Talk:Mira Mesa, San Diego

message: I plan on adding the Philippine Festival at Mira Mesa Recreation Park to the Community events section. The first one is occurring this Saturday, June 17th 2006. That is, if it's a success and truly becomes an annual event. If anyone disagrees, please let me know before editing it out.--DavePretty 16:54, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Philippine Festival 

message: Is there any reason the link to www.miramesa.com in the External Links section keeps getting taken out? It's certainly related to the article.--[[User:TeNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOname is offensive to some, does anyone else feel that it is common enough to warrant inclusion in this article?Orayzio 19:49, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, it should be mentioned. The entry as it is (and all other San Diego entries) are very sugar-coated! It would be useful to either cite or counterclaim it. (For example, "MM has long had the nickname of  Minila Mesa, yet the Filipino population is only X%") --24.249.108.133 22:11, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mira Mesa Website? 

message: Someone added Dat Phan to the Notable People From Mira Mesa section, I've never heard that he was from Mira Mesa, nor can I find anything on Google about it. Can anyone verify this?--Teh darkcloud 01:34, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: LOL...Dat Phan?  Just because he's Vietnamese doesn't mean he's from Mira Mesa!!!  He grew up in City Heights and Santee.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.220.83.42 (talk) 04:11, 28 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uhm... Dat Phan? 

message: "Perfect blend of California living"?  Sounds like the Chamber of Commerce has been editing the entry!
::Lived in Mira Mesa for two years and found it to be horrible. Traffic was incredible - my office was two miles away from my home and it still would take 15 - 20 minutes to get there in the morning. There literally are no alternative routes to Mira Mesa Blvd. and the lights are such that you have to sit through multiple cycles of each to get from A to B. My fellow residents also had no respect for other peoples' vehicles - I got more parking lot dents in two years there than in the 5 years since (well actually I haven't gotten any more dents since) and we're talking two or three inch long, "let's see how hard I can hit this guy's vehicle with the edge of my door" crap. COL was incredibly high and value for dollar (housing, etc.) was incredibly low - I still marvel at 9.5 x 9.5 third/forth bedrooms (a very small study and essentially a big closet were the only practical uses we could find for them - don't think a decent bed would have even fit in either given the door and window placements). About the only good thing was there were several options for ethnic food which made lunch more enjoyable than the standard fast food chains - but that can't be much of a ringing endorsement of the place. We constantly heard old timers (people who'd been in the area for 15 years or more) say how it was great back then, but they couldn't stand the place any more for the overcrowding and exorbitant prices. I've lived from coast to coast to coast and back and feel this was the worst place. Also, don't forget the corrosion of anything metal left outdoors or in your garage due to the high salt content from the ocean (oddly enough never a problem for us on Long Island where we lived for 4x as long). Jmdeur (talk) 16:37, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speaking of sugar-coating 

message: I'm taking out that part about the Christmas tree. It's outdated.
I added that a few years ago (I think I worded it badly too.) And since then the forum itself disappeared from the website.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Teh darkcloud (talk • contribs) 05:23, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Christmas Tree 

message: "Asian/Pacific Islander 41.2%, White 33.4%, African American/Black 25%, Native American 0.35. 16.9 % of the population was Hispanic or Latino."
Where is the source of these demographic figures?  These numbers don't look right at all, with a collective total of 116.85%!  Just counting the Asian/Pacific Islander, White, Native American and Hispanic-Latino statistics alone yield 91.85%.  What's the actual numbers?  Is the White population inclusive of both non-Hispanic and Hispanic White?  Surely the African-American population isn't that high as well, with these numbers seemingly trumping the numbers that Southeast San Diego and East San Diego/City Heights/Mid-City may have within the City's urban core?
...This link may provide the answers: 
Based on the pie chart for "Races in Zip Code 92126," the majority of the area is White alone and Asian.  The African-American population is considerably smaller than the "25%" listed on the demographics for this page (based on the data, it's actually about 5%).  Hope that clears that up—Preceding unsigned comment added by Syghost (talk) 08:18, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Demographics 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Allied Gardens, San Diego, California which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RM bot 23:16, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Move discussion in progress

message: Melanie, as I mentioned on your talk page there have indeed been edit wars and I fully understand your desire for consensus. The problem, from my perspective, is that I have put information on Wikipedia fully in concert with the basic rules. All the information I have provided is taken, not just from any map I can create on the SanGIS website, but rather from authoritative sources provided by The City of San Diego. Community boundaries in San Diego are recorded in the San Diego General Planhttp://www.sandiego.gov/planning/genplan/. The person or persons with whom I seem to be competing continue to post maps that are incorrect and have no citation. 
This is not a new discussion. There are those in our community who, for a variety of reasons, want the community boundaries changed. Of course, that sort of thing happens in a great many communities for just as many reasons. The difference in this case is that the person or persons claim that the boundaries of Mira Mesa are not what is recorded in the General Plan. I am the President of the Mira Mesa Town Council, a member of the Executive Committee of the Mira Mesa Community Planning Group, and a Member of the Mira Mesa-Scripps Ranch Retired Volunteer Patrol Foundation. My undergraduate education is in computer science and I studied Systems Management and was awarded a masters degree at USC. also, as a member of the Planning Group Executive Committee I am required to renew my City Planning qualification periodically by taking a course offered by the City of San Diego called The Community Orientation Workshop. I tell you this in hopes that you will agree that my references and my credentials to use those references place me on very solid ground, authoritatively speaking, on this issue. Should the City Council take it upon itself to amend the boundaries of Mira Mesa, I may disagree with the action, but as is the case now, I must abide by the result.
Please help by at least leveling this playing field by requiring that all entries cite authoritative references.
Thanks.
TedBrengel (talk) 16:45, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia Rules Should Be Followed By Everyone

message: This is insane! The rules are clear. One must not put their original ideas or creations on Wikipedia but rather each contributor is required to get information from authoritative sources and then cite the sources in the context of the article. It is simply not possible to carry on a discussion unless we all operate by the same rules--consensus is simply not possible otherwise. I will once again post the correct map of the Community of Mira Mesa on the page. Wikipedia, please help me end this insanity!
TedBrengel (talk) 17:13, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Another Incorrect Map with '''NO''' Citation

message: One of the most frequently asked questions involves the various land uses in our community. We always refer a person asking this type of question to the Community Plan. The map on page 5 give an excellent abbreviated version of all land uses and serves as an excellent starting point for this type of question. It occurred to me that it probably would be a very good idea to put it on the Wikipedia page to perhaps get some of those questions answered without anyone having to seek out a Planning Group or Town Council Member. I therefore posted the land use map from the Community Plan very near the top of the Mira Mesa article.
TedBrengel (talk) 18:05, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: OK. I am not an expert on copyright issues, but Wikipedia has very strong policies about using material that has been published elsewhere. Let's wait and see if your map stays; if it gets removed it will be because of copyright issues, not because there is anything wrong with the information. --MelanieN (talk) 18:15, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Land Use Map

message: OK, a couple of things. First, calm down. We will get this resolved. Things don't happen instantly here, because other people are not online and logged in 24/7. Second, please do not revert this entry again yourself. There is a rule at Wikipedia called the 3-revert rule that says anyone who reverts another person's edit more than 3 times in a 24-hour period, even if they are right, is in danger of getting blocked from Wikipedia for edit-warring. Consider this your official warning not to revert again; instead, send me or someone else a message and let us handle it. 
Now, to the meat of the situation. As I understand it, someone has been replacing the official city neighborhood map with a map that they themselves drew up, or at least that has no link to an official or reliable source - is that correct? In that case they are in the wrong and their map should not be allowed here since it has no citation to a Reliable Source. The city's neighborhood map is the one that should be here.
Now to the backstory: it looks to me as if their map is drawn to exclude the westernmost portions of the community, such as Sorrento Mesa - am I reading that right? I encountered this same wiki-battle here a year or two ago, when someone from the Mira Mesa Town Council was trying to insist there was no such place as Sorrento Mesa. It was clear to me then, and is clear to me now, that passions run high on this situation. That provides a caution to you: you are not neutral here, you are an involved party, and you need to be careful not to insert your point of view into the article. You need to continue to stick to what Reliable Sources say; your "expertise" cited above does not entitle you to edit the article any way you want. I say this just to let you know where you stand, not to suggest you have been doing anything wrong. Up to now your edits have been factual and based on Reliable Sources, and just I want to make sure it stays that way. 
Finally, to what we can do about the continual insertions of this unreferenced map: the person (obviously the same person) who is doing it is not logging in or creating an account; they are doing it anonymously under an IP account, which can change, and which is very hard to block or control. However, if it continues I will consult an administrator (I am not one) and find out if there is some way to block or limit this person. --MelanieN (talk) 18:11, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Update: the person has now established an identity and explained where they are getting this map; they did not invent it so I am striking my comments about them. --MelanieN (talk) 18:30, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: How to handle this

message: OK, I think we now understand the issue. It is not about maps, it is about the definition of a community. I have been thinking about this (I am also involved in community planning in San Diego) and I realized that the planning group is not always synonymous with the community. Sometimes they are pretty much synonymous, as for Ocean Beach. Sometimes the community planning group is a purely artificial construct, like Navajo or Uptown, where there is no corresponding community by that name. And sometimes, as in this case, there is a planning group and there is a community by the same name, but they may or may not have identical boundaries. In this case I think we cannot make the judgment (that would be original research which Wikipedia does not allow). Instead we need to somehow deal with the issue, and possibly the controversy, in the article itself. Let's start a conversation about how we should do that. For one thing I think we should include both maps, identified as to their source and what they portray. But again, let's not start adding things until we figure out how to do it. --MelanieN (talk) 19:05, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Definition of community

message: I'm actually not the one making those edits.  Passions are very inflamed on this issue and a lot of people are getting involved.  Well, at least on the Sorrento Valley side.  At the last few Mira Mesa Planning Group meetings where this issue was discussed, large numbers of Sorrento Valley residents turned out to oppose the annexation attempts but no Mira Mesa residents turned out to support it.  The only people from Mira Mesa that seem to support this are members of the Mira Mesa Town Council, The Mira Mesa Community Planning Group, the Calle Cristobal Maintenance Assessment District and the Mira Mesa Maintenance Assessment District.  Sadly, the major players are the same in all of those organizations.
The map that Ted keeps removing is straight from SanGIS.  It was generated using ArcExplorer which was set to display the "Neighborhoods" layer.  It is the official map of neighborhoods within the City of San Diego (which was also confirmed by the City Planning and Neighborhood Restoration Department).  The map Ted keeps posting is the Mira Mesa Community map.  This is the planning area map, not the neighborhood map.  The validity of the planning area community maps are not in question.  However, they are not neighborhood maps.  They reflect Community Planning Areas only.
You mention Point Loma.  There is actually no community called Point Loma.  It's a colloquial term to describe the peninsula area.  It's within the Peninsula Community Planning Area and contains neighborhoods such as Loma Portal, Fleetridge, La Playa, Sunset Ciffs and others.  In fact, the Peninsula Community Planning Area web site states this very clearly...
http://www.sandiego.gov/planning/community/profiles/peninsula
The Peninsula Community Planning Area actively celebrates the diverse neighborhoods located within it's boundaries while the Mira Mesa Community Planning Area does not.  Looking objectively, if the Mira Mesa Community Planning area was instead named something like the "North Miramar Community Planning Area" this whole issue would be a lot more simple to understand.  The coincident names definitely cause confusion (and in the case of Mira Mesa, aspirations of grandeur).  This theme is repeated all over the city.
The Wikipedia page in question is for the NEIGHBORHOOD of Mira Mesa.  If Ted or anyone else wishes to create a page for the Community Planning Area of Mira Mesa that's fine (so long as it's factually correct).  All one has to do is look at other Wikipedia San Diego Neighborhood plans to understand the difference.  Take Serra Mesa for example...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serra_Mesa,_San_Diego
Serra Mesa is a Community Planning Area (that encompasses more than one neighborhood) and also a neighborhood.  The Wikipedia neighborhood page is about just that, the neighborhood.  Most people are concerned with neighborhoods, not community planning areas which have been established solely for land use purposes.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by OpenTrackRacer (talk • contribs) 19:22, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: What "annexation attempts" are you talking about?  Who is attempting to annex what? Has the issue been reported anywhere? --MelanieN (talk) 19:29, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: P.S. You could give our hard-working bots a break if you would sign your comments. You can do that in one of two ways: Add four tildes ~~~~ at the end of your comment (the tilde is the capitalization of the button at the far left of the number row on your keyboard), or else click on the button that looks like a signature - in the array of buttons above the edit window. Either of those actions will automatically sign and date your comments. --MelanieN (talk) 19:35, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  P.S. regarding that police neighborhood map: we need a link or we can't use it. The general police neighborhood map is here ; is there a link to the Mira Mesa section of the map that you wish to post? --MelanieN (talk) 19:45, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

text: I agree with OpenTrackRacer. I don't know of anyone would call the intersection of Mira Mesa Blvd and Lusk "Mira Mesa."  The Serra Mesa example is a good one; Birdland,_San_Diego has prominent signs at the entrance identifying it as it's own neighborhood, but it falls under Serra Mesa planning. OhNoitsJamie Talk 19:53, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion 

message: Sorry if I'm putting this in the wrong place.  I don't see a clear way to add onto a previous heading (and my HTML skills are almost 20 years out of date).
The Mira Mesa Community Planning Group (seemingly along with the Mira Mesa Town Council) is trying to make the borders of the Mira Mesa neighborhood the same as the borders of the Mira Mesa Community Planning Area.  They are asserting that they are one in the same.  That assertion would expand the Mira Mesa Neighborhood to encompass the majority of the Sorrento Valley neighborhood (ie: annexation).
Ted Brengel makes this straw argument in the Mira Mesa Town Council (which is a Mira Mesa neighborhood organization and not "officially" affiliated with the Mira Mesa Community Planning Group...  even though they share the same web site and many board members are the same in both organizations) June newsletter on page two...
http://www.miramesatowncouncil.org/doc/Newsletter/2013%20June%20Newsletter.pdf
Both Ted Brengel and Bari Vaz have also gone to great lengths to purport this same concept in comments on a San Diego Union Tribune article about new homes being built in Sorrento Valley...
http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2013/Apr/13/tp-pardee-homes-releases-new-phase-at-sorrento
As I mentioned, there have been several contentions meetings of the Mira Mesa Planning Group recently and will be again at the next meeting in October when the group plans to vote on the issue (even though it's outside the scope of their charter and would only be a recommendation to the City of San Diego).  There is an audio recording of public comments from the last meeting that can be made available if desired by the Wikipedia community.OpenTrackRacer (talk) 19:53, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I still don't understand what they are "trying to do", or who they are trying to get to do it. Their planning group boundaries are set by the city; they are not trying to get those changed, right? So who defines the neighborhoods, that they are trying to get changed? They will certainly not succeed if they want to eliminate any city references to Sorrento Valley, which is a well established and notable neighborhood. I would have thought the same is true of Sorrento Mesa, although the police department seems to lump it in with Sorrento Valley.  --MelanieN (talk) 19:59, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Annexation 

message: The general San Diego Police neighborhood map linked above is the correct one.  According to the City and SanGIS, it is the official map of neighborhoods within the City of San Diego.  The neighborhood map isn't accessible from the interactive SanGIS map but a full SanGIS neighborhood map can be generated using ArcExplorer and posted if desired.
To reiterate, here is the statement sent by Michael Klein from the City of San Diego's Planning and Neighborhood Restoration Department...
"Neighborhoods are boundaries reflecting the perception of residents within a particular area. Neighborhoods often are contained within communities, although they may not be entirely within one community. In some community plans, neighborhoods are mapped in the plan as of the date of plan adoption. Because perception of neighborhood boundaries is more fluid than that of community boundaries, the Police Department conducts a periodic outreach to residents to identify any perceived shift in boundaries. Adjustments to neighborhood boundaries are made by the Police Department over time based on input provided by citizens and Police Department needs. Therefore, the Police Department is the City’s “keeper” of neighborhood boundaries."
OpenTrackRacer (talk) 20:06, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Interesting, I hadn't see that before. Thank you. Maybe I should tell them about the errors I know about! Anyhow I do think that Wikipedia articles tend to be about neighborhoods rather than planning areas. I continue to think there is a place for both maps in the article. I'll think about how to do that. --MelanieN (talk) 20:09, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: BTW do you have a link for that comment? Is it from some public source? Or was that some personal comment to you, such as via email? --MelanieN (talk) 20:10, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maps 

message: They are not trying to change the planning area boundaries.  They are trying to change the neighborhood boundaries of Mira Mesa to encompass the entire planning area (thus eliminating the vast majority of the Sorrento Valley neighborhood).  Is essence, they are purporting that everything in the Mira Mesa Planning area is Mira Mesa (and putting up signage to support that position).  Imagine if the Peninsula Planning Group tried to do the same thing in Point Loma!
They are attempting to define Sorrento Valley as only the area on the west side of Interstate 805.  They have changed Google Maps and other alterable sources in an attempt to legitimize this effort.  Most of the businesses and all of the residents who live in Sorrento Valley (in the Pacific Ridge, Wateridge, Sorrento Highlands and Sorrento Terrace developments) identify their neighborhood as being Sorrento Valley.  Sorrento Mesa is a colloquial term for the business area around Qualcomm but the city does not recognize it as a neighborhood (and neither do the residents of Wateridge who live there).
Publicly available sources all consider the area indicated on the San Diego Neighborhood map as being Sorrento Valley, not Mira Mesa (with some minor boundary differences)...
http://www.trulia.com/for_sale/1343_nh/x_map
http://www.zillow.com/sorrento-valley-san-diego-ca
http://www.city-data.com/neighborhood/Sorrento-Valley-San-Diego-CA.html
http://www.pardeehomes.com/sorrento-valley
http://www.sorrentovalleyrealestate.org
http://www.sandiegorealestateagent.com/real-estate-guide/sorrento-valley.asp
The list goes on and on.  Most of the hotels in the area show on their web pages that they are in Sorrento Valley and there are numerous business parks called "Sorrento xxxxx" in this area as well.  The El Camino Cemetery and Chapel clearly states where they are located...
http://www.sorrentovalleychapel.com/
As for how, the answer is by any means possible.  The Calle Cristobal Maintenance Assessment District requested to the Mira Mesa Community Planning Group a Mira Mesa monument sign at the west end of Mira Mesa Boulevard.  They also requested Mira Mesa neighborhood signs which have been placed in Sorrento Valley (on Sorrento Valley Boulevard, just east of Vista Sorrento Parkway, on Lusk Boulevard, just east of Vista Sorrento Parkway, on Camino Santa Fe, just north of Miramar Road and on Camino Santa Fe, just south of Sorrento Valley Boulevard).  The Calle Cristobal Maintenance Assessment District has two board members (including Ted Brengel) and both of them are also on the Mira Mesa Community Planing Group.  The Mira Mesa Planning Group initially denied the whole thing and said they didn't know the how or why of the signs but they eventually admitted the truth.  All of this and the Wikipedia and Google Maps edits are an attempt at a fait accompli which we assume they believe will help convince the City of San Diego to make these boundaries official.  The Mira Mesa Town Council and Mira Mesa Community Planning Group are also well connected politically which aids their crusade.
The residents and businesses of Sorrento Valley are determined not to let this happen.OpenTrackRacer (talk) 20:36, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  What they're trying to do 

message: The question that we have been debating these past days though is not one of neighborhoods and their right to exist. To me that is beyond question. People can call the area in which they live anything they choose. No, the question here is about the notion that Mira Mesa has somehow suddenly, after 35 years of existence as a community, become a neighborhood. My answer, as you might guess is a resounding no. Mira Mesa is a community comprised of a number of disparate neighborhoods. This is not just an opinion. In studying the City documents relevant to that issue (if indeed it is an issue anywhere else on the planet) over many years I have learned that the San Diego General Planhttp://www.sandiego.gov/planning/genplan/ and the thirty-five or so community planshttp://www.sandiego.gov/planning/community/plans/index.shtml that comprise it define community boundaries in San Diego. If I, like my adversary wished to create a cloud of confusion, I would trot out many other documents that bear on this issue. Documents such as the San Diego City Charter, The Mira Public Facilities Financing Plan, Facilities Benefit Assessment Plans, the Calle Cristobal and Mira Mesa Maintenance Assessment Districts, the San Diego Municipal code, Council Policy 600-5, and a number of others. I won't do that though because the one superseding document in the case of community boundaries is the San Diego General Plan and its community plans. To refer to other documents is merely throwing up a cloud of confusion.
The argument that changing the boundaries would "annex" some portion of the community is incomprehensible to me as is the notion that we are somehow changing the boundaries of our shared community. The community of Mira Mesa existed many years before any of the homes in the area in question were even planned and those boundaries haven't changed in well over twenty years. We (whoever this mysterious imperious "we" may be) aren't changing anything with regard to community boundaries and haven't for over twenty years.
Consensus is generally a good thing. It makes us all feel like members of the same team. It helps us to pull together toward a common goal. But false consensus, agreement among members of a group that things that simply aren't true are established facts, is not good. This is called groupthink. And that's kind of where we are with this. The people in Sorrento Valley have somehow convinced themselves that if they round up enough documents they can somehow trump the City General Plan and make Mira Mesa a neighborhood with Camino Santa Fe as its eastern boundary. That's akin to arguing that the earth is flat. Even in this enlightened age you may get many followers, but that won’t deflate the globe. So I will support all efforts to achieve consensus, provided that the facts being debated are taken only from authoritative relevant documents. And, frankly, with regard to community boundaries in San Diego the only authoritative relevant document is The San Diego General Plan. These facts can be verified in a matter of minutes by consulting the references I cited.
Once again for emphasis, no one is doing anything to the Mira Mesa community boundaries that have existed exactly as they are today for many years. All claims to the contrary are simply incorrect.
So what “they” are trying to do is NOTHING. 
TedBrengel (talk) 21:50, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The article is about the neighborhood, not the planning zone.  Sorrento Valley, San Diego is its own neighborhood within the planning boundaries of Mira Mesa, just as Birdland,_San_Diego is a neighborhood within the planning boundaries of Serra Mesa. OhNoitsJamie Talk 23:13, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Community vs Neighborhood

message: The assertion that Mira Mesa exists solely as a "community" and not as a neighborhood is laughable.  San Diego is a city comprised of neighborhoods.  Neighborhoods are part of one or more Community Planning Areas which exist for land use purposes and have Community Planning Groups which advise the city in that regard.  Oftentimes, the terms neighborhood and community are used interchangeably to describe an area within a city.  However, in the City of San Diego they have two distinctive meanings.
If what Ted Brengel is asserting were correct, there would be no Loma Portal, Roseville, Sunset Cliffs, La Playa or Roseville neighborhoods, only the community of Peninsula.  There would be no Grantville, Allied Gardens, Del Cerro or San Carlos neighborhoods, only the community of Navajo.  There would be no Birdland, only the community of Serra Mesa (not even the neighborhood of Serra Mesa).  You get the idea.  According to Ted, the structure of all the other neighborhoods and communities in San Diego are incorrect and only Mira Mesa is correct.
If you extend Ted's logic, there would be no San Diego or Carlsbad or Encinitas or Del Mar, only the County of San Diego, which as we know, encompasses all of these areas and has clearly defined borders.
The Wikipedia page in question is about neighborhoods in San Diego of which Mira Mesa is one, as is Sorrento Valley.  If Ted would like to create a page for the Community of Mira Mesa (which again, exists for land use purposes) he's more than welcome to do so and I'm sure no one will mind, so long as he sticks to the facts.OpenTrackRacer (talk) 01:15, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Communities are not neighborhoods and neighborhoods are not communities 

message: I believe that it is quite simple to draw a map showing the Lopez Ridge area (a geographic name) and the area around Wateridge as a single contiguous neighborhood. I also don't think that anyone would have a problem with that. But know well that though it is not necessary to advertise the fact, Sorrento Mesa, and Sorrento Valley, along with the Village and probably a few others are neighborhoods within the Community of Mira Mesa. The distinction in this case is that Mira Mesa has a great many resources that are absolutely required to support a population while Sorrento Valley and Sorrento Mesa have none. They have only homes and businesses. That's precisely why, after the building chaos of the sixties, the community of Mira Mesa was formed and a plan was created both to control the insanity and to insure that the resources required to support the people living here are provided.
Parks are one example of a resource that is in very short supply all over San Diego. Mira Mesa is no exception. We are currently 80 acres short of the City mandate for park space. I agree that adding the neighborhoods west of Camino Santa Fe to the Mira Mesa map many years ago in no way helped this problem, but to somehow annex any of that area outside of Mira Mesa does not serve the residents either as there is no open space there that might be used as a park. Anyone who would like to help address this problem may do so by joining the Mira Mesa Recreation Council.
Schools are yet another example. Mira Mesa public schools are among the best in the county. But as is the case with parks Sorrento Valley and Sorrento Mesa have neither schools nor any open space where one could be built.
I would like to suggest that the Sorrento Valley-Sorrento Mesa distinction is one that can be argued forever with no difference in any of the possible results. Many of us in Mira Mesa have called the area north or Carroll Canyon and South of Lopez Canyon Sorrento Mesa for many years. That said, I don't think there is anything official about that nor does it really matter. If you use a name to refer to a place and others understand what you mean when you use that name then conversation can take place. That's really all that is required. And that's my view on Sorrento Valley. The area originally known as Sorrento Valley is in the Torrey Pines Planning Area, but since it adjoins the newer area that the residents want to call by the same name and since there seems to be no objection from the Torrey Pines Planning Group, I don't see a problem with the name at all. In summary I think that we all support the notion that their is a area known as Sorrento Valley. Where we disagree is the notion that somehow a community such as Mira Mesa can be characterized as a neighborhood. Here in San Diego, and I think in most places, neighborhood is generally a subarea of a community (though there are certainly cases where neighborhoods span several communities). For a place to be called a community and be so classified by the San Diego General Plan, resources such as schools and parks are a requirement.
The map entitled City of San Diego Police Neighborhoods dated 9/17/2011 that has been referenced several times on this talk page is very real, but it is not what many seem to believe it is. Its creation corresponds to the formation of the Northwestern Division of the San Diego Police Department. The newly formed Northwestern Division subdivided the assigned area into what they call neighborhoods. The areas shown in red on the map are those of the Southwestern Division while those shown in purple are areas assigned to the officers of the Northeastern Division. From the police department perspective these are neighborhoods because they are the beats use in assigning patrols. Each of them is sufficiently contiguous to allow a police vehicle to patrol without using limited access highways. The use of that map beyond that purpose is a bit problematic.
The reason those who have lived in this area for over thirty years make the distinction between the area north of Lopez Canyon and that to its south is that there is a vast difference in land use, a difference so replete that the notion that face-to-face social interactions occur[ing] (as mentioned in the Wikipedia article on Neighborhood) is clearly incorrect. But if we accept this Police Department definition of Sorrento Valley (which serves the Police Department quite well) as the name for that entire area then in casual conversation, whenever the name "Sorrento Valley" is used one will have to wonder whether the speaker is referring to the residential area on Lopez Ridge to the north, the area south of Lopez Canyon that is home to hundreds of high tech companies, the area south of that in Carroll Canyon (which is currently being planned) which will one day include office buildings and industrial facilities, or the area just north of MCAS Miramar that is heavily industrialized. Those areas have historically been called "Lopez Ridge", "Sorrento Mesa", "Carroll Canyon (Stone Creek Project)", and "Miramar Area" (respectively). Calling all of those areas "Sorrento Valley" serves no useful purpose. On the other hand if those living on Lopez Ridge wish that area to be called Sorrento Valley I think people will start to know the area by that name. So, I agree that the Police Department Neighborhoods Map could be used on Wikipedia, but it should be identified as a police department tool and not a description of neighborhoods as loosely defined here in Wikipedia (Neighborhood).
TedBrengel (talk) 12:51, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: So I take it you are in agreement with the language in my proposed draft, which makes it clear that the Mira Mesa community (i.e. CPA) includes the neighborhood of Mira Mesa as well the other neighborhoods? Can we all please skip all the speeches and concentrate on how to write the article? --MelanieN (talk) 14:43, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Absolutely, in the sense of the definition of "neighborhood" that I cited and provided that the boundaries of the neighborhood of Mira Mesa are precisely the same as those of the community of Mira Mesa.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by TedBrengel (talk • contribs) 20:19, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Apparently you didn't read my proposed draft. It defines the community of Mira Mesa as the community plan area, and the neighborhood of Mira Mesa roughly according to the police neighborhood map. I think it is going to have to be done that way. Please realize that this has no bearing on your Real Life neighborhood issues; this is according to the rules of Wikipedia. We are an encyclopedia and we have guidelines. One of them is that you don't get to make up a definition of something (such as "neighborhood") and then apply it to the article; that is called WP:Original research and it is not allowed here; we base our articles on what WP:Reliable sources say. Note that Reliable Sources are not limited to official sources. Another rule is that we use the WP:Common name of a place, which may not be the same as the official name. A neighborhood is determined by what Reliable Sources call it and by what the people who live, work or own property there call it. It's clear that the western portion of the Mira Mesa planning area is not called Mira Mesa by Reliable Sources or by the businesses that operate there, so it can't be included as part of the Mira Mesa neighborhood here, even if the city or local agencies define it as such. The official designation is a matter to be determined offline. We are just writing an encyclopedia article here. --MelanieN (talk) 23:08, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Ideas on the Draft

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Mira Mesa, San Diego. 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/20070501022156/http://www.miramesa.com/content/mira_mesa_history.php to http://www.miramesa.com/content/mira_mesa_history.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111224023747/http://www.chargers.com/community/community-foundation/community-quarterback-award.html to http://www.chargers.com/community/community-foundation/community-quarterback-award.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060616181322/http://ctc-academy.org/index.html to http://www.ctc-academy.org/index.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080409195426/http://www.miramesachristianschools.com/ to http://www.miramesachristianschools.com/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130520133002/http://www.sandi.net/cms/lib/CA01001235/Centricity/Domain/200/Elementary/hickman.html to http://www.sandi.net/cms/lib/CA01001235/Centricity/Domain/200/Elementary/hickman.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130114033438/http://www.sandi.net/cms/lib/CA01001235/Centricity/Domain/200/Elementary/mason.html to http://www.sandi.net/cms/lib/CA01001235/Centricity/Domain/200/Elementary/mason.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131105225437/http://www.sandi.net/site/default.aspx?DomainID=2141 to http://www.sandi.net/site/default.aspx?DomainID=2141
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) 19:09, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (February 2018) 

message: I am moving the following uncited material here until it can be properly supported with inline citations of reliable, secondary sources, per WP:V, WP:CS, WP:IRS, WP:PSTS, WP:BLP, WP:NOR, et al. This diff shows where it was in the article. Nightscream (talk) 18:13, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Uncited material in need of citations