Talk:California/Archive 3

message: An anon user edited the list of universities to limit it to 4.  I agree that we can't list all the univerisities in California; there's probably hundreds of them.  However, I think we'll have a hard time listing only 4 "prominent" ones, because who decides which ones get listed?  I have a couple of ideas.  We can link to a separate article that just lists all the colleges and universities in California.  We can not list separate campuses of the UC and Cal State systems, ie. Berkeley and UCLA would not be listed separately, as they are both UC campuses.  Or we can just not list colleges and universities in California at all.  Aranhamo 16:36, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree. No one else has had an issue with the list; it's been stable for months.  I don't think anyone can seriously argue with a straight face that any of the community colleges, Cal State campuses, or private colleges can rank with the four universities already illustrated at the top of the Education section.  Yes, I know that some of the Cal State campuses, particularly Cal Poly Obispo, and San Jose State, are quite good, but when it comes to international reputation, very few people outside of California have heard of those campuses, while everyone has heard of Stanford, Cal, and UCLA for certain, and maybe USC.  --Coolcaesar 05:59, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It hasn't been stable at all; it's been growing and growing until the anon user (rightly, in my opinion) pared it down.  The problem is that choosing any 4 particular schools is inherently POV, especially since California has so many internationally renowned schools that excel in various fields.  But everything else on Wikipedia is POV, so why should this be any different?  Aranhamo 15:14, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Universities 

message: "Current trends show that by 2050 California's population will be 55-60% Hispanic, 20-25% non Hispanic white, 15% Blacks, Asians will constitute less than 5% of the population and 5% will be of mixed or Native American/ Pacific islander heritage."
I thought that blacks were losing population and asians were gaining population.  I think "blacks" and "asians" need to be switched in the sentence.
:Yeah, the sentence does not jibe with the population data above it.  I think there needs to be a cite or it should be removed.  Aranhamo 20:11, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this correct? 

message: I was looking at the California article in the World Book Encyclopedia and in Britannica today at the public library and it dawned on me that we could use more photos in this article.  It's kind of ridiculous that the article neither mentions nor shows the Golden Gate Bridge, and it doesn't have a photo of Yosemite, when we have articles and photos of both elsewhere on Wikipedia. I will be digging up photos (only GFDL and CC licensed photos, of course) from other places on Wikipedia and adding thumbnails to this article soon.  --Coolcaesar 05:55, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  We need more photographs in this article 

message: Can anyone make a vector image of this flag: ?
There's already this flag:  in SVG format, but it is inferior in design to the png above. OzLawyer 14:06, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's also not what the Cali flag looks like. Star's too big, and the font's wrong. -- R'son-W (speak to me/breathe) 03:46, 20 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, I've made edits to the SVG flag to better match the PNG flag.  Any feedback is welcomed.  --ChrisRuvolo (t) 17:14, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Flag 

message: The California article has been heavily vandalized recently and the frequency may be exceeding the ability of us regular editors to keep up with it.  WeggeBot just reinserted a whole ton of interwiki links to the other versions of this article in other languages.  I didn't realize until I saw this on my watchlist that interwiki links had disappeared, so I traced the history to see what happened.  It looks like we got hit with vandalism here , in which all the interwiki links at the end were lost and the lead was also vandalized.  When Wars reverted at this diff , only the lead was fixed, but not the rest of the article for reasons that are not clear.  
The article may need semi-protection, or else the quality will begin to deteriorate rapidly if it keeps getting vandalized and then improperly fixed like this.  --Coolcaesar 17:42, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Something peculiar happened, this article needs semi-protection 

message: I just stumbled over some information in a reputable book I got saying that California was named after "a mythical Spanish island, ruled by a queen named Califia, which appeared in a Spanish romance (c. 1500) called Las Sergas de Esplandián." I think this little bit of information should be mentioned somewhere in the article, but I'm not really sure where the best place would be exactly, so someone bold enough should do it. RENTASTRAWBERRY FOR LET? röck 23:10, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's already there, not presented in the way that I'd do it, but certainly done in a quite acceptable manner. Check out the name section of the article. ClairSamoht - Help make Wikipedia the most authoritative source of information in the world 23:45, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

text: How did I miss it? RENTASTRAWBERRY FOR LET? röck 00:03, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Naming Information

message: There is some interesting and useful information included in the following links that really should be included in this article in the section treating California history.
*AfriGeneas, "African American Genealogy - California"
*San Francisco Bay View, "Wanda's Picks."
I also have a book somewhere in my personal library called They Seek a City by Arna Bontemps and another author whose name escapes me, published in 1945 (just checked online).  I'm sure it holds some very useful information, too.  Maybe I'll get around to adding it, maybe not -- but that's the name of the book, in case anyone is interested in reading/researching the African American migration out of the South and their impact on California.  deeceevoice 03:28, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Black presence in California history

message: Peer review has been requested for the California Gold Rush article.  All comments and suggestions are being accepted with an eye towards possible nomination of that article as a Featured Article. NorCalHistory 07:11, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  peer review requested - California Gold Rush 

message: Shouldn't there be a "Culture" section in this article? California is usually considered mainstream and many trends popular in the United States and even in other western nations make their start in California. Could a more knowledgeable person perhaps add the section? Thanks for the consideration. --71.98.1.20 02:59, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  thirded.  It definitely does--thats why I, and many people I know want to move there. And if it causes people to move then I'd say the article needs oneTrevorLSciAct 23:49, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Culture 

message: We need to ditch some of those lists.  I suggest trimming them to the richest 10 and the poorest 10, which should be enough.  Neither Texas nor New York have such long lists occupying so much space in the middle of the article.  I also agree with the suggestion above that California needs a Culture section.  Texas has one, and I think we can all agree that California has a lot more culture to talk about than Texas!  --Coolcaesar 04:11, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Haha that is probably because we do think too much about money!!!  (from California) --Stacey Doljack Borsody 21:53, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, I'm taking care of it now and trimming to 10 and 10.  No one's defended having such long lists.  --Coolcaesar 08:24, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  We need to ditch some of the richest and poorest places 

message: I changed the population of San Francisco in the Important Cities and Towns sections to match the 2005 population estimate. - DJDavis92
:The footnote at the bottom of the second table states "Note: table was compiled using California State estimates from 2006 for population and Census 2000 for area and density" so I would think the data that was already there would have been even more accurate. Mikemill 05:09, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  San Francisco Population Change 

message: JUST HOW IN THE HELL IS CALIFORNIA 70 SOME PERCENT WHITE, CHANGE THIS STUPID STAT and all others that have been changed
:That's because most Hispanics are White. -Will Beback · † · 09:34, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Demographics

message: Before everyone gets too worked up about the text of the Demographics section, that section will be coming up for consideration in our movement of the bulk of each of these sections to daughter articles.  Each of these sections is/has been too long for this main California article, and the main California article has benefited from moving the bulk of the text of sections to daughter articles.  The Demographics section will get its turn in the next week or so to be considered for movement. NorCalHistory 14:22, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: We should retain the same information as other state articles. Readers should be able to find similar information in each state article. -Will Beback · † · 18:52, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Going to propose moving most of ''Demographics'' to daughter article 

message: Someone created a Culture of California article, which, incidentally, needs some help. But it also needs to be integrated into the main California article. Any suggestions?--Plainsong 06:47, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Culture of California integration