Talk:Furnace Creek, California

message: I'm not going to edit that out but it's pretty obviously untrue.
We do have the World's Lowest Golf Course though.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.131.32.179 (talk) 06:08, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lowest point in the world? 

message: The highest ground temperature in Furnace Creek, CA was 201°F.
Don't think so guy... IT was 136 in Libya.. I believe Death Valley was up to 134.
: ground temperature and air temperature are two different things. The highest air temperature in furnace creek is 134 (Its where the death valley record was recorded in 1913) But ground temperature usually isnt consitered important information. 66.36.26.154 15:37, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Apparently yesterday it reached 139 in Republic, Washington (I know that's really hard to believe), breaking the world record, the old record 134 from Furnace Creek. ManhattanSandyFurystorm (talk) 15:17, 29 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: It is hard to believe. Citation to reliable source, please. —hike395 (talk) 02:40, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Later:I don't believe it. see  —hike395 (talk) 02:42, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

text: @66.36.26.154 Libya has been removed from the records, proved to be a wrong reading. Telecine Guy (talk) 20:24, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  The highest ground temperature

message: The WMO (World Meteorological Organization) this morning de-certified the record for the world's highest surface temperature, held for 90 years by El Azizia, Libya. The now official hottest temperature ever recorded on Earth was the 56.7°C (134°F) reading taken at Furnace Creek (née Greenland Ranch) in Death Valley on July 10, 1913, should someone wish to adjust this page. Since this is just a talk page-- interesting that on the temperature profile chart; there's no mention of humidex!-- Gees I wonder Why? HAH! In fact, Death Valley is so dry that heat indices are often well -below- the actual ambient temperature. http://wmo.asu.edu/, and http://www.wunderground.com/blog/weatherhistorian/comment.html?entrynum=89 75.147.156.165 (talk) 13:14, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Furnace Creek is now officially the hottest place on Earth 

message: "There were 18 housing units at an average density of 0.6 per square mile (0.2/km²), of which 11 (73.3%) were owner-occupied, and four (26.7%) were occupied by renters. The homeowner vacancy rate was 0%; the rental vacancy rate was 0%. 19 people (79.2% of the population) lived in owner-occupied housing units and five people (20.8%) lived in rental housing units."
11 is not 73.3% of 18, and 4 is not 26.7% of 18: the percentages are correct for 15, but another year's stats also mentions 18.  Something is wrong, but what I do not know.
75.156.37.89 (talk) 00:31, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent catch! The data was added by , and there was a slight mistake. There were 18 housing units in 2010, of which 15 were occupied. The 73.3% fraction is of the total number of occupied units, not total housing units. I fixed the text for this article, but it may be a pervasive problem for the census data that Carlossuarez46 imported in 2012. —hike395 (talk) 01:13, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

text: *I see what the problem is; percentages are based on occupied housing units, here 15 of 18. I had begun to fix them and got as far as Inyo county alphabetically before user:BeenAroundAWhile told me to stop. So I've stopped and I expect that user will finish the corrections since he or she has taken control of the process. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 19:30, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

text: *Discussion now at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_2010_US_Census#RfC_about_mass_changes_to_California_census_figures Carlossuarez46 (talk) 20:42, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Questionable Arithmetic 

message: I don't know how to fix this, but the thingey that lists Census numbers isn't working.... Thmazing (talk)
: It wasn't broken --- no one had bothered to enter the data. I could only find 2010 and 2018 data, so filled that in. Thanks for flagging this! — hike395 (talk) 14:00, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank YOU for fixing it! Thmazing (talk) 16:10, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Broken widgit or something 

message: There are two GNIS entries for Furnace Creek. There is , which is a "populated place" and whose coordinates are in the center of the resort/village of Furnace Creek. There is also , a census designated place, which stretches from  to , approximately  apart.
The lede defined the article to be about the CDP.  changed the infobox to reflect this, along with the elevation. However, I wonder if readers really expect the article to be about the 10-mile-long swath of desert? Or to be more specifically about the resort/village? The infobox image shows the entrance sign to the resort.
Thoughts? — hike395 (talk) 00:18, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The early GNIS entries were simple single coord descriptions - then the folks at GNIS went through and amplified the earlier descriptions with more detail and a new id#. I prefer to use the more recent "updates" as they add more details. I know nothing about the Furnace Creek area beyond what GNIS and USGS topo maps tell me. Vsmith (talk) 02:23, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ambiguity in definition