Talk:Santa Ana Mountains

message: The picture is on this page has a label of "Santa Gabriel Mountains"... It should be "San Gabriel".  Bgtgwazi 15:44, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The photo's gone now. I put a new one up. --Justin (talk) 20:29, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

text: November 15, 2008 - Incorrectly labeled photo (SANTA Gabriel Mountains should be SAN Gabriel Mountains has NOT, repeat, NOT been changed, I still see the pic with the incorrect label today, Nov 15, 2008  —Preceding unsigned comment added by PaNavigator (talk • contribs) 19:03, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wrongly labeled picture 

message: Sections needed and references: Geology, Ecology, Human Use.
Ecology: 
Annual Grassland, Pasture, Mixed Chaparral, Chamise-Redshank Chaparral, Coastal Scrub, Valley Foothill Riparian, Coastal Oak Woodland, Eucalyptus, Montane Riparian, Montane Hardwood, Montane Hardwood-Conifer.
Human use: original human inhabitants were Tongva in the north, Acjachemen in the west, and  Payomkowishum in the east, south.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Justin.Johnsen (talk • contribs) 02:21, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  To do 

message: Check out "Shadows of old Saddleback; tales of the Santa Ana Mountains" by Terry E. Stephenson (1974) 
There is a copy at the Yorba Linda Library at CA-R 979.496 ST4
--Bluedv (talk) 07:13, 6 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another reference 

message: The article says that San Diego Creek is sourced from these mountains, but it is actually from the San Joaquin Hills; but some of its tributaries (ex. Peters Canyon Wash, Borrego Wash) are. Should this be changed? themaee (talk) 03:11, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: San Diego Creek

message: As a result of the WP:3RR-breaching edit war over these images, I have locked the page for 72 hours. During this time discussion needs to take place so that consensus can be achieved on which images to be included. If edit-warring instead resumes when the protection expires blocks will fall. - The Bushranger One ping only 11:35, 4 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Protected

message: I'd like to float another possible scenario.  The photo uploaded by Mike Cline from Flickr is so clean and sharp, that it really seems a shame to not make full use of it by putting it in the infobox at a lesser size.  I'd like to suggest the possibility of putting that picture in the place where the aerial picture was in the other version of the article, at a large size which will show it very well, and then restore the original photo (snowy mountain, seen above), with some cropping to remove the "clutter" that some people objected to.Any thoughts? BMK (talk) 20:38, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd prefer to go with the Cline photograph in the info box.  The others have been too contentious, and both have issues.  --Drmargi (talk) 23:38, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I can understand your thinking, but I still think it's a shame not to get maximum value out of the photo.  Oh well... BMK (talk) 01:23, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  That may well be, but let's go with consensus above, especially given the tension of late.  --Drmargi (talk) 01:41, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:   was wondering how the photo of San Mateo Canyon Wilderness, southern Santa Ana Mountains, from April 2007 was considered a better graphical image of these mountains then the photo that WPPilot took. That photo seems to show the whole range, and the photo "San Mateo Canyon Wilderness, southern Santa Ana Mountains, April 2007" could be anywhere on earth. 216.242.15.66 (talk) 19:58, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Another possibility

message: The wikipedia article on the Peninsular (S. Calif.) ranges claims Santa Ana Mts are members. This article claims they are too, yet the first thing mentioned in their Geography section is they start with the Chino Hills.  The Chino Hills are part of the Transverse Range. This is clearly inconsistent, and needs clarification: who is it that uses one or the other definition? (public? geographers? geologists? ecologists?) Or is one just wrong?Abitslow (talk) 19:20, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: From looking at the USGS Santa Ana 30x60 topographic map; the Santa Anas show a NW-SE trend fitting the trend of the Peninsulars. To the northwest the Puente Hills trend E-W in line w/ the Transverses. Between these lie the Chino Hills which appear to have a WNW-SSE orientation. But, that's just my OR ... would need a RS to clarify ... and the statement in the Chino Hills geography section is also unsourced. Vsmith (talk) 23:06, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

text: Removed the Transverse bit from the Chino Hills article. Seems the Chino/Puente hills have the NW trend and geology of the Peninsulars, however the Puentes abut the Transverse range. The geology is complex and would need a section of its own - and a bit of work. Vsmith (talk) 01:50, 2 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inconsistency between traverse and peninsular?