Talk:List of governors of California

message: Surely someone has a better picture of Jerry Brown than that goofy painting.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.36.148.190 (talk) 04:32, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Jerry Brown picture

message: I don't see it say anywhere that the likenesses are those displayed in the Capitol, as chosen by the governors themselves. 66.218.54.163 (talk) 03:44, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't understand what you mean; are you saying this is true, and we should include it? --Golbez (talk) 04:02, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Uncredited source

message: In the process of answering a question, I came across this list, which appears to be complete and well sourced. Is it feature worthy? - Mgm|(talk) 12:19, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments from [[WP:FLC]]

message: Voter Turnout
Here is a list of state voter turnout percentages for presidential and gubernatorial primary and general elections.
Year Election Turnout Candidates
Nov. 1994 Gubernatorial general 60.2% * Wilson-Brown
June 1994 Gubernatorial primary 35.0%
Nov. 1992 Presidential general 75.3% Bush-Clinton
June 1992 Presidential primary 47.4%
Nov. 1990 Gubernatorial general 58.6% Wilson-Feinstein
June 1990 Gubernatorial primary 41.5%
Nov. 1988 Presidential general 72.8% Dukakis-Bush
June 1988 Presidential primary 46.1%
Nov. 1986 Gubernatorial general 60.0% Deukmejian-Bradley
June 1986 Gubernatorial primary 38.6%
Nov. 1984 Presidential general 73.9% Reagan-Mondale
June 1984 Presidential primary 49.3%
Nov. 1982 Gubernatorial general 69.7% Deukmejian-Bradley
June 1982 Gubernatorial primary 52.9%
Nov. 1980 Presidential general 76.5% Reagan-Carter
June 1980 Presidential primary 64.2%
Nov. 1978 Gubernatorial general 68.7% Brown-Younger
June 1978 Gubernatorial primary 74.1%
Nov. 1976 Presidential general 81.1% Carter-Ford
June 1976 Presidential primary 71.2%
Nov. 1974 Gubernatorial general 62.6% Brown-Flournoy
June 1974 Gubernatorial primary 51.7%
Nov. 1972 Presidential general 80.4% Nixon-McGovern
June 1972 Presidential primary 68.9%
* Early estimate by secretary of state's office
Source: Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder
:Seems your source is flawed; Nov. 1986 was in no way "Deukmejian-Bradley" unless you consider that when history is written by the victors, nobody gives a flying rat's ass about anybody else anymore. 66.218.54.163 (talk) 03:44, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Voter Turnout 

message: which are as follows:
Jerry Brown
Democrat
1,609,298
50.1%
Houston I. Flournoy
Republican
2,055,586
47.3%
I'm no mathematician but I see an error.  Can someone supply the real numbers? --Jfruh (talk) 20:43, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems the article no longer lists election results, but for the sake of Jfruh's mathematical confidence at least, the results were as shown below. ChrisJBenson (talk) 06:51, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem w/1974 election numbers 

message: A bot  has added class=FA to the WikiProject banners on this page, as it's listed as a featured lists.  If you see a mistake, please revert, and leave a note on the bot's talk page. Thanks, BOT Giggabot (talk) 03:26, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Automatic addition of "class=FA"

message: The image :Image:GeorgeDeukmejian.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
The following images also have this problem:
*:File:JamesRolph.jpg
*:File:CulbertOlson.jpg
*:File:CCYoung.jpg
*:Image:PatBrown.jpg
*:      Image:GoodwinKnight.jpg
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --00:59, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with Image:GeorgeDeukmejian.jpg

message: It would be nice to make the 1st table sortable as the 2nd table is, but trying it results in all the columns disappearing when one column is sorted.  Not a good outcome.  Hmains (talk) 04:01, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Right. It's the fact that lieutenant governors sometimes split governor rows. I hear they're working on a new version of the sortable script that takes that into account, but until then it's forced to be unsortable. (However, what really needs sorting? Name: The category is alphabetical. Party: Only a few options that are easily seen, so easy to count. Start/end date? Already sorted by that. Terms? I can see some use for this, but it's about the only one.) --Golbez (talk) 04:26, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  sort 

message: Newsom has chosen to complete his term as San Francisco Mayor, which expires on January 10th, 2011. According to the California Constitution, oath or no oath, he'll become the Lieutenant Governor of California at 11:AM PST (19:00 UTC). Is it legal for Neesom to hold both elective offices con-currently over the next week (Jan 3-10)? GoodDay (talk) 19:15, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Many people delay resigning from being a governor to become a senator or representative; they don't become a member of congress until their credentials are accepted and, I believe, they are sworn in. I don't think you can as easily put off an election to an executive position, however. If a governor were elected to be president, he would become president precisely when the law proscribes, rather than when he decides it. I don't know if that would count as an automatic resignation, though. So the questions are: Is it possible for Newsom to delay becoming Lt. Gov (being an executive office elected by the people, my guess is no), and is he legally allowed to serve as both a mayor and in the executive at the same time? (This, I do not know) --Golbez (talk) 21:32, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: User:Corvus cornix helpfully linked me this post  which links to this article  about how it may be a legal thing he's doing. I can't read it in depth at the moment, just wanted to offer it. --Golbez (talk) 21:44, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: We could probably put in some sort of footnote that says his term doesn't start till he takes the oath, which he is holding off on.  Corvus cornixtalk 21:45, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: There's also an apparent disagreement over at Abel Maldonado article. He wasn't elected LtG last November, so according to the State Constitution, he ceased to be LtG today at 11:00 AM PST. Yet he's still got his LtG website up. GoodDay (talk) 22:36, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps not; the Sac Bee says, "The state constitution says the current officeholder stays in the post "until a successor qualifies," a phrase both Newsom's attorneys and Maldonado interpret as the new guy taking the oath of office." Unless the state courts disagree, I say we run with it. --Golbez (talk) 15:14, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: For the record, there is there is nothing about 11:00 AM whatsoever in the California Constitution.http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/.const/.article_5  Indeed, this is why Ronald Reagan was sworn in as Governor a few minutes after midnight, as his predecessor, Pat Brown, remained Governor until his successor (Reagan) took office.See bottom of page 172 to top of page 173 of Governor Reagan: His Rise to Power by Lou Cannon. OCNative (talk) 05:44, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gavin Newsom 

message: Regarding Jerry Brown and the Constitutional term limit, the article contradicts itself at least twice. The last paragraph of the "Governors" section before the table includes these two statements:
#  In 1990, [...] a constitutional amendment implemented a term limit of two consecutive terms [....]
#  Jerry Brown was able to be elected to a third term in 2010 because his previous terms were before the term limit was enacted.
The last of the footnotes is about Jerry Brown and states (in part):
#  He will be unable to run in 2018, due to term limits.
#  His fourth (and final) term expires on January 7, 2019.
Assuming the text of statement #1 is exactly correct, then statement #2 is false. The reason that Jerry Brown was able to be elected (and serve) for a third term in 2010 (and indeed for a fourth term in 2014) was NOT because his previous terms were before the term limit was introduced. He was able to be elected in 2010 and 2014 for a much simpler reason. They didn't violate the limit of two consecutive terms, no matter when it was introduced.
Continuing with the assumption that #1 is correct, then the last footnote is incorrect. Statement #3 is correct. He will be unable to run in 2018 due to the Constitutional term limit. However the second part is not correct. He can run for (and if elected, serve as) Governor for a fifth term (although not in 2018). His term that ends in January 2019 is not necessarily his final term.
With thanks from ChrisJBenson (talk) 13:41, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The Constitution itself states, "No Governor may serve more than 2 terms.". #1 would appear to be wrong. Not sure if I did that or someone else did, but it has no requirement that the terms be consecutive to be limited. So it would seem that #1 was incorrect. --Golbez (talk) 19:40, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction regarding Jerry Brown and term limits 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on List of Governors of 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 https://web.archive.org/20100223084103/http://www.nga.org/portal/site/nga/menuitem.29fab9fb4add37305ddcbeeb501010a0/?vgnextoid=ccc9224971c81010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD&vgnextchannel=e449a0ca9e3f1010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD to http://www.nga.org/portal/site/nga/menuitem.29fab9fb4add37305ddcbeeb501010a0/?vgnextoid=ccc9224971c81010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD&vgnextchannel=e449a0ca9e3f1010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100223084026/http://www.nga.org/portal/site/nga/menuitem.29fab9fb4add37305ddcbeeb501010a0/?vgnextoid=2af9224971c81010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD&vgnextchannel=e449a0ca9e3f1010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD to http://www.nga.org/portal/site/nga/menuitem.29fab9fb4add37305ddcbeeb501010a0/?vgnextoid=2af9224971c81010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD&vgnextchannel=e449a0ca9e3f1010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110715223555/http://www.sacbee.com/2011/01/05/3299615/the-buzz-with-newsom-in-the-wings.html to http://www.sacbee.com/2011/01/05/3299615/the-buzz-with-newsom-in-the-wings.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100223083541/http://www.nga.org/portal/site/nga/menuitem.29fab9fb4add37305ddcbeeb501010a0/?vgnextoid=e0d9224971c81010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD&vgnextchannel=e449a0ca9e3f1010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD to http://www.nga.org/portal/site/nga/menuitem.29fab9fb4add37305ddcbeeb501010a0/?vgnextoid=e0d9224971c81010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD&vgnextchannel=e449a0ca9e3f1010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100223082716/http://www.nga.org/portal/site/nga/menuitem.29fab9fb4add37305ddcbeeb501010a0/?vgnextoid=f3f9224971c81010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD&vgnextchannel=e449a0ca9e3f1010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD to http://www.nga.org/portal/site/nga/menuitem.29fab9fb4add37305ddcbeeb501010a0/?vgnextoid=f3f9224971c81010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD&vgnextchannel=e449a0ca9e3f1010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100223084602/http://www.nga.org/portal/site/nga/menuitem.29fab9fb4add37305ddcbeeb501010a0/?vgnextoid=980a224971c81010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD&vgnextchannel=e449a0ca9e3f1010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD to http://www.nga.org/portal/site/nga/menuitem.29fab9fb4add37305ddcbeeb501010a0/?vgnextoid=980a224971c81010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD&vgnextchannel=e449a0ca9e3f1010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100104101123/http://www.nga.org:80/portal/site/nga/menuitem.29fab9fb4add37305ddcbeeb501010a0/?vgnextoid=8b98224971c81010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD&vgnextchannel=e449a0ca9e3f1010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD to http://www.nga.org/portal/site/nga/menuitem.29fab9fb4add37305ddcbeeb501010a0/?vgnextoid=8b98224971c81010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD&vgnextchannel=e449a0ca9e3f1010VgnVCM1000001a01010aRCRD
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 22:35, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There's no constitutional provision that I see for what to do when the office of lieutenant governor is vacant. It appears that the acting ones noted in this list were presidents of the senate. Is there a law that specifies it? Basically, my concern is, if there's an automatic accession to "acting lt gov" then all vacancies should read with the name of the president of the senate, right? Except an official list  includes two vacancies. Do we know why the office was vacant at this time and not filled with an acting governor? --Golbez (talk) 20:10, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: The issue has never arisen. The Governor, today, can appoint an Lt. to fill the position, like Schwarzenegger did with Maldonado. But I'm not sure with before. I assume like the pre-1947 presidential succession, where the Pro Temp of the Senate is first in line, as he fills the position of the Lt. in that chamber. Although today, the Lt. Gov. doesn't have the right under the CA Senate rules to preside without the Senate's invitation, which I'm pretty sure is unconstitutional, but no Lt. Gov. has ever sought to use his office, ever, at all, so who cares.   Spartan7W §   04:39, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: But the issue has arisen - the official list shows two vacancies, and several acting, and Maldonado is not marked as acting. So why are some acting, and why were some vacant? --Golbez (talk) 05:17, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

text: On a different note, we have to keep the term span dates for McCarthy and Bustamante because their terms overlapped gubernatorial terms, especially three-term McCarthy.  Additionally, marking January 10th as end for Maldonado and begin for Newsom helps stress how little of Bustamante's term overlapped with Brown's.   Spartan7W §   15:13, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. I'll go through and populate dates where relevant. --Golbez (talk) 15:28, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Acting lieutenant governors

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on List of Governors of 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/20101007124417/http://lalaw.lib.ca.us/research/ballots/1990/1990.aspx to http://lalaw.lib.ca.us/research/ballots/1990/1990.aspx
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081220163026/http://www.californiagovernors.ca.gov/h/biography/index.html to http://www.californiagovernors.ca.gov/h/biography/index.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100128022726/http://www.sos.ca.gov/archives/collections/1849/full-text.htm to http://www.sos.ca.gov/archives/collections/1849/full-text.htm
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) 08:22, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of Governors of 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/20081012031100/http://vote2003.sos.ca.gov/Returns/summary.html to http://vote2003.sos.ca.gov/Returns/summary.html
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) 02:25, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on List of Governors of 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://archive.is/20160419192008/https://www.baycitizen.org/news/politics/newsoms-dual-role-raises-legal-quandary/ to https://www.baycitizen.org/news/politics/newsoms-dual-role-raises-legal-quandary/
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) 21:41, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I'm going rewrite this to remove extraneous info, match other formatting, make it more mobile and even desktop friendly, etc. I will do this in pieces so to keep it manageable. I'm being bold, and I'm not an asshole, at least I don't think I am - but I can understand that this looks like me owning the article. and, I mean, I'm not saying it's not. But, IMO, this is a lot of needless info that artificially inflates the article, and we're going to need multiple people to say that it's not.
So, my steps:
# Shrink the images to 75px. 150px means that only 5 can show up on my healthy-sized screen at a time. It also makes it poor for mobile.
#*Done
# Remove life ranges. Adds nothing to an understanding of the article, if someone cares they can click through. It's not like this is the only place these people are named.
#*Done
# Remove previous office. Now this one, people might fight on, so I'm obviously open to that, but ... again, it doesn't add much. Nearly all are lt governors, mayors, or congressmen. Nothing differentiates any of them. And it has no bearing on future performance, nor does it inform people why they were elected - was Newsom elected governor because of his success as lieutenant governor, or because of his success as mayor? Was Schwarzenegger really elected because he was on some presidential council? 
#*Done
# Remove living governors list. This is a personal peeve of mine, but since it's a separate table and not part of the main table, it's a lot easier to be discussed and reverted. But... again, it doesn't add anything. People seem to care what presidents are still alive, but California governors? There is a point where trivia is only relevant to the trivia wonk who added it. And I don't say that to insult - I'm a trivia wonk. But it has to be useful to readers rather than just the one or two editors who want it. 
#*Done
And hey, an election is as good a time as any. --Golbez (talk) 21:21, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rewrite 

message: The 1874 constitution - original, unamended, though this part is the same today - calls for the start of the gubernatorial term on the first Monday after January 1. However, almost none of the elections before 1939 follow this:
* 1880: Perkins inaugurated January 8, first Monday was January 5.
* 1883: Stoneman inaugurated January 10, first Monday was January 8.
* 1887: Bartlett inaugurated January 8, first Monday was January 3.
* 1891: Markham inaugurated January 8, first Monday was January 5.
* 1895: Budd inaugurated January 11, first Monday was January 7.
* 1899: Gage inaugurated January 4, first Monday was January 2.
* 1903: Pardee inaugurated January 7, first Monday was January 5.
* 1907: Gillett inaugurated January 9, first Monday was January 7.
* 1911: Johnson inaugurated January 3, first Monday was January 2.
* 1923: Richardson inaugurated January 8, first Monday matches --- this is the only inauguration between 1880 and 1939 to follow the rules
* 1927: Young inaugurated January 4, first Monday was January 3
* 1931: Rolph inaugurated January 6, first Monday was january 5.
From there on, starting with Olson in 1939, it actually matches. Does anyone have any idea why this was? Were their terms really started on the right date, but the formal inauguration waited? Or were the previous governors really in power til the wrong date? I note that every single one of these is after the constitutional start date. Any ideas? --Golbez (talk) 22:25, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Constitutional start date 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:List of Governors of New York which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 14:29, 11 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress 

message: As this page was moved from List of Governors of California to List of governors of California as per
Talk:List of governors of New York#Requested move 11 April 2019. I propose to similarly move:
* List of Governors of California before 1850 to List of governors of California before 1850
* List of Governors of California by age to List of governors of California by age
* List of Governors of California by education to List of governors of California by education
If not it looks inconsistent, for example on Governor of California#See also.
 I am pinging you, because you did the actual move. Nuretok (talk) 19:15, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Follow up moves