Talk:Eureka, California

message: The point of the article and the audience is more to do with the larger demographic than the agenda of particular editors. The link to domestic violence is really inapropriate in this type of article. This is an INTRODUCTORY article on a city. Is that the proper location for specific issues such as Domestic Violence? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.12.129.75 (talk • contribs) 
:There are a bunch of links in the external links section of this article that do not fit within the Wikipedia's External links policies. Movie theater listings? 
:Among other problems, the Wikipedia is WP:NOT WikiTravel. Unless a tourist attraction is specifically mentioned in the body text of the article, it has no place in the external links, and if the place has its own article (e.g. Sequoia Park Zoo), the external link needs to be only in that article. 
:I've now deleted a few external links, plus reorganized the section so that individual links are easier to find. BlankVerse 12:32, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A great job of cleaning up links! We may reduce it further as DAUGHTER articles are spawned or further developed. Norcalal 17:27, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A note on the external links that I left in the article: I didn't check any of them, so someone should check each one to see how valuable they are as an encyclopedia resource. For example: Some added a link to the Long Beach Historical Society to the Long Beach, California article. That would have been great if there was some good information on the website, since the Long Beach article is pretty skimpy and scatter-shot in the history section. Instead, the website had just office hours and info on how to become a member, so it was useless as a Wikipedia link. BlankVerse 12:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion of removal of Domestic Violence External Link...Just who do we think the audience is here? 

message: User 24.248.42.81: I have reverted most of your last edits, here are my reasons:
Removal of "He likely will not, however, as there is not sufficient evidence of a crime." I think you are trying to say he will not "win" but nevertheless, this is a civil suit and no one has any idea of the outcome, so what you write is just opinion.
changed "6-00 feet, 180lbs" to "5 feet 11 inches, 170 lbs" why? because this figure is sourced, as in the source link right next to  the figure, please follow it and read. This is probably irrelevant detail anyway.
Removal of "10-inch" I have no idea how long the knife was, but I have never seen the size mentioned in any credible source. The cycle of edits that this figure has gone through is astounding. Obviously people have a vested interest in this figure. I think it is irrelevant detail. 
Removal of ", liberal, anti-government anarchist" since this pretty much refers to the Green Party (a party that holds governmental posistions in the region and around the country) I hardly see how you can call them "anti-government anarchist" and I think saying "liberal" is really just irrelevant. In any case, you seem to be using these terms in a way very similar to name-calling, that would fall under the category of POV. Wikipedia has a NPOV policy, please read it.--Metatree 20:55, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I made no attempt to delete the article since the announcement of HUMBOLPEDIA, but did a major reconstruction of the Eureka article in November to improve the overall quality and expand and develop sections based on other model artticles like those on SF and various smaller cities. MY GOAL was to consider sweeping aspects of the community and consider broad interests of typical encyclopedia users. SOME editors in the beating to death of scandal here are ONLY interested in their anger over injustice and somehow think that publishing the minutia of these ridiculous scandals somehow helps it. I am concerned ONLY about what the average seeker may want to find in this type of encyclopedia. This is NOT a blog or a place to grind an axe...especially for an editor whose own local paper- now outdated resource (which has attempted to grind this axe RE: the Eureka PD in the local area and failed) has such low readership. In other words the vast majority of people inquiring here are NOT interested in the dirty laundry. Of note is the fact that persons who may be looking to move here who have considerable social conscious may look elsewhere as they read of this exorbidant level of detail herein that the local police have a major problem. These types in their inquiry might even over time address such issues if they moved here. But in their cursory glance would look at the Eureka and Arcata articles (and in comparison with others) note the sad state of affairs HERE and move to Eugene or some other place instead. So go ahead and continue to shoot your foot off...I am sure it feels good....otherwise why do it? AGAIN, very few people who use this type of resource care about this ridiculous level of detail on these scandals....this is not unusual among many locales in the history and related socioeconomic conditions all accross the country, but the incessant runing on about the scandal at this level of detail in this type of article is bizarre....and sad. The stated goal of education (according to the above editor) does nothing to obliterate the glaring inappropriateness and the insistance of an editor whose own failed publication could not gain support locally, so this individual (and a few others on the fringe) is/are determnined to make the sad news of one local police department the thing of greatest detail and minutia that local kids and visitors remember as they look to this article for basics like population, educational resources, and cultural attributes for school reports and to narrow down cool places to live. They instead dont see how cool it is here in Eureka because the focus demands their attention away from that and toward the unspeakable situations involving certain members of the local police and three unfortunate souls. Good job...aren't you glad you get to run your mouth here now that your paper, the HUMBOLDT SENTINAL failed? Bravo!Norcalal 08:07, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I referred to the person with that affiliation and OTHERS on the fringe. My argument is sound. Have the editors so categorized contributed anything that would be of use to others that doesnt have something to do with scandal? Interesting how the above editor suggests the high road, yet doesnt sign a name. And the truth remains that ONLY to a few folks are these issues of such great significance in a forum such as this one...but due to the nature of Wiki tolerance, the entire world has to get the blow-by blow detail of the scandal a few are determined to force down the throats of everyone else. Nothing writen here will go to fix the messes locally. But the bad press will continue to beat an already economically depressed area and help GUARANTEE more of these sad events that continue in the wake of the destruction of a now dead economic monoculture (i.e. the loss timber industry, which has never been replaced). Again, I say congratulations. YOU (all of you on the fringe) WIN...BUT DO YOU FEEL BETTER? I think probably not. By the way, have any of you so determined to run this litany of stuff on the local police scandal found any such content on other cities? Well actually in a survey of at least 30 other cities in the nothern part of the state, there is nothing like this. Hmmm...maybe one ought to wonder why?...and consider that it is definitely not for the lack of scandal or drug issues or crimes, including murder in any of the other 30 cities...There is nothing that my argument says that supports the alleged crime of the Eureka PD, what I am saying is that this type of encyclopedic reference is not the soapbox these persons want it to be, it just isn't. And there is nothing appropriate about this issue existing here in such detail. This belongs in a blog and in the local papers, and so on....and everyone, if honest, can have no other conclusion. This will eventually go to arbitration and it will be removed. In the meantime development of the article will continue as a resource for potential visitors and residents and little kids who need to write reports. Those are the things this encyclopedia is for. Again it is an ENCYCLOPEDIA--a general reference... nothing more, nothing less.Norcalal 07:13, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Law Enforcement Details 

message: THE FOLLOWING IS THE ANNOUNCE/LINK OF THE NEW SITE...
This section now also at the new HUMBOLPEDIA: The Humboldt County Specific Wiki! -the place for local residents and others to share current events and culture -- or anything local to Humboldt County.Norcalal 10:15, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I made no attempt to delete the article since the announcement of HUMBOLPEDIA, but did a major reconstruction of the Eureka article in November to improve the overall quality and expand and develop sections based on other model artticles like those on SF and various smaller cities. MY GOAL was to consider sweeping aspects of the community and consider broad interests of typical encyclopedia users. SOME editors in the beating to death of scandal here are ONLY interested in their anger over injustice and somehow think that publishing the minutia of these ridiculous scandals somehow helps it. I am concerned ONLY about what the average seeker may want to find in this type of encyclopedia. This is NOT a blog or a place to grind an axe...especially for an editor whose own local paper- now outdated resource (which has attempted to grind this axe RE: the Eureka PD in the local area and failed) has such low readership. In other words the vast majority of people inquiring here are NOT interested in the dirty laundry. Of note is the fact that persons who may be looking to move here who have considerable social conscious may look elsewhere as they read of this exorbidant level of detail herein that the local police have a major problem. These types in their inquiry might even over time address such issues if they moved here. But in their cursory glance would look at the Eureka and Arcata articles (and in comparison with others) note the sad state of affairs HERE and move to Eugene or some other place instead. So go ahead and continue to shoot your foot off...I am sure it feels good....otherwise why do it? AGAIN, very few people who use this type of resource care about this ridiculous level of detail on these scandals....this is not unusual among many locales in the history and related socioeconomic conditions all accross the country, but the incessant runing on about the scandal at this level of detail in this type of article is bizarre....and sad. The stated goal of education (according to the above editor) does nothing to obliterate the glaring inappropriateness and the insistance of an editor whose own failed publication could not gain support locally, so this individual (and a few others on the fringe) is/are determnined to make the sad news of one local police department the thing of greatest detail and minutia that local kids and visitors remember as they look to this article for basics like population, educational resources, and cultural attributes for school reports and to narrow down cool places to live. They instead dont see how cool it is here in Eureka because the focus demands their attention away from that and toward the unspeakable situations involving certain members of the local police and three unfortunate souls. Good job...aren't you glad you get to run your mouth here now that your paper, the HUMBOLDT SENTINAL failed? Bravo!Norcalal 08:07, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

text: I referred to the person with that affiliation and OTHERS on the fringe. My argument is sound. Have the editors so categorized contributed anything that would be of use to others that doesnt have something to do with scandal? Interesting how the above editor suggests the high road, yet doesnt sign a name. And the truth remains that ONLY to a few folks are these issues of such great significance in a forum such as this one...but due to the nature of Wiki tolerance, the entire world has to get the blow-by blow detail of the scandal a few are determined to force down the throats of everyone else. Nothing writen here will go to fix the messes locally. But the bad press will continue to beat an already economically depressed area and help GUARANTEE more of these sad events that continue in the wake of the destruction of a now dead economic monoculture (i.e. the loss timber industry, which has never been replaced). Again, I say congratulations. YOU (all of you on the fringe) WIN...BUT DO YOU FEEL BETTER? I think probably not. By the way, have any of you so determined to run this litany of stuff on the local police scandal found any such content on other cities? Well actually in a survey of at least 30 other cities in the nothern part of the state, there is nothing like this. Hmmm...maybe one ought to wonder why?...and consider that it is definitely not for the lack of scandal or drug issues or crimes, including murder in any of the other 30 cities...There is nothing that my argument says that supports the alleged crime of the Eureka PD, what I am saying is that this type of encyclopedic reference is not the soapbox these persons want it to be, it just isn't. And there is nothing appropriate about this issue existing here in such detail. This belongs in a blog and in the local papers, and so on....and everyone, if honest, can have no other conclusion. This will eventually go to arbitration and it will be removed. In the meantime development of the article will continue as a resource for potential visitors and residents and little kids who need to write reports. Those are the things this encyclopedia is for. Again it is an ENCYCLOPEDIA--a general reference... nothing more, nothing less.Norcalal 07:13, 22 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggestion that Editors consider moving current government and law issues to NEW HUMBOLPEDIA site....

message: If you have something good to say about Eureka and can cite your sources, please add it. I think the negative history that meets wikipedia NPOV guidelines should remain. I agree that some of the words used in the article did not meet NPOV guidelines. However, sugar-coating or deleting verified history doesn't make sense. Yes, there is more to Eureka than racism and genocide. There are a lot of print articles about the art and music communities in Eureka, for example. Vampyrecat 21:54, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Be Bold]], say something good

message: The previous comment was placed at the top of this talk page.  New comments are placed at the bottom of a talk page.  Will research how to create an archive for this page.  I suggest editors move on from these issues and work toward creating a page worthy of featured article status.--al95521 20:54, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry and thanks for moving it, archiving, etc. Vampyrecat 22:02, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Moved Be Bold comment

message: Isn't that usually dealt with quite well by using maps, and today GPS? Seems like that just lentghens the article without adding anything that a wikipedia reader would find useful. Keeping the article consise is something we all should strive for.
Coexist 07:28, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that all the information is helpful in a textural format.  Thanks you for not removing the info.  When I visit other sites, I want to know the things I added to the Eureka page.  I could work on sourcing the information if that would help.  I think the best thing to do is have a really good table of contents so that users can jump to what they want to read.--al95521 08:34, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Transportation Section? 

message: You did a nice job of making the content more consise just like you wanted.  Although, just like my comment above, less is not more in my opinion.  I thougt the date information was on topic.  You could add that in again if you had any second thoughts.  My aim is to have a feature article quality page.  If we get too much info on one subject we can always spin off to a new page.--al95521 08:34, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Media 

message: Went to Weather.com and could not substantiate the 17 degree low.  20 degrees (f) is still the low.--al95521 06:54, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Weather 

message: Did some research to determine the date of the photo and arrived at the following: Since both pulp mills were obviously functioning in the photo, this picture must be previous to the December 1992 shuttdown by Simpson of the pulp mill at Fairhaven (this is the one easier to see located south and east of the other operating mill on the Samoa Peninsula, which was Louisianna Pacific at the time). Also, for reference. the Fairhaven Power Company plant (a smaller plume of steam - mostly) then a subsidiary of the Eel River Saw Mills (now bankrupt and in receivership) is running just due west of the now completely dismantled Simpson Pulp Mill. For a resource check: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3636/is_199710/ai_n8770298 "Pulp & Paper",  October 1997  by Miller, Drew.   Norcalal 21:36, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aerial View of Eureka and Humboldt Bay 

message: Last I checked, Seattle was on the coast. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.32.246.219 (talk) 04:41, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Seattle, which is situated on an isthmus between Puget Sound and Lake Washington, is 2.5 hours from the Pacific Ocean. In travel there last summer it was quite clear that due to its summer temperatures that it really is not "coastal." Nevertheless both it and Portland are significantly larger than Eureka... of course. Norcalal 16:27, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Portland is also not coastal.  It's some 70 odd miles from the coast.--Xaraphim (talk) 01:03, 19 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Boston?? Smallbones (talk) 19:48, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: AGAIN, THIS ISSUE HAS COME UP. A long time editor made adjustments to a non-registered editors attempt to removed the following well-written AND carefully worded statement about Eureka: "Eureka is the largest city north of San Francisco situated on the Pacific Ocean in the Continental United States." THE STATEMENT IS TRUE. IT HAS NO BEARING OR RELATIONSHIP TO PORTLAND, SEATTLE, OLYMPIA, TACOMA, OR ANY OF THOSE CITIES, WHICH MOST DEFINITELY ARE LARGER...BUT GUESS WHAT! NONE, I REPEAT NONE OF THOSE CITIES ARE ON THE PACIFIC OCEAN/COAST...NOT A ONE OF THEM. CAN WE BE DONE WITH THIS? MULTIPLE EDITORS, WHO ARE REGISTERED ASSISTED THE ORIGINAL STATEMENT MADE SOME TIME AGO TO BE BETTER WRITTEN. ITS AIR TIGHT. LET US MOVE ON. I also went a step further for clarification: I added the vernacular version (West Coast) of the "West Coast of the United States to further make the point. Eureka IS the largest by population and area of all cities situated directly on the Pacific Coast all the way to Canada. Period. It is indisputable. I will say it one more time: BEFORE you bring up Portland and Seattle and others, look very closely at a map. They are NOT on the Pacific Ocean. They just aren't. There is no city north of San Francisco that exceeds Eureka in population or area...not Bolinas, not Fort Ross, not Mendocino, not Fort Bragg, not Gualala, not Crescent City, not Brookings, not even Coos Bay (whose port is slightly larger), not Gold Beach, not Florence, not Lincoln City, not Tilamook, not Astoria, and certainly none of the even more remote towns on the Olympic Peninsula. Now, please understand. Thank you. Norcalal (talk) 09:42, 9 December 2012 (UTC)

text:  Please don't shoot me, but I rewrote that sentence one more time.  I think it incorporates your concerns and flows through the concepts better than it did before.  I also fixed citations, and etc. this morning.  Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 18:08, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I think adding a citation from a reliable source that Eureka is the largest coastal city north of San Francisco would solve the problem instead of adding original research. 72Dino (talk) 18:26, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text:  I didn't add any original research.  I checked pre-existing citations and fixed grammar in one particularly tricky part.  But your point is a good one.  Even though on many other Wiki pages, it is considered in poor form to put citations in the lede paragraph; however in the spirit of "following what was already done," and also User:72Dino's suggestion, I have added a citation to the section and once-again reworded that sentence based on the General Plan of the City of Eureka which reads: "Page 3: Located on California's North Coast, Eureka is the westernmost city of the contiguous United States and the largest coastal city in California north of San Francisco. Eureka is situated on Humboldt Bay, which is the most important port between San Francisco and Coos Bay Oregon." PDF General Plan   I am unable to find a citation which makes the full and exact statement made by  Norcalal  that Eureka is the largest coastal city in the U.S. north of San Francisco. Ellin Beltz (talk) 07:35, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

text: Another anonymous editor tried to cut up the location extremes section of the main article today.  I'd refer people to the Extreme points of the United States and also remind that the citation is quoted in the citation, that's what the citation says and if one wishes to change it, one needs to cite a source not just cut out pieces.  Ellin Beltz (talk) 01:34, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Largest Pacifc coastal city north of SF in US? 

message: I have been working to improve this article intermitantly since November 2006. I had fleshed out the intro section and then another editor removed much of the detail. Noting that what I had was likely too much, I think the following is the goal we can achieve, which is in alignment with the WikiProject Cities project:
From the Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/Proposed Template
LEAD section
The introductory section should introduce the article about the city, serving as a concise overview of the article, establishing context, summarizing the most important points, and explaining why the subject is interesting or notable.
This section should follow the guidelines specified under WP:LEAD. Additionally, a couple of items should be included in the lead section for city articles, including:
    * Name of city and location in state
    * City proper population (one number)
    * Metro population (one number)
    * Brief note about historical roots/founding
    * Nicknames, if notable
    * Primary industries supporting its economy (e.g. service, manufacturing, tourism, etc...)
    * Notable unique characteristics and characteristics commonly associated with it
Previous notes on the reduction of what was listed in the introduction area before included removing details that exist in the info box. This generally makes sense. However, the template (above) has both and duplicates population, for example.
~Norcalal 20:55, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eureka Introduction Section 

message: Seems like a great idea...it focuses or re-focuses the effort to article quality only! Maybe through that lense, the maturation of this article can progress... ~ Norcalal 03:45, 15 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Addition of Talk Page Header 

message: This online only media reference has no current reporting. In fact there is no article dated after Spring 2006. The insistance that this be placed alongside or in front of weekly papers or even the daily major papers is preposterous. In regard to the editor who continually places it in the article, the solution to its constant removal is easy: Simply make it a viable current media source and other editors including myself will see its relevance...Makes sense to me Norcalal 15:42, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Humboldt Sentinal issue returns 

message: The very begining of the history of Eureka is connected to the mining operations of the Trinity River area. This secondary source of Gold in California was never really considered part of the initial Gold Rush. This section really needs changing. An primary article on Eureka is incorrect in using placing significant discussion on the Gold Rush, with the exception of the historical original use of the word, "Eureka!". Ultimately the discovery of Eureka and Humboldt Bay and County could idealy be placed in daughter articles or in those separate articles. But for now the Gold Rush issue is really overdone in a main article of this size. Comments anyone? Norcalal 04:52, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Made significant adjustments in the Histroy section (including the Gold Rush issue). It may be that their needs to be daughter articles soon as the article reaches maximum optimum size. Consideration of where to begin to cut or start new development may be in order Norcalal 06:27, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gold Rush subsection needs consideration 

message: Yreka is not another use of the word Eureka and Eureka is not another use of the word Yreka. Granted there may be some confusion, including the fact that the entire time JC Penney had stores in both locations, they routinely messed up orders bound for one city or the other. However, they are not the same word and the use of a header at this level of an article is especially obvious as the error in this usage of "For other uses, see..." To clarify further, there is no use of Eureka that is Yreka and no use of Yreka that is Eureka, period. The error in speaking or reading the word or name is not worthy of placement at the beginning of the article, even if the reference was more correctly stated. Norcalal 08:40, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  RE: REMOVAL of "For other uses, see Yreka, California" header that was placed in lead of article 

message: :Image:Seal of Eureka, CA.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 20:38, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Seal of Eureka, CA.jpg

message: The replacement photo placed in the infobox should showcase the city and not be JUST a picture of a picture, or a photo that focuses on the Carson Mansion (which has a better quality picture in the article already), or a photo that shows an undeveloped industrial area, for example. What is the goal of constantly putting sub par photos here? In what way does that improve or represent this article? I have had no response from Offrecord09 (talk) and my request that photos be submitted here for the community to consider has not led to any response except demanding that sub-par photos be placed in the infobox. Norcalal (talk) 01:55, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Recent photo changes. 

message: An anonymous user keeps removing this: "Only two of the county's TV stations, KIEM Ch. 3 (NBC) and KEET Ch. 13 (PBS) are fully based in Eureka while KVIQ Ch. 17 (CBS), KAEF Ch. 23 (ABC), KBVU Ch. 28 (Fox), and KEUV Ch. 31 (Univision) are located near Eureka but operated from elsewhere." from the main page article.  I don't know why it's causing the anon. such trouble, but I wish to put it here so it doesn't get lost in the shuffle.  Ellin Beltz (talk) 08:05, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Local Media 

message: The history that Eureka was once home to all 4 major national networks is gone. The fact that Eureka still has 2 stations is absent. KIEM (NBC), Channel 3 and PBS Channel 13 (KEET) are still produced and locally operating.. Obscure radio station info is present, but the last major network (NBC) and the only PBS Station north of SF is absent. It doesn't make sense. Norcalal (talk) 18:26, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Television Stations? 

message: This part doesn't begin to describe the savagery inflicted on the Chinese in Eureka. It needs considerable expansion. Nicmart (talk) 00:46, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chinese expulsion 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Eureka, California. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20140201213842/http://internet.humboldt.k12.ca.us/sps/se/glenpaul.php to http://internet.humboldt.k12.ca.us/sps/se/glenpaul.php
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 21:59, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Eureka, 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/20110531210815/http://www.naco.org/Counties/Pages/FindACounty.aspx to http://www.naco.org/Counties/Pages/FindACounty.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121226085609/http://eurekachamber.com:80/home to http://eurekachamber.com/home
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111015123039/http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Quakes/nc71348851.php to http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/recenteqsww/Quakes/nc71348851.php
*Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6YSasqtfX?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.census.gov%2Fprod%2Fwww%2Fdecennial.html to http://www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130911234518/http://factfinder2.census.gov to http://factfinder2.census.gov
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060930124329/http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/research/divisions/sd/communityprofiles/California/Eureka_CA.pdf to http://www.nwfsc.noaa.gov/research/divisions/sd/communityprofiles/California/Eureka_CA.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080112070749/http://www.hbmwd.com:80/home to http://www.hbmwd.com/home
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140219021746/http://www.eurekasymphony.com/index.html to http://www.eurekasymphony.com/index.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120407012116/http://www.redwoods.info:80/showrecord.asp?id=3970 to http://redwoods.info/showrecord.asp?id=3970
*Added  tag to http://redwoods.info/showrecord.asp?id=3775
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120708080359/http://www.redwoods.info:80/showrecord.asp?id=3691 to http://www.redwoods.info/showrecord.asp?id=3691
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140420023748/http://www.humboldtbayfullofblues.com/ to http://www.humboldtbayfullofblues.com/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120227033704/http://www.chickenwingfest.org/details.html to http://www.chickenwingfest.org/details.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110704132703/http://www.excaliburfaire.org/ to http://www.excaliburfaire.org/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130525133523/http://www.redwoods.info/showrecord.asp?id=3867 to http://www.redwoods.info/showrecord.asp?id=3867
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130525133256/http://www.redwoods.info/showrecord.asp?id=3710 to http://www.redwoods.info/showrecord.asp?id=3710
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110501185155/http://www.ci.eureka.ca.gov/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?BlobID=2682 to http://www.ci.eureka.ca.gov/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?BlobID=2682
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121226085609/http://eurekachamber.com:80/home to http://eurekachamber.com/home
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:36, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Eureka, 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/20141103002921/http://www.calafco.org/docs/Cities_by_incorp_date.doc to http://www.calafco.org/docs/Cities_by_incorp_date.doc
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) 03:54, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 10 external links on Eureka, 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 http://www.webcitation.org/6A28nGIHB?url=http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/0623042.html to http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/0623042.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120821114706/http://www.eurekawebs.com/plan/5_1.htm to http://www.eurekawebs.com/plan/5_1.htm
*Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6A28nGIHB?url=http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/0623042.html to http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/0623042.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-eureka-quake10-2010jan10%2C0%2C4204701.story
*Added archive https://archive.is/20160602200744/http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2015/SUB-EST2015.html to http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2015/SUB-EST2015.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html
*Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6A28nGIHB?url=http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/0623042.html to http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/0623042.html
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://factfinder2.census.gov/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120306095646/http://www.redwoods.info/showrecord.asp?id=1838 to http://redwoods.info/showrecord.asp?id=1838
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120302115059/http://www.eurekatheater.org/ to http://www.eurekatheater.org/
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) 19:50, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Eureka, 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/20090116013520/http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/travel/weekend/abox/article_1662541.php to http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/travel/weekend/abox/article_1662541.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120407012557/http://censtats.census.gov/data/CA/1600623042.pdf to http://censtats.census.gov/data/CA/1600623042.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120407012557/http://censtats.census.gov/data/CA/1600623042.pdf to http://censtats.census.gov/data/CA/1600623042.pdf
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) 19:03, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Eureka, 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/20161201081440/https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/states/events/1992_04_25_26.php to https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/states/events/1992_04_25_26.php
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080304060905/http://postcarboncities.net/node/46 to http://postcarboncities.net/node/46
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) 06:12, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified