Talk:California water wars

message: Deceit:
Farmers and ranchers tried to band together to sell water rights to Los Angeles as a group, but again through deceit, Los Angeles managed to buy the water rights at a substantially reduced price.
Deceit is a pretty strong word. Does the book cited use it? If so, the author of the book should be cited in the text as source for the word, don't you think?
Sincerely,
GeorgeLouis 00:09, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wrote that sentence almost 3 years ago, and I don't currently have reference [5] at hand. When I wrote the material, I worked from notes that I made from [5]  -- this sentence was a summary of multiple pages of historical material. So, I just don't know wheter [5] used "deceit" or not. [5] went into detail about the misrepresentations that LADWP made to the farmers and to the local water authorities in the Valley, so I think "deceit" was a legitimate NPOV word to use. hike395 03:59, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree with "some have called deceit". Can you find reference where it is not a deceit? Or misrepresentations or some other word? Who thinks it was done on the up-and-up? hike395 14:27, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

text: Well, I put the reference into the body of the text and changed it to misrepresentation, which is what I believe you said was the word used in your source. If the word was actually "deceit," then please put it back, but at least keep the source within the text instead of requiring the reader to parse it out for himself. That's my opinion, anyway, and frankly it is not one of an expert, only an editor. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis 15:11, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Deceit?

message: It seems to me that keeping the URLs is most consistent with WP:V. I'd like to put them back in. hike395 03:58, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of LA Times and New York Times reference URLs 

message: The first five sections were written by User:Wenrick --- I poked around with Google and in the Kahrl book, and could not find any evidence of copying. I think we'll have to assume good faith and thank User:Wenrick for his fine contribution.
I wrote the last three sections, mostly from notes from [12], but with consulting other sources. I wrote these myself, they have been subsequently edited. Feel free to verify. hike395 12:50, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Where did material come from?

message: The section titled "Public vs. private: early problems of water control in Los Angeles" is a good backgrounder on LADWAP -- should it belong at Los Angeles Department of Water and Power or here? I'm uncertain. What do other people think?
:I agree. Either there or History of Los Angeles, California.  ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 05:37, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  move history of LADWP to LADWP article? 

message: This article would be greatly improved by a map specific to the subject or even a general map of the area.  --TjoeC (talk) 18:20, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Map? 

message: There's been plenty of disputes over water in the Central Valley and up further North in the Klamath River.  It would be good to add sections about those as well.  63.107.91.99 (talk) 17:29, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Northern California 

message: Wondering how an area with a known native population can subsequently have a "first expedition"? Perhaps this should be written as "first American expedition"?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.237.192.101 (talk) 10:36, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Before the water wars