel free to comment there.
--Mcorazao (talk) 13:04, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Infobox suggestion 

message: (I am new to making comments about Wikipedia articles, so bear with me.)
I've identified the need for improvements regarding several unsupported statements, assertions, and assumptions about California Indians found in the European Exploration section, as follows:
* Unsupported statements about the dwellings in which the Indians lived.
* Unsupported statements about the clothing worn by California Indians.
* Unsupported statement "The isolation of the California tribes and the poor conditions for growing food without irrigation explains..."
* Unsupported statement "Without agriculture or migratory herds of animals or fish ..." regarding facts about animal migrations within or across California.
* No supported statements in the paragraph that begins "Basket weaving was the highest form of art and utility"
I've identified the need for improvements regarding missing information relevant to California Indians, as follows:
* No statements about the geographical distribution of Indian population in California.
* No statements about any regional differences about the dwellings in which the Indians lived.
* No statements about the diets of California Indians who did not rely primarily upon acorns.
* No statements about the diets of coastal California Indians.
* No statements about an explanation for the absence of irrigation by California Indians (especially those in Southern California), when tribes just to the southeast (Yuma area) practiced it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by PSholar (talk • contribs) 21:24, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Comments are good, but improvements are better. I hope you take it upon yourself to make some or all of the needed improvements. WCCasey (talk) 07:07, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unsupported statements regarding California Indians 

message: There is not obvious POV material in this article.   POV assertions should be explained and examined here.  Hmains (talk) 03:02, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV? 

message: See discussion above. I think 24.5.250.93 has added too much material to this article, both too much detail and too much unsupported, unverifiable text. We should start over with this article as it existed before the IP editor began working on it. Here is the diff of October 3, 2010 to right now: . The article was 24kb then but now it is 100kb. Some middle ground must be reached.
I believe this same person is now operating as 24.4.47.82, especially evident in the contribution history of the Livermore, California, article. Other articles affected by the Dublin editor's too-large additions include Maritime history of California, Tariffs in United States history, Excise tax in the United States, Tariff, California Trail, Californio, SS California (1848), Battle of Monterey, Thomas Cavendish, Women in the California Gold Rush, Oregon Trail, Panama Canal, Panama Canal Railway, British Agricultural Revolution, Juan Bautista de Anza National Historic Trail, Conquest of California and Central Overland Route. The editor tried to rewrite History of California to 1899 but was stopped by two other editors and myself. In April 2011, the editor tried to rewrite California Gold Rush but was stopped by Hmains and Owen. An initiative is needed to determine which IP contributions are verifiable and which ones are appropriate weight and detail for an encyclopedia. Binksternet (talk) 17:57, 5 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: So you are proposing to undo all editing since October 2010? That's pretty drastic. It would undo all the junk edits, but also all the positive edits, of which there have been many during that time. But it's probably easier to do that (and then look back through the history and restore the valuable edits) than to try to rewrite the current mess. I endorse this idea but I'd like to hear from a few more people before it is done. Maybe we should invite comment at relevant WikiProjects; one of the causes of the problem is that this page has few watchers. --MelanieN (talk) 13:20, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  I just posted a link to this discussion at the various California WikiProjects. We need more input here. --MelanieN (talk) 18:20, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see much communication with this editor on his Talk Page. Wouldn't that be the place to start? Also, I would simply remove any information without sources. GeorgeLouis (talk) 23:48, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the best way to go about this is to look at the articles edited, and look at the content which is not verified by a reliable source. Then interested editors can attempt to find reliable sources to support the content, or remove it outright per WP:BURDEN.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 14:46, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. Binksternet (talk) 15:20, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Dublin IP editor contributions

message: What is the point of this 2-part split?
Better divide Californian history into about eight periods, and do a full-length article on each. Then simply put the eight lede sections together, and let that be your single article titled 'History of California'. Valetude (talk) 21:42, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Intriguing proposal. Can you flesh it out with suggestions for the sub-articles? Binksternet (talk) 22:31, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: For example:
1. Pre-colonial
2. Spanish Era
3. Mexican Era
4. American State
5. The Railroad Age
6. Industrialisation
7. Silicon Valley
8. Immigration pressures Valetude (talk) 23:47, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

text: Where would you put the growth of the orange industry? Binksternet (talk) 00:19, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: At whichever historical stage you feel it became significant. Of course, you could re-theme the whole series (Fur trappers, Film industry etc). But I think people prefer the straight sequential style in an article titled 'History of...' Valetude (talk) 01:01, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dividing it up 

message: Francis Drake not really revelant  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.33.30.138 (talk) 15:35, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Francis Drake 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on History of California. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080331220353/http://www.sfgov.org/site/visitor_index.asp?id=8091 to http://www.sfgov.org/site/visitor_index.asp?id=8091
*Added  tag to http://www.census.gov/prod/www/abs/statab.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131004055802/http://www.sfgenealogy.com/sf/history/hgpop.htm to http://www.sfgenealogy.com/sf/history/hgpop.htm
*Added  tag to http://www.census.gov/prod/www/abs/statab.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111207115225/http://www.learncalifornia.org/doc.asp?id=1617 to http://www.learncalifornia.org/doc.asp?id=1617
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:15, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 5 external links on History of California. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081026054357/http://ceres.ca.gov/nahc/califindian.html to http://ceres.ca.gov/nahc/califindian.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100128022726/http://www.sos.ca.gov/archives/collections/1849/full-text.htm to http://www.sos.ca.gov/archives/collections/1849/full-text.htm
*Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/65cUaXQm8?url=http://www.sell-oldgold.com/cgi-sys/suspendedpage.cgi to http://www.sell-oldgold.com/articles/Mining-Communities-in-the-1849-Gold-Rush.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110927024843/http://www.maderatribune.com/life/lifeview.asp?c=100216 to http://www.maderatribune.com/life/lifeview.asp?c=100216
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120102074700/http://www.1st-hand-history.org/Hhb/HHBindex.htm to http://www.1st-hand-history.org/Hhb/HHBindex.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:41, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Vizcaino is believed to have entered Drakes Bay seeking any remaining cargo from Cermeño's lost San Austin.  The article should be updated.MikeVdP (talk) 03:43, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting, if true. Provide a reliable, verifiable source for this claim. WCCasey (talk) 18:06, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Vizcaino

message: I just noticed that this article is simply a slightly less detailed version of History of California before 1900 with a single paragraph summarizing 1901–present. I propose that we merge this and the "before 1900" article, and then make this page a redirect to California#History.
One day, when these articles are full of quality information and sources, we can decide to create an intermittent version, but right now there's way too much work to do to get things up to par. UpdateNerd (talk) 07:23, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nonsensical article redundancy 

message: Your statement that LA grew rapidly needs to changed to postwar sunbelt migration.  I believe SF grew rapidly as the first settlement.  Also the German, Italian and Portuguese families established key agricultural colonies and churches.  They did not leave after harvest to go go home.  
You need to rewrite this to explain the systemic process. 2607:FB91:480:E01D:8DCC:374D:E53E:7014 (talk) 03:33, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  History. California 

message: The article makes a claim that the Californios rose up against Mexico. The source is some tripod page. Most books make no such claim. The bear flag partisans were not californios, but Americans, under leadership (unofficial) of American military. 184.190.145.231 (talk) 18:20, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  US invasion vs Californio rebellion 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:07, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion