Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California/Archive 1

message: Hi folks,
I just wanted to let you know about a list of votes for deletion on articles related to California.  You can find the list here:  Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/California.
Since you're interested in California and improving Wikipedia's coverage of California-related topics, you might want to monitor this list.
If you find the list useful, please also help to maintain it by adding new items and archiving old ones.  Thanks!
Cheers,
-- Visviva 16:02, 15 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deletion list 

message: This category is getting pretty unwieldy with a lot of people. I propose that we create subcategories for regions (North, Central, and Southern) and then furthermore create categories for major cities within those regions. Any opposition? Additionally, I've proposed renaming a few categories like :Category:San Franciscans to :Category:People from San Francisco (see discussion). --howcheng  [ t • c • w • e ] 23:21, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps :Category:People from San Francisco should be :Category:People from San Francisco, California to be a little more global. As for splitting into North, Central, and Southern, I think it is problematic because not everyone agrees on what what defines those regions. Breaking out people from major cities or metropolitan areas from the main category doesn't sound like a bad idea, though. Mike Dillon 00:12, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right; we probably don't need the regional ones, but I don't think there's a need to append ", California" to the category names unless there's the possibility of confusion with another city of the same name. --howcheng  [ t • c • w • e ] 16:45, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I only suggested a name change because there is a San Francisco (disambiguation) page. After looking at it more closely, it looks like none of the cities there will ever be notable enough to have their own categories, so nevermind that suggestion. As for the regional ones, I don't think it's a bad way to split the main category, I just think the split will be ambiguous for some cases and possibly contentious in others. I actually think it works great for self-selected stuff like :Category:Wikipedians in Southern California. Mike Dillon 17:16, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

text: I changed my mind. Adding "California" to the end of the category names is a good idea, because invariably some will need it and some won't, so then we'll end up having a few that are :Category:People from some city and others that are :Category:People from another city, California. I remember the reason why I thought of the regions too -- there can't be a need to have a category for every city in the state, but there are going to be people from small towns that don't merit a category, and it would be nice to throw them in some other bucket besides "People from California." Perhaps we should have a breakdown by county first? --howcheng  [ t • c • w • e ] 16:27, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not so sure the hugeness of the category is a big problem. The only problem I can see with it is that the subcategory navigation requires hacks like the leading space to show all subcats on the first page. Otherwise, I don't think that splitting is necessary except wherever there is a clear case for a city-based category. The county thing would be too confusing because it requires a lot of local knowledge to be useful. For example, it wouldn't be obvious that :Category:People from Stanislaus County, California might have people from Modesto and Turlock unless you are familiar with the Central Valley. Mike Dillon 05:58, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmmm, you're right about that. What about categories for the major metropolitan areas then? I went through :Category:People from California today and sorted a bunch of people whose last names started with A and B, and there were a number of SF Bay Area people or Greater LA metro area people that I didn't move to the more specific categories. Perhaps we have :Category:People from the San Francisco Bay Area and :Category:People from the Greater Los Angeles metropolitan area and then put SF and LA as subcats of those with the others just lumped in that category? howcheng  [ t • c • w • e ] 07:31, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[:Category:People from California]] 

message: has been nominated for deletion by User:SPUI. Plase join in the relevant discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 March 13#Template:PD-CAGov. BlankVerse 13:40, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[template:PD-CAGov]] 

message: Hello. I'm a member of the Version 1.0 Editorial Team, which is looking to identify quality articles in Wikipedia for future publication on CD or paper. We recently began assessing articles using these criteria, and we are are asking for your help. As you are most aware of the issues surrounding your focus area, we are wondering if you could provide us with a list of the articles that fall within the scope of your WikiProject, and that are either featured, A-class, B-class, or Good articles, with no POV or copyright problems. Do you have any recommendations? If you do, please post your suggestions at the listing of all active Places WikiProjects, and if you have any questions, ask me in the Work Via WikiProjects talk page or directly in my talk page. Thanks a lot! Titoxd(?!? - help us) 18:44, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team|Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team]] cooperation 

message: Many articles covered by this WikiProject lack photographs. As part of a subcategorization of the requested photos category, there is now a category for California articles needing photos - to use it, just add  to the article's talk page. I have only added a few articles to the category so far, but it would be an easy way to make an extensive list California-related articles lacking photos. I hope you find it useful! TheGrappler 04:25, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[:Category:Wikipedia requested photographs in California]]

message: Please check out List of current and former capital cities in the United States and make sure that California's capital cities are listed accurately. A word of warning: the page does contain quite a bit of complicated wiki formatting, so if you're not comfortable editing it, just post your changes on the talk page and someone more experienced will apply them to the article.   JEK   19:44, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  History buff needed 

message: I've worked for the past month to update Portal:United States and keep it better maintained.  Though, I think the portal would be even better with broader participation.  One way to do that is instead of choosing the "selected article" myself each week, if others would nominate articles and help make decisions.  (same goes for pictures, though these are stocked up through July 29)  If there is anything related to California (or anything else related to the U.S. - culture, music, literature, geography, history, politics, ...), please nominate.   I'd also like people to weigh in on the nominations and help select what should be featured. Thanks. --Aude (talk contribs) 23:16, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Nominate articles for [[Portal:United States]]

message: Hello, everybody.  I am the bozo who just recently created the new subcategories in the "People from California" category.  I thought that some of you might want to know why they were created, and why they often have so few pages in them.  
The majority of the states have "People from [state]" categories which have at least 200 entries, sometimes over 1,000.  This is clearly an unworkably large number for anyone wishing to use the category for research purposes.  In 8th grade in Rapid City, South Dakota, the social studies class asked us to write, over the course of the year, reports on two or three people who were or had been residents of the city.  Because of that, I have reason to believe that they could be used and probably are used for research purposes.  To make such research easier, I looked at the list of metropolitan statistical areas and basically entered in one new category for each metropolitan statistical area.  
I know that many of these categories might well be, in the eyes of you who know more about the cities in question much better than I do, misnamed or otherwise faulty.  I apologize for any mistakes I may have made along those lines, and I would welcome any corrections, including deletion, that any of the rest of you might choose to make.  With that in mind, I have also generally populated the categories with only one or two names, to ease in the process of deletion or renaming.
I thought you all should know why these categories were created, and felt some degree of responsibility for letting your know.  I wish you all the greatest good fortune in making the coverage of your state in Wikipedia of the greatest scope and quality possible, and I hope that I haven't annoyed too many of you by my recent actions.  Badbilltucker 13:16, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  New "People from [city]" Categories 

message: There is a new poll on naming communities within cities at Wikipedia:Communities strawpoll. Since many of the communities that have had article naming disputes are located in California (including Hollywood, La Jolla, and Anaheim Hills) the participants in the California WikiProject should add their votes and comments to the discussion so that hopefully there will be a clear consensus and that will then stop most of the interminable debates on this issue. BlankVerse 11:33, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia:Communities strawpoll 

message: It looks like Serge, who is unhappy with the current naming standard for cities, has embarked on a city-by-city effort of renaming them, starting with Chicago, and now continueing with San Francisco. My personal opinion is that the current system works fine, but you may have other opinions. Please visit Talk:San Francisco, California and register your opinion. There is also a more general survey on naming cities at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (settlements). BlankVerse 22:09, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed move, San Francisco, California -> San Francisco 

message: For the reasons that I stated at Template talk:Los Angeles USD, Template: has been nominated for deletion. The template is already huge and ugly. Imagine it populated with all 1,035 LAUSD schools. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. BlankVerse 20:35, 10 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  TfD nomination of Template:{{ucfirst:Los Angeles USD}} 

message: There's a discussion here about how best to (further) split up the .  Ideally, we'd do this by generally-recognised regions consisting of a readily-identifiable list of whole counties, such that there's at least 60 existing stubs in each (but not so many as to mean we're likely to be doing the same thing again before too long).  Comments welcome.  Alai 00:41, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  CA-geo-stub sub-types proposed 

message: Joshua A. Norton is up for a featured article review. Detailed concerns may be found here. Please leave your comments and help us address and maintain this article's featured quality.  Sandy 00:09, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Joshua A. Norton]]

message: "This page is 33 kilobytes long." Seems like we have a problem here, I think this project needs subpages to store all the extra info. --Daniel Olsen 04:12, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This talk page just needs to be archived. BlankVerse 10:26, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Sections? Subpages?

message: Portal:California has recently been created, but it needs some filling out to turn it into a full-fledged Portal. BlankVerse 07:14, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portal:California 

message: A new WikiProject has been started, and may be of interest to members here. It is WikiProject National Register of Historic Places. It covers all listings on the Register, in all states and territories. Should you be so inclined, please feel free to join. And spread the word to any other interested parties.
-Ebyabe 19:35, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Invitation to new WikiProject 

message: Hello. The WikiProject Council has recently updated the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Directory.  This new directory includes a variety of categories and subcategories which will, with luck, potentially draw new members to the projects who are interested in those specific subjects. Please review the directory and make any changes to the entries for your project that you see fit. There is also a directory of portals, at User:B2T2/Portal, listing all the existing portals. Feel free to add any of them to the portals or comments section of your entries in the directory. The three columns regarding assessment, peer review, and collaboration are included in the directory for both the use of the projects themselves and for that of others. Having such departments will allow a project to more quickly and easily identify its most important articles and its articles in greatest need of improvement. If you have not already done so, please consider whether your project would benefit from having departments which deal in these matters. It is my hope that all the changes to the directory can be finished by the first of next month. Please feel free to make any changes you see fit to the entries for your project before then. If you should have any questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you.   B2T2 18:54, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Project directory 

message: So, does Baja California actually qualify for inclusion within this WikiProject?  Before answering, consider the history of California, when all of it was a territory of Mexico, and what was Alta California back then is today the U.S. state of California.  That should make it an article "related to the U.S. state of California" stated on the top of the project page.  If it is, place the project notice template on the top of their talk pages?  At least have some collaboration with WikiProject Mexico on the Baja California articles and the Alta/Baja border. --Geopgeop 14:52, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Baja California 

message: Your bot has added Inspector General to your wikiproject, aswell as several other articles that I've come across in my travels. I'm just not sure why it would be part of this wikiproject so thought it best to let you know. The bot is 'MetsBot'. If I've missed something and it's perfectly reasonable for that article to be in your project, then you have my apologies.--SGGH 18:09, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Your bot. 

message: Earlier this year, there was a mass killing of articles about Boy Scout councils and Boy Scout camps. Many of the articles were of poor quality, but the real reason that the articles failed to be saved was lack of a coordinated defense on the part of the Scouting WikiProject. In response to that, there was a move by one user to merge as many Scouting related articles as possible into ‘state’ articles like Scouting in California rather than a push to expand the smaller articles that existed. 
In term of California, these articles no longer exist.
#Camp Bothin
#Camp Cherry Valley
# Camp Emerald Bay
#Camp Hi-Sierra
#Camp Josepho
#Camp Stuart
# Camp Wolfeboro
#Chesebrough Scout Reservation
#Pico Blanco Scout Reservation
#San Diego-Imperial Council
#San Gabriel Valley Council
# Western Los Angeles County Council
I’m pointing this out to you, because WikiProject Pennsylvania has made a concerted effort to save our articles, which is why ours are most of the few that still exist. --evrik (talk) 16:31, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll be honest with you - Camp Oljato does not seem notable and is not in a Wiki format typical of other articles. It could very easily be nominated for deletion WP:AfD. If you want to see it saved, it needs notable info and good discussion on its talkpage to support the article.  Ronbo76 02:26, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The one above it was not much better either. I have been an AfD nominator and both would be prime for noms. Both need copyedits to bring the notable achievements cited by reputable neutral third sources otherwise they will end up like other articles that probably should be here.  Ronbo76 05:22, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Obliteration of Scouting articles related to California

message: *Camp Wente, BSA --evrik (talk) 01:58, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll be honest with you - Camp Oljato does not seem notable and is not in a Wiki format typical of other articles. It could very easily be nominated for deletion WP:AfD. If you want to see it saved, it needs notable info and good discussion on its talkpage to support the article.  Ronbo76 02:26, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The one above it was not much better either. I have been an AfD nominator and both would be prime for noms. Both need copyedits to bring the notable achievements cited by reputable neutral third sources otherwise they will end up like other articles that probably should be here.  Ronbo76 05:22, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Other California articles threatened

message: The article "Californian Least Tern" was obliterated in a merge into least tern. the article covered an important subspecies in california and was focussed and well written on that subject. click Here to see the article that was destroyed. that article should be restored.  Anyone interested in this matter may comment Comment Here Covalent 17:16, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So fork that off into a new article. In the edit you've given us, the Least Tern article was focused on the California Least Tern when there are two other subspecies, and I see no article ever having been at California Least Tern. howcheng  {chat} 17:36, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, my bad -- Californian Least Tern ("Californian") has never existed. Still, there's nothing preventing you from writing a new article at California Least Tern. howcheng  {chat} 17:38, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The article existed for most of 2006. Just click Here to view it. The article doesnt need to be rewritten: just restored to the form it was in before it was moved to "least tern"...but the history should be moved, which needs an admin assist, which is why concensus is needed here. Covalent 17:45, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: First of all, the history can only be attached to one article, so I can't take a partial edit history and move it to another article. The only way you can do this is to do a copy-paste from the old version in the history of Least Tern and in your edit summary, do something like, "Content split from Least Tern". See Wikipedia:Summary style for more information. howcheng  {chat} 19:01, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: The article on "California Least Tern" should not have been destroyed

message: As part of the WikiProject California, the article on the California State Normal School should be undeleted. The California State Normal School was the first public institution of higher learning in California, and the campaign to delete this article was lead by a San Jose State University student in an effort to censor and suppress references to that school's original name.  The article did share some text with the SJSU article, but I personally pledge to make sure the two articles do not share any text. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.98.197.66 (talk • contribs) 18:12, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't see how the SJSU article attempts "to censor and suppress references to that school's original name" since it seems to discuss this extensively in both the introduction and "History" sections. It could be possible to make California State Normal School a separate article that deals with the school as a teacher's college, but this discussion should be taking place on Talk:San José State University, not here. howcheng  {chat} 20:11, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Request for undeletion - California State Normal School article

message: Hello, I am new to the community. I was motivated to become a member when I read for the second or third time the artical showcasing Eureka to the world.
I discovered a laundry list of messes in the local police department and a diatribe focusing far too much on a slaughter of local natives that occured in 1860. Yes this 1860 nightmare occurred as did many others accross the nation. But what I found unacceptable is that it took the lionshare of the space of what was printed in the article. When I compared this focus with other cities, I found no such focus on the negative in light of a glaring absence of /focus on of the basics one expects in an encyclopedic reference.
This vitriol was in place of what could be a rich article on one of California's gems, the micropolitan center, Eureka, CA. This little city is living expression of the State Motto "Eureka: I have found it." And its rich history and ongoing revitalization deserves better.
Being new to this community, I unwittingly began an overhaul of the article to get to a foundation and then to rebuild the article in a way that showcases cultural attributes, resources, and history. I was amazed I could do this. But being an historian whose expertise in California history is even more focused on the North Coast, I determined I could right a wrong.
Organically I began the process, not realizing the hornets nest that could be stirred.
I bring this to your attention after my mistake of understanding Eureka and the Redwood Emprire and a sincere desire to focus on a star of California. 
I may end up in a political quagmire here as a result of undoing the ridiculousness of the now (today) removed section on Law Enforcement and the lopsided area on History. I am tempted to walk away, but felt since Eureka is on the WIKIPROJECT CALIFORNIA that I would bring it to the attention of the project first.
So far a monitor has allowed my changes to remiain. I can only imagine the hurt individuals who were responsible for the odd extensivity of the negativity in the old sections I removed will not go away so easily.
So I present this simple idea. Why not leave the text of the slaughter of the Wiyots in the article under that name. Why not leave the mess with police misdeeds in a separate article on police problems and misdeeds.
All I ask is why should such a great little city in the midst of its rebirth as a revitalized regionial center be subjected to any continued torture for its shady past and current problems, especially as outlined regarding police. Not Even the Los Angeles listing has this negativity, though its police are certainly often deserving of such notation. I found reference to methamphetamines in the Eureka article overview, but in Oakland and San Francisco no such notation exists for "crack" and "methamphetamines," respectively.
I believe these issues need to be in the public perview, but not in the lopsided way, I found in the Eureka article. I realize I should have made this point before I made sweeping changes in the article, but it was ridiculous as a social historian to allow it to remain. And it was only later in the process that I discovered the protocol herein for change.
Again a monitor of the site allowed my changes to occur as of today, but I ask that those interested in this project monitor for the reaction and what may occur.
I apologize for not understanding how article editing is suposed to occur. But clearly Wikipedia is not a place only to bash a locale for its past.  We can do better and I expect all the dirty laundry of every other city to receive its own section, if all the negativity returns to the Eureka article. Fair enough? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Norcalal (talk • contribs) 
: It looks like all of the POV problems in the "Demographics" section were introduced by  in a single edit on August 30, 2005: link. Because of the amount of text added, I suspect it may actually be a copyright violation (of which most of the text is still there). This was certainly not a concensus change to the article, but it looks like subsequent editors have been content to leave it in the article. You are definitely right that this article has serious problems. There are verifiability problems all over the place, not to mention a nearly complete lack of sourcing (a common problem). Mike Dillon 22:18, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Also, if you look at this user's contribution history, they have a serious vegan/animal rights POV problem... Mike Dillon 22:21, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Watch necessary on the Eureka, California article. 

message: There already is a WikiProject Southern California. Is it time to also create Wikipedia:WikiProject Northern California to handle Northern California topics, and leave California WikiProject for statewide issues? BlankVerse 10:33, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Who would deal with the Central Valley? Mike Dillon 16:19, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe there should be a WikiProject Great Central Valley.  Or do what is often done, the San Joaquin Valley south of Merced is Southern, and Merced and North plus the Sacramento Valley is Northern.  Or we could divide it by the rocks.  I don't think it's that big a deal.  Fresno is Southern, Modesto is Northern, everything in between a blur for much of us.  Maybe we need a great confusion buffer zone, WikiProject Central California.  Ultimately, will it matter, will confusion arise?  What's the point of dividing the state into separate projects anyhow?  KP Botany 20:59, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  WikiProject Northern California 

message: Having failed at other requested moves, including Los Angeles, California and San Francisco, California, and not gaining any consensus with a mass change in the naming convention for US Cities, the same group of editors is back proposing changing individual cities. The latest example is Talk:Anaheim, California#Requested move. Please go to that section and express your opinions on this latest proposed page move. BlankVerse 10:30, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move: Anaheim, California -> Anaheim 

message: I have began editing the much more extensive article on the same topic, but instead entitled "San Francisco Mime Troupe".  I would suggest combining the articles and tagging the larger "San Francisco Mime Troupe" under this project. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amiaheroyet (talk • contribs) 
:I've put a  tag on the The San Francisco Mime Troupe, and a  tag on the San Francisco Mime Troupe article. This is an uncontroversial merge, so I would suggest going ahead and merging any unique information, and then turning the "The San Francisco Mime Troupe" article into a redirect page. BlankVerse 12:16, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move: "The San Francisco Mime Troupe" --> "San Francisco Mime Troupe" 

message: The California Gold Rush article has been nominated for Featured article status.  If you would like to comment on this nomination, please go here to leave your comment.  To leave a comment on that page, click the [edit] link to the right of the title California Gold Rush.NorCalHistory 20:01, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: To go directly to the Featured article candidate page for the Calif Gold Rush article, go to this page: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/California Gold Rush. BlankVerse 08:16, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  FA nomination for [[California Gold Rush]] 

message: Can anybody verify anything in the article on the Sydney Ducks?
Colinlieberman 06:03, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Reverted the nonsense, and unencyclopedic information.  Added External Link. NorCalHistory 06:45, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: But, it was so good the way it was.  Oh well, I guess that we can't yield to the trolls just 'cause they're funny. --Hjal 08:03, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Anything that is really funny can be sent to WP:BJAODN. BlankVerse 11:36, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bad Article? 

message: Panavision has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.
  
Sandy (Talk) 21:13, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Panavision FAR

message: Recently synced a few facts, particularly the number dead from mulholland's st francis dam disaster i 1928, between wikipedia's articles on william mulholland and on LA Department of Water and Power —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.63.100.166 (talk) 15:49, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  mulholland and LA Water and Power articles 

message: There is currently a discussion underway about articles assessments for this WikiProject at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject California/Assessment#Importance scale. Project participants are invited to join the discussion if they are so inclined. Mike Dillon 06:16, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Discussion about WikiProject:California assessments 

message: A user at talk:Alta California pointed out that there is also a place named "Alta" in California. It might not be notable but for completeness sake it'll probably get an article anyway. So we'd have "Alta California" about the old Mexican state, and "Alta, California" about the modern community. Though it's a very subtle difference I don't think it'll be a problem. Of course we can put disambig notices on each page to help anyone who picks wrong. Does anyone see a problem? -Will Beback · † · 09:15, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alta California / Alta, California 

message: There are an awful lot of California shopping centers with articles, and a number of them appear to be rather non-notable (see Simi Valley Town Center and Broadway Plaza, for example.) Could these (and others) perhaps be merged back into the localities where they are located, per WP:LOCAL? --Brianyoumans 16:36, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, good grief, a professional mall spammer.  Can't we just block the spamdress, rather than speedy delete every single page?  KP Botany 17:18, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I thought I would ask the Project before starting to merge and redirect, or just speedy;  I got scolded for AFDing a bunch of Ohio library stubs without consulting the Ohio folks.  People can get tetchy about things like this, and mall articles frequently survive AFD. --Brianyoumans 00:41, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Spam shouldn't though.  Still, you're right, you should ask.  Glad the user is blocked, though.  Would like to see many of them, probably most, go.   KP Botany 01:23, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

text: When I first saw a long description of a mall (in Terra Linda, San Rafael, California), I stripped much of the content.  Later when I saw the mall categories, they first struck me as spam.  Then, I realized that 1) malls and their major tenants are important to lots of people (shoppers, realtors, developers, potential small business people), if not to me, and 2) having a good category structure and separate articles (or merged articles by company or region) keeps details that are superfluous to many off the main page for the locale.  I think that mall articles should be kept or merged depending on the amount of content. And excessive shopping content in city and suburb articles should be moved out to a mall article. --Hjal 04:46, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Even defunct malls are hard to eradicate from the Wikipedia at AFD (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Centre 2000), so I doubt that you can get consensus to delete even crappy substub mall articles for existing malls. BlankVerse 06:02, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the dead malls are harder to get rid of, because the article usually includes the history of the mall and its failure. And the AFD you cited was trying to get rid of a whole raft of articles - always difficult (although I have managed it several times.) About the malls I want to merge (or delete): I don't think any of them have more than basic stub articles, they won't add much length to locality articles when merged. --Brianyoumans 08:14, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Mall Merging

message: Hello, all. It was initially my hope to try to have this done as part of Esperanza's proposal for an appreciation week to end on Wikipedia Day, January 15. However, several people have once again proposed the entirety of Esperanza for deletion, so that might not work. It was the intention of the Appreciation Week proposal to set aside a given time when the various individuals who have made significant, valuable contributions to the encyclopedia would be recognized and honored. I believe that, with some effort, this could still be done. My proposal is to, with luck, try to organize the various WikiProjects and other entities of wikipedia to take part in a larger celebrartion of its contributors to take place in January, probably beginning January 15, 2007. I have created yet another new subpage for myself (a weakness of mine, I'm afraid) at User talk:Badbilltucker/Appreciation Week where I would greatly appreciate any indications from the members of this project as to whether and how they might be willing and/or able to assist in recognizing the contributions of our editors. Thank you for your attention.  Badbilltucker 22:06, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipedia Day Awards 

message: I'm not sure if there will be another use for this info, but I recently compiled the following info:
:There are a few California counties that have names shared with other states, including eight different Orange Counties. There are two Nevada Counties, and two Sierra Counties. There is also one Irish, three US and three Canadian Kings Counties. 
note: I didn't look at every California county—just the ones that looked most likely to me to also be used by other states or countries. BlankVerse 09:26, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The only use for this is would be in creating a disambiguation page for these counties, so that people searching for articles can be prompted to go to the one they want.  I think you answered your own question, since the links in your question already lead to disambiguation pages that lists all eight Orange Counties, etc. GUllman 02:22, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I used the data for explaining why I thought that California needed to be in all of the category names for a group of categories for California counties. Instead of creating an if-then-else naming scheme, I felt that it would be better to use the wordier, but totally unambiguous naming scheme of including California in the name of every category, rather than only those counties that weren't unique. BlankVerse 10:11, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I stumbled across another shared county: Trinity County. BlankVerse 00:45, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Shared' counties 

message: Any suggestions to improve the article, users. Anything anybody can do to help? I would really appreciate it. Showmanship is the key 01:19, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I hope project members will have a look at it:  perhaps stubbifying it and starting over will help.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:07, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Looking at the references, I have some concerns about copyright status.  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:25, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Culture of California 1800s to mid 1900s]]

message: I feel that there should be at least one picture of Qualcomm Stadium before it was fully enclosed.
The article does reference that the enclosure construction began in 1997, and was a direct result of selling the naming rights, but a picture of the unenclosed environment would better depict the physical difference between the old Jack Murphy Stadium and Qualcomm Stadium.
The stadium's name was changed to San Diego Jack Murphy Stadium in 1981, the year following Jack Murphy (sportswriter)'s death.
There should also be a note about when the second JumboTron was added to the western side of the stadium.
A date for when the inner outfield wall was installed should be added, rather than just leaving it as "later" - This is a very important statistic for home run totals.
"The local architect selected to design the stadium, Frank L. Hope and Associates, had never designed a stadium before. Yet in 1969 San Diego Stadium became the only stadium to win the First Honor Award from the American Institute of Architects. The Hope firm also received a commendation award from Governor Ronald Regan." 
-R "Axion" M —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.116.250.245 (talk) 20:51, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Qualcomm Stadium 

message: With some clean-up, this article, James W. Robinson, should perhaps be nominated after being considered for inclusion to the California Wiki-Project. Robinson reads like he belongs in the Who's Who of San Diego history. I have begun clean-up on the article as I found it in an orphan abandoned status. After placing a bio tag on it, a Texas Wiki Project bot placed that project's tag on it. I believe the California Wiki Project tag should also be placed on it. Any ideas?  Ronbo76 17:19, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Another article for consideration should be Louis Rose.  Ronbo76 17:30, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured article [[James W. Robinson]] status? 

message: Hi, I was hoping that any of you guys in the L.A. area would be able to get and image or something which could go in David Beckham move to Los Angeles Galaxy. If you can help, please reply on the talk page of that article. Thanks!--HamedogTalk|@ 09:04, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image for [[David Beckham move to Los Angeles Galaxy]] 

message: Here is what I wrote on Talk:California Republic:
::Here is a reference, The California State Flag, although I remember being taught differently. My teacher said it was a reference to the North Star and the possible influence of emmigration from the Bering land bridge. In essence, the bear is looking towards the field of honor (towards his right) that has the [North Star]] painted red which is the color of blood which can stand for historic or future bloodshed. Here's another reference, Raising of the Bear Flag which uses the terms some say in solidarity with Texas (my emphasis on "some say") because over time that probably became the more acceptable urban legend. The Flag of Texas was presented to Congress in 1838 which means Todd may have been aware of it prior to leaving on his historic trek to Oregon followed by California. Almost any reference you will find on the Bear Flag will mention Texas in it. 
That period of California history intrigues me. Ronbo76 16:47, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[California Republic]] citation for the Bear Flag 

message: This article (Novato, California) lists four ranchos that were very important to the history of Northern California: Rancho San Jose, Corte Madera de Novato, Rancho Olompali, and Rancho Nicasio. It is very notable that one, Rancho Olompali was awarded to a Miwok chief (as per the article and my dim recollection of California history). It is probably one of the few, if not the only, to be awarded to a native.  Ronbo76 17:27, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Alta California#Ranchos of California]] - Four not listed 

message: Here I am stumbling all around The Big Four and when I looked at Leland Stanford's talkpage, I noticed he is not listed on our project. Wow!  Ronbo76 05:56, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for catching that. Since Stanford was Governor of California, among other things, he should definitely be part of this project's scope. Someone should probably go through the entire list of Governors and make sure they're all covered. Also, feel free to add the WikiProject banner to talk pages yourself. You can add it without an assessment if you don't feel comfortable doing that part (I didn't assess the Stanford article). Mike Dillon 22:36, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Mike, thanks. I will add it to the ones I am sure of. The Governor's list is a good idea (after the football game).  Ronbo76 22:43, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The good news is only the first and third governors were not on our project. The bad news is most of the early ones are stub articles. The terrible news is most can stand cleanup and wikification. Some of the current living past governors' articles should be reviewed prior to them becoming deceased.  Ronbo76 00:47, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: BTW, as I got into some articles it was easy to rate them as some had been rated by other project. I think I got the hang of the ratings but need to look more into it. If I had to rate the current living in the order of needing most work: first would be Deukmejian, followed by Brown, Wilson, and Davis. Ronbo76 00:57, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  One definite article for the project - [[Leland Stanford]] 

message: Thanks to BlankVerse and Mike Dillon's tutelage, this article now has some required pictures that show the historical aspect of Sacramento, CA.  Ronbo76 13:27, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: [[History of Sacramento, California]] now with requested pix

message: I am not sure how many members of our project participate in the WP:AfD process. The prod article above has a great comment on its talkpage from user:BlankVerse that this article could easily go to the AfD process and probably would not survive. I try to participate in the AfD process because I have nominated a number of articles for deletion. In essence I feel that I nominate, I should also debate as that shows I have  stake in the process. The WP:CAL should also participate so that way our users are recognized there in the event a project article is nominated for deletion. Granted, the AfD process should look at a user's contributions as a factor but often is swayed by who participates in the AfD daily. Just a thought. . .  Ronbo76 20:40, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I hate to say it, but this project is not particularly active, so you're probably not going to get much of a response. As for AfD, I rarely participate in it because I don't want to constantly butt heads with people whose sole purpose on Wikipedia is to delete other people's work. The "deletionists" make up a majority of the people you cite as participating in AfD daily. Sometimes it is justified, but I find that more often than not the deletion is a waste of everyone's time and could just as easily be left as is. Mike Dillon 20:50, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I kind of noticed that the deletionists tend to dominate. I strive to be a moderate although some users probably see me as a deletionists (especially self-created user articles) but I have been advocating for Keeps as well.  Ronbo76 21:24, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: There used to be Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting, which would sort the various nominated articles into subpages, such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/California, which you could use to check on article deletions related to a particular topic. Unfortunately, the amount of human effort required for the project resulted in it fairly quickly becoming out-of-date, and then un-updated. IFF the articles were properly categorized at the time that they were nominated for deletion, it wouldn't be too hard to get a bot to do that work. BlankVerse 11:25, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:AfD]] and our participation as [[WP:CAL]] 

message: This discussion could benefit from the comments of some active Californian editors. See Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2007 January 13#Category:Towns in California. BlankVerse 11:25, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed category merge: [[:Category:Towns in California]] into [[:Category:Cities in California]]

message: Hi! I learned something about geolink tags and am using it in some of WP:CAL articles that were in stub statuses. I have a question about the Wikimapia. Is a screenshot of a Wikimapia map and/or satellite image considered releaseable to the Wiki projects under the GNU Free Documentation License? If so, this would really help our project in terms of being able to put quality maps of noted interchanges, desert locales, etc. Cheers, Ronbo76 15:31, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No. Screenshots in general are considered "derivative works" under copyright regimes. This means that it can only be licensed under the GFDL if the original content was GFDL (or in the public domain). Incidentally, this also applies to your traffic shortcut screenshot above, which you marked with GFDL/CC-BY-SA; you don't have any rights to relicense that work, since you didn't do any creative work to create it. Moreover, if you had modified it, the licensing of your modified version would be subject to the restrictions placed on modification in the license of the original work (i.e. the KCBS website). Most of these things are licensed with "all rights reserved", which means you can only use it under fair use and there is no compelling fair use argument for these screenshots. Hope that helps.  Mike Dillon 15:48, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

text: All this being said, much of the U.S. Government's original satelite imagery is in the public domain, so it can be used on Wikipedia. In particular, the USGS Urban Areas imagery is in the public domain and would be a good source for interchange images (not so much for desert images, since they aren't covered). The problem is that it's a little convoluted to get the desired images if you don't have experience with the USGS systems (particularly http://seamless.usgs.gov). Mike Dillon 15:53, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Rats! Every time I think I have that fair use/GNU issue settled, another thorn pops up. Now, if I could just get my mitts on the USGS site. At least I spruced up the California State Indian Museum article. I will pay USGS a visit later today. Ronbo76 16:08, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geolink tag, Wikimapia, [[California State Indian Museum]] and [[GNU Free Documentation License]] question 

message: If you know of a stub article that needs some improvement, I can help by putting a geotag on it. The geotag opens a link to Wikimapia, Google or Yahoo Maps. The article's visitors can then open the appropriate satellite imagery to see what the article is describing or where it's located. If you know of an article, please append it to this message or on my talkpage. Ronbo76 21:09, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geotags for stub articles requests 

message: There is a dispute on Portal talk:California about whether Portal:Mexico is acceptable in the Related Portals section of Portal:California or not.  One position is that Mexico is uniquely relevant to California given the historic, cultural, economic, and political relationships between the two regions, and therefore deserves inclusion more than, e.g., Portal:Film, which is related to California but not exclusively or specifically enough.  The other position is that Mexico's relevance to California is NOT unique or special enough to warrant inclusion over, e.g., Portal:Film, and therefore should be left out.  I noticed that the WP:CAL#Related WikiPortals section includes Portal:Mexico, which seems to support the first position.
In any case, I would like to request a straw poll here to resolve this dispute and definitively either include or exclude Mexico from the related portals section of Portal:California.
eae 03:10, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portal:California 

message: I just rewrote the Alemany Maze article. Please review and wordsmith it at your earliest opportunity. Brownie points if someone finds the misspelled word. Ronbo76 04:58, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Alemany Maze]] rewrite 

message: Hello, while reading an article, I came across an image that was in that article. It had been downloaded from a Nasa site and uploaded at Wikimedia Commons. The Nasa website search is pretty easy to use but so far, I have only been able to obtain the larger maps and not a detailed map of say 4mile by 4mile picture suitable for bridgespan. Cheers Ronbo76 15:48, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible new source of Nasa images for our project 

message: Recently there has been both WikiProject San Francisco and WikiProject San Francisco Bay Area created. Now there is a proposal to merge both projects into the Bay Area version. If you want to contribute your two cents to the discussion, please see Poll: Merge WikiProject San Francisco into WikiProject San Francisco Bay Area?. BlankVerse 09:37, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: New Cal WikiProjects

message: Oakland Cemetery has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.
SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:05, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oakland Cemetery is in Atlanta, Georgia, not California. howcheng  {chat} 20:17, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just left SandyGeorgia a message about that on her talkpage. Ronbo76 20:22, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry folks - sheesh - I'm catching up from a trip, and goofed that one!  Please delete the entire section here if you'd like?  SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:38, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

text: OK with me to delete this section - Sandy's entitled to a flub now and then! NorCalHistory 21:19, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 
Oakland Cemetery FAR


message: Maybe we can get a bot like on John D. Spreckels's talkpage and adapt it for the WP:CAL project. Somehow, it was able to cull the article for Hawaii and added it to their project. Ronbo76 23:08, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bot to automatically add like on [[Talk:John D. Spreckels]] 

message: Me again :-)  I've overcome my jet lag, my trauma from the Oakland airport, and this time it's the real thing :-)
Ridge Route has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.
SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:27, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Ridge Route FAR

message: Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Culture of California 1800s to mid 1900s. This deletion discussion would benefit from the input of some more editors familiar with California. BlankVerse 03:16, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  AFD: Culture of California 1800s to mid 1900s 

message: Yosemite National Park has been nominated for a featured article review. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to featured quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, articles are moved onto the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article from featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Reviewers' concerns are here.
SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:35, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Yosemite National Park FAR

message: Once again there is a proposal to change the Wikipedia's long standing naming convention for US Cities.
There has been a small, but very vocal, and very persistent group of editors who have been trying, without much success, to overturn the "city, state" naming convention for US cities. First they tried at the naming convention level, but failed to achieve consensus for their views. They then changed tactics and tried to change the titles for several US cities, including three failed attempts to move Los Angeles, California, and one each for San Francisco, California and Anaheim, California. The only city that I know where they succeeded (after a couple of different surveys) was Chicago, but even that city has recently been moved back to Chicago, Illinois. 
Now there is a revival of a fairly recent proposal to have the article titles for a small number of cities violate the very long-standing "city, state" naming convention. The discussion and voting are currently going on at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (settlements)#Associated Press. Since the past debates have ended up involving a large amount of time for California editors, I hope that they will weigh in on this latest proposal. BlankVerse 11:16, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed change to the naming conventions for US cities 

message: It's available through my Wiki Commons account (thanks to user:Mike Dillon who gets the assist). It is on the Sacramento Valley Railroad article and available for others such as Theodore Judah. Cheers,  Ronbo76 18:14, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Historical [[Sacramento Valley Railroad]] picture available 

message: *I have been doing some work to attempt to improve the classification status of the article on the only Congressman to die in the line of duty, Congressman Leo J. Ryan.  He posthumously received the Congressional Gold Medal.  He represented California's 11th congressional district.  Please let me know what you think, at Talk:Leo Ryan/Comments.  Thank you for your time.  Smee 19:13, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Leo Ryan|Congressman Leo J. Ryan]] 

message: Please merge Mammoth-Yosemite Airport into Mammoth Yosemite Airport, since they both contain identical information, but Mammoth Yosemite Airport has some extra.  The first should redirect to the second.  Thanks Jay Buffington 06:42, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge Mammoth-Yosemite Airport into Mammoth Yosemite Airport

message: Does the talkpage for this category Category talk:California in the American Civil War get the WP:CAL banner? I just noticed it while on Recent Change Patrol.  Ronbo76 02:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Category talk:California in the American Civil War]] 

message: I am looking at the change and cannot decipher it? Any clues for the clueless?  Ronbo76 02:54, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Whoops, I missed the notice above. Sorry, Ronbo76 17:46, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Change to [[Talk:Ridge Route]] - what does it mean? 

message: See Template talk:WikiProject California#Please use another image. Initially, there was an  request, because the image currently used is up for deletion on commons; now, however, it appears some people want the image changed regardless of a delete/keep decision on commons. Mentioning this here in the hopes of getting more eyes and ears involved -- do people like the current image? Would they like a different one? Speak up and let yourselves be heard, eh? – Luna Santin (talk) 19:41, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed change to this WikiProject's template 

message: Would anyone be opposed to me taking all these images to IFD? --Iamunknown 05:01, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Looks like a bunch of highway signs. Too bad they cannot be associated with the right road/article or moved to Wikimedia Commons under someone's directory for the project's use. The highway project might want 'em. Ronbo76 05:05, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: They are no longer necessary. They were originally in List of county routes in California, but have all been replaced with SVG copies at Wikimedia Commons. I have a list of all those images on this page. --Iamunknown 05:24, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

text: Then, if I may be WP:BOLD, delete away! Ronbo76 05:25, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Voilà! Thanks for the encouragement (hope the mocha tastes good)! :D --Iamunknown 07:05, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Regarding obsolete images 

message: California Gold Rush will be the Main Page Featured article  at midnight UTC, February 14, 2007. please be on watch for vandalism and nonsense edits. BlankVerse 15:17, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  California Gold Rush - Main page Featured article at midnight UTC, February 14, 2007. 

message: Many thanks to all who offered so much valuable assistance during these past 24 hours when California Gold Rush was the Main page FA!  Your invaluable assistance was very much appreciated! NorCalHistory 00:51, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Many thanks from [[California Gold Rush]]