Talk:Portola Valley, California

message: This page has some painfully obvious errors that I don't exactly know how to address other than bringing up in this discussion page. Firstly, it needs to cite its source for the 2000 census. That leads to the second problem. Am I the only one to seriously doubt that the average male yearly income is zero dollars, whereas the average female yearly income is just over 92,000 dollars? I know many male workers in Portola Valley anyways so this is clearly false. I'd be much obliged if someone could locate the original source for this data and correct this horrendous factual error.
:The error has been fixed. The problem was that the US Census data listed the male income at 100,000+, whereas the bot that was used to fill in the data was expecting a number without any extra symbols. BlankVerse 22:05, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 2000 Census

message: :Image:Portola Valley seal.png 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) 19:46, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Portola Valley seal.png

message: A quick poke around Google suggests there's arguably enough information on Bill Lane to produce a separate article on him under the notability criteria.  There's already a Bill Lane article in the system, and would require more research, but I figured it was worth mentioning.  --Joe Decker (talk) 15:59, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bill Lane 

message: There seems to be an attempt to claim that Portola Valley is "the wealthiest town in America per the US Census".  However the cited sources don't seem to support this.  First one cannot cite another wikipedia page such as https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_California_locations_by_income . Nor does it help that that source lists only California locations and is incomplete.    lists Atherton as having the highest average household income.   Of course one can argue about median versus average and whether per household or per capita to determine "wealthiest". I'm willing to accept reliable sources and a reasonable definition but none have been given yet. --Erp (talk) 03:26, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The second source () seems to list values only by state.  needs to better support the claim. Perhaps some subpage of this link is what is being referred to? --Erp (talk) 04:31, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok we now have a source though  it is per capita rather than median household or median family income which is used in many other lists (per capita can be affected by live-in versus commuting servants and also number of children). --Erp (talk) 02:52, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

text: I'm not sure why you reverted all the work I put into the article and labeled it a 'minor revision' given that I left the claim of wealthiest alone (except making it clear what was meant by wealthiest).  Why remove the citation for why Ormondale school has the name it has or the info on the Alpine Inn (which probably should have its own article).  --Erp (talk) 06:32, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The change by Townofportolavalley should be reverted. Too much good material was removed, and the bit about "wealthiest" is not supported by reliable sources. Binksternet (talk) 13:57, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: We were heading towards an edit war and he did come up with a weak source to which I added some necessary caveats (which he then reverted). I'm not sure what 'wealthiest' should be but median income is probably better than average, given that someone like Bill Gates could move into a small community and immediately make it the wealthiest under the average rule even though everyone else in it earned less than 100,000).  I would recommend at least moving it elsewhere in the article because surely Portola Valley has more to offer than bragging about mere wealth. However I think someone else should do it so that it looks less like a fight solely between him and me. --Erp (talk) 03:50, 17 May 2018 (UTC)

text: I note that the source is now out-of-date so replaced.  I note almost all current reports list Atherton as wealthier as well as many other places.  --Erp (talk) 01:55, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wealthiest? 

message: I've just removed a list of attractions because it was without references and said nothing about why each item was an attraction (and frankly most didn't seem very attractive, i.e., something that people might go out of their way to see, though they might fall in the category of amenities).  Each attraction should have at least a short sentence except possibly if it is so well known that it needs no explanation.  --Erp (talk) 21:56, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Attractions