Talk:California

Semi-protected edit request on 20 December 2023

Mexican is the most common ancestry in California, followed by English, German and Irish. Add this to demographics section.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/projects/2023/california-population-ethnicity/#:~:text=Mexicans%20comprise%20the%20largest%20ethnic,of%20Californians%20identifying%20as%20Mexican. 91.192.81.61 (talk) 13:55, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Is Mexican really an ancestry? HiLo48 (talk) 23:07, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes, the experts and reliable sources use it. See Heyman, Josiah McC. "US immigration officers of Mexican ancestry as Mexican Americans, citizens, and immigration police." Current Anthropology 43.3 (2002): 479-507. and Duncan, Brian, and Stephen J. Trejo. "Ancestry versus ethnicity: The complexity and selectivity of Mexican identification in the United States." in Ethnicity and labor market outcomes . 2009. 31-66. Rjensen (talk) 23:43, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

So what does it mean? HiLo48 (talk) 02:36, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: Per WP:SWYGT, the provided source was the SF Chronicle, but the data from the Chronicle comes from elsewhere.  Spintendo  20:20, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 December 2023 (4)

Chinese, Filipino, Indian and Vietnamese are the largest Asian ancestries in California. Add this information to demographics section.

Source: https://www.sfchronicle.com/projects/2023/california-asian-population-growth/ 91.192.81.61 (talk) 14:07, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: Per WP:SWYGT, the provided source was the SF Chronicle, but the data from the Chronicle comes from elsewhere.  Spintendo  20:18, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 December 2023

California has the largest Mexican, Salvadoran and Guatemalan population. Add to demographics section.

Source: https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2023/09/2020-census-dhc-a-hispanic-population.html 91.192.81.61 (talk) 08:31, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: Largest as compared to whom?  Spintendo  20:11, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Can we get a response from someone who does not have a Nintendo reference on their username? Thanks. Mousefountain (talk) 02:25, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

@Spintendo Other US States, as the source linked above, the US Census, states. 64.58.160.98 (talk) 10:50, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Far-left revisionist fake history promoting "California genocide" BLM propaganda

This article falsely states that "the depopulation of indigenous peoples" constituted a "California genocide." That is Marxist revisionist history promoted by the far-left Democrat media who are trying to degrade the meaning of the word "genocide." Death by smallpox is not a genocide. Real, non-politically-partisan historians know that there was no such thing as a "California genocide." 2603:8000:6400:83B5:71CD:2AA1:2970:EFF8 (talk) 05:17, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

You have clearly not read about the campaigns to wipe out indigenous peoples that were undertaken by white settlers. Posses of white men would hunt down and kill Indians to get rid of them entirely. Nobody in California had heard of Marx yet when this was happening. Binksternet (talk) 08:37, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Binksternet (talk · contribs) is absolutely right; there is a well documented historiography around the California genocide that has existed far before Marx or BLM. And if you chose to read the California Genocide article, you'd see that it concerns itself with exactly what he describes: posses of white settlers out to exterminate indigenous people and government-sponsored wars against tribes, NOT about small pox or diseases... Cristiano Tomás (talk) 16:10, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

1.) The IP editor claiming that Democrats are Marxists is laughable.

2.) There is still a serious historiographical debate on whether the atrocities were genocide or ethnic cleansing by serious scholars. (As of 2023) So I think we should be non-committal for now.

3.) As you rightfully pointed out: it definitely shouldn't be removed from the article. It's a notable and terrible part of Californian history. KlayCax (talk) 08:20, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

Questionable Assertion about Men in Women's Clothing

The section 'Indigenous' needs to change. In the start of the section, current understand of the demographics of native people says "greater than 300,000 people" in "more then 70 distinct ethnic groups". Yet the very next paragraph goes into detail with one theory of "men in women's clothing have traditional roles" and declares it to be "common". No one knows that those gender roles were "common" in California. This wording is directly misleading. It is not intellectually honest to put forward one particular theory as "common", without admitting the context or considering other theories, if not equally even in passing at all. Secondly, there were warrior tribes, and practices of slavery among some tribes. The implication is that the tribes really were diverse, including savage and cruel behavior associated with dominant hunter clans with territory. This portion of history is not mentioned at all. This section shows obvious bias, does not meet standards of fairness, accuracy and rigor.

Questionable Assertion Written in an Authoritative Way

The section 'Etymology' needs to change. In "the origin of the name California" it is said that no one really knows how the name was picked or the origin. Yet the very next paragraph goes into detail with one theory calling it "the most likely" and spins a strange tale at length. No one knows that this is the "most likely" origin of the name California. This wording is misleading. It is not intellectually honest to put forward one particular theory as the most likely origin of the name California, without admitting the context or considering other theories, if not equally even in passing at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.101.48.113 (talk) 13:58, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

Lviv Region (Ukraine) and California to became twin-regions

https://sd03.senate.ca.gov/news/20240425-legislature-approves-sen-dodd%E2%80%99s-ukraine-sister-state-measure I think it's safe to add Lviv Oblast, Ukraine to the twinned regions list. LightNovell (talk) 20:41, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 June 2024

Insert hyperlink for the word Hindi, in the demographics(languages) section. Bahavesh (talk) 03:07, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

 Done TheNuggeteer (talk) 06:24, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Copyedit request

The second sentence of the article intro has a minor grammatical error. Proposed remedy:

It borders Oregon to the north, Nevada and Arizona to the east, and shares an international border with the Mexican state of Baja California to the south. 2605:59C8:30BC:6F10:7D39:C088:E451:7F84 (talk) 00:28, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

California name header

Why is the name of California displayed both in English, and in "Californian Cantonese" when that's not an official language in California? Ensvenskkanzler (talk) 23:21, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Ensvenskkanzler, it was in the "Native name" field because some editor put it there. I removed it because it is not the native name. Cullen328 (talk) 23:37, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

The infoboxes aren't about Official Languages, they are about the names given by native communities of a state, country, or any other political status.

Louisiana has several languages, Louisiana French, Louisiana Creole, etc. in its infobox because these are the historic communities that have settled and contributed greatly to the state- none of these are official languages in the state.

Same as Alaska with its many different languages, including Russian, as Alaskan Russians made massive contributions to Alaska. We can see the same with Pennsylvania with Pennsylvania Dutch, New Jersey with Jersey Dutch. These are not official languages of any of these states, but they are native languages, and these historic communities have given native names for their home states.

In the same way, California Cantonese have contributed immensely to California, and the name in the infobox "Gamsaan", Gold Mountain is only used by the California Cantonese- and its a Qing dynasty name that is obsolete in the Cantonese spoken in China today.

This is the native name for California from the historical community that has been in the state since its founding. For this and all the other reasons mentioned above, the name is proper to remain in the infobox. Aearthrise (talk) 23:49, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

According to Asian Americans in California, only about 3.6% of the California population is Chinese and roughly half of them speak Mandarin. There are comparable numbers of Filipinos, Vietnamese and Indians in California. Plus significant numbers of Koreans and Thais. Why should Cantonese get this special treatment? Cullen328 (talk) 23:59, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

The Pennsylvania Dutch today make up 1% of the state of Pennyvlania, mostly Amish, but in the past they were the major ethnic group in the state, making up almost 50%. Same is true for the Louisiana French who made up the majority of the state, today they're only about 5%.

You're asking why a native name from a historical community that settled the state since the beginning (almost 200 years) should be included, and not the recent communities Vietnamese from the Vietnam War, Koreans from the Korean War that have come here in recent decades.

These recent communities haven't made the same impact on California as the old California Cantonese; these people haven't created or given a native name to California, because they haven't been California long enough to differentiate themselves from the communities back home, and the climate of post World War 2 America has made their descendants mostly assimilate into standard American culture, without leaving traceable marks. Aearthrise (talk) 00:12, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Also, the Japanese have a very long and important history in California, going back to 1869. Cullen328 (talk) 00:10, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

The majority of Japanese who immigrated to California settled in California Cantonese Chinatowns, and they were visible until World War 2 where they were imprisoned in internment camps and shamed for their culture. Like German communities in America after World War 2, Japanese descendants have been forced to abandon their culture.

Also, the Japanese don't hold a native name for California, whereas the California Cantonese do, a people who are proud of their culture and contributions to the state, and continue to exist today. Aearthrise (talk) 00:20, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

If we're going to talk about historical population percentage, then this wouldn't support adding Cantonese to the native names. In 1880 Chinese people only made up 9% of the population. [1] Ensvenskkanzler (talk) 00:26, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Forgot to add that I am referring to the Californian population. Ensvenskkanzler (talk) 00:27, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

The names in infoboxes aren't about Official Languages, population size changes over time, etc. They're about native names given by native communities who have made an impact on the state. The California Cantonese are native to California, they have a made a massive impact, and they have given a native name to the state.

Populations change over time; New Jersey and New York were majority Dutch until the 1800s; same is true for states named, like Louisiana and Pennsylvania. The important factor for including native names is the impact on the state and the distinction of that name.

The California Cantonese have this distinction, the same as the other communities mentioned above. Aearthrise (talk) 00:31, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

I personally don't have a strong opinion on the inclusion or exclusion of the California Cantonese name but I'm leaning oppose. The editor who keeps repeatedly adding the name has failed to accurately source it. Right now it's WP:OR to add it and claim that it's a native name. You can't use California Cantonese as a source either because Wikipedia is not a reliable source. I do strongly oppose the repeated addition of the name whilst this discussion is ongoing when there is still reasonable opposition to the addition. estar8806 (talk) ★ 00:31, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Now you're claiming WP:OR for a native name of a native community of the state. I have a source here for you to read about Gold Mountain.

This claim of WP:OR is not correct, and if all you need is a source then you have it. Aearthrise (talk) 00:35, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

• I oppose this addition and you must gain consensus to restore it, Aearthrise. The Manual of Style says that infoboxes are for "key facts" and says The less information that an infobox contains, the more effectively it serves its purpose, allowing readers to identify key facts at a glance. That principle should guide us. These foreign language names are not key facts. Cullen328 (talk) 00:32, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  Strongly support This is a key fact, and a native name given to California. For that reason it should remain. The first person made this post about Official Languages, you replied to it claiming it wasn't a native name.

  Now that it has been proven beyond a doubt that it's native name from a native community who has greatly impacted the state, you're trying to strong-arm this discussion to keep the native name out.

  The only argument you're making now is irrelevant to the discussion, citing a Wikipedia MOS. If that's the case, we should delete all native languages from other state articles: Louisiana, Pennsylvania, Alaska, etc. Aearthrise (talk) 00:40, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  "California Cantonese" is not a separate language, It is just Cantonese with some localized vocabulary. Yes, those other infoboxes should have content that are not key facts removed. Cullen328 (talk) 00:44, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  Another irrelevant point: Louisiana French is not a separate language either, nor is Alaskan Russian, but they are important native communities who have impacted their states and given native names to the state. Aearthrise (talk) 00:47, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  The only "natives" of California are the indigeonous peoples, not the immigrants over the last 500 years. Cullen328 (talk) 00:46, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  Native name in this case doesn't mean "indigenous Native American" it means native to the region. Same is true for Kingdom of Axum, Haiti. They have Greek, and French as native names, because these are languages and communities that have made an impact on the region. Aearthrise (talk) 00:50, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  "California Cantonese" is not a separate language. It is simply Cantonese with some local vocabulary. It is no more a "native language" of California than English or Spanish. Native California languages include Chumash, Kumeyaay, Hoopa, Tolowa Dee-ni, Miwok and many, many others. Cullen328 (talk) 01:18, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  Another irrelevant point. Being a separate language or not has nothing to do with native names given by notable native communities of a region. Aearthrise (talk) 01:22, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  There is no such thing as a distinct California Cantonese language, and this whole thing violates the Manual of Style. Cullen328 (talk) 01:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  I don't know what you're doing now; you're just throwing random irrelevant points that have nothing to do with native names being included in the infobox.

  California Cantonese is a variety of the Cantonese that has evolved in California to fit American values and concepts and is unique to Calfornia. The same is true for Pennsylvania German, and Louisiana French.

  You're saying the MOS speaks against them? Then it speaks against the native names of the previously named states: Pennsylvania with Pennsylvania German, Louisiana French with Louisiana, Alaskan Russian with Alaska etc.

  Trying to claim it as an MOS violation is an absurd argument, because you're applying it in this case, but ignore all the other cases. You're reaching for straws; you know the criteria to refute, notability and verifiability, and unless you can show that those aren't filled, these indirect tangential arguments are invalid. Aearthrise (talk) 01:36, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  The Manual of Style is not irrelevant and this is not a key fact. "California Cantonese" is not a language. Cantonese is, but it is not a native language in California. I am not obligated to study those other cases, but those names are probably inappropriate for those infoboxes too. Most importantly, you do not have consensus for your proposed change, which is required. Cullen328 (talk) 02:04, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  Now your claiming that i'm saying the Manual of Style is irrelevant, which is untrue. I don't know if you have trouble reading, but i've showed you how your arguments are absurd.

  You are not being honest now, and you're reaching for straws. You need to refute the criteria for inclusion, and until you do that, all these irrelevant arguments are invalid. Aearthrise (talk) 02:29, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  Do not misrepresent what I said. The phrase may have originated in California but "California Cantonese" does not exist as a separate language and Cantonese is not a native language any more than English or Spanish are native languages. The term can mean "San Francisco" or "California" or "British Columbia" so it lacks precision. This is not a key fact about California and therefore does not belong in the infobox, according to the clear language in the Manual of Style. Most importantly, you do not have consensus for adding this, so it must stay out. Cullen328 (talk) 04:34, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  You're obviously not following this discussion, because I've had to to repeat information over and over again.

  Your argument about whether a language is indigenous or not is irrelevant; you're confusing the word native in "native name" with "Native American" which have nothing to do with each other.

  Further, i've provided ample evidence- five citations below this thread that show the use of Gold Mountain by the native California Cantonese community, and you ignore it. In California Cantonese, it means either the City of San Francisco (differentiated as Gau Gamsaan, Old Gold Mountain) or the State of California (simply Gamsaan), and it's verified with multiple sources.

  The broader historical meaning of Gamsaan for British Columbia or North America is outdated, because that was Qing dynasty vocabulary 200 years ago by immigrants from the Gold Rush times, and foreign Cantonese today call California only "Gaazau". The California Cantonese still exist and use this name for California. Aearthrise (talk) 04:57, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  I would say as I mentioned before addition of a name made by a group of people whose total population of the state never exceeded 15% would not make much sense, but states like Pennsylvania did have massive populations like you mentioned, but California is not one of them. Ensvenskkanzler (talk) 00:47, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  Yet again I think I should clarify in the case of Pennsylvania I'm talking about population like the Amish, the way I phrased it doesn't make sense. Ensvenskkanzler (talk) 00:50, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  You've changed your argumentation from being about Official Languages to population size changes over time in state. It's irrelevant to whether a it's a native name or not.

  The California Cantonese are a historical community that at one point made up almost 1/4th of the state, 50% of all Gold Miners. They built Chinatowns, Cantonese communities all over the state and built the major levy systems around Sacramento, San Francisco, and Los Angeles.

  The California Cantonese have impacted the state both historically and in modern times, and they have given their home state a native name.

  Any argument against their native name needs to prove two things: that they don't have a native name, and that they haven't impacted the state. Aearthrise (talk) 00:55, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  I am not sure using impact as a measurement to decide what is a native name or not is how a native name is supposed to be added, using impact as a measurement then would mean adding native names of other groups to every place on earth impacted by another group. Ensvenskkanzler (talk) 01:05, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  You've changed your argument three times now- now you're arguing against the criteria for inclusion: notability and having a native name.

  You're saying the notability, i.e. impact of a community, shouldn't be important for inclusion on Wikipedia.

  The reason why we include native names for states on other articles is exactly because of their notability.

  Louisiana doesn't include Vietnamese in its infobox native names, because the Vietnamese aren't notable in the same way as the Louisiana French, nor have they given it a native name; the same is true for Puerto Ricans in Pennsylvania, they haven't given it a native name, nor have impacted the state like the historic Pennsylvania Dutch.

  The criteria for inclusion of any information on Wikipedia needs two things: notability and verifiability. Both of these criteria are met by the California Cantonese.

  You need to refute these criteria to make your argument valid: that the California Cantonese haven't given a native name to their home state, and that they aren't a notable (impactful) community of California. Aearthrise (talk) 01:16, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  Their history of impact is something more for the history of California rather than a native name. A native name that's used by a small fraction of the population isn't a native name, regardless of their impact. Ensvenskkanzler (talk) 01:39, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  Your responses are still not adressing the points to refute. You are continuing to make an argument from population size changes over time, which is irrelevant to the discussion.

  If population size determined a native name given to a place, then Pennsylvania should remove their Pennsylvania German native name and replace with Spanish. But we don't do that because it's absurd, both in terms of notability and verifiabilty, as recent Spanish immigrants haven't impacted the state like the native Pennsylvania Dutch community, nor have they given it a native name.

  Until you refute the criteria: notability and verifiability, which are indeed met by the California Cantonese, your continued tangential arguments are invalid. Aearthrise (talk) 01:46, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  How is it irrelevant if the name that you are proposing was/is used by less than 15% of the state's population? The California Cantonese may have had significant impact but as I say again, the fact that a very small portion of the population actually used it doesn't make it a native name.

  Pennsylvania shouldn't remove their Pennsylvania German native name because the Pennsylvania Germans made up a significant portion of the state's population AND had meaningful impact. Ensvenskkanzler (talk) 01:57, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  You're still repeating an irrelevant argument from population size changes over time. This and your other points are invalid arguments because they don't address notability and verifiability. The California Cantonese are both notable and have a verifiable native name. Aearthrise (talk) 02:20, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

According to Gold Mountain (toponym), Gāmsāan, 金山 is a historical name for either San Francisco, the State of California, or broadly the western regions of North America, including British Columbia, Canada. Accordingly, this term lacks accuracy and specificity, and should not be used in the infobox on that basis alone. Cullen328 (talk) 02:27, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Just remove something similar on another page.... think we should look around and see how much of this stuff has been added all over. Moxy🍁 02:32, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

You do research, but you don't understand what you're reading. Gamsaan is a historical term that is outdated for all Cantonese speakers, except the California Cantonese, as it is late Qing dynasty vocabulary that remains for this community who have it as a native name for their home state. I've already included a citation that verifies this native usage, and the community is notable. Aearthrise (talk) 02:41, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

It's clearly undue weight to be so prominent. Righting great wrongs isn't why we're here. I can see mentioned in the etymology section but the first two things you see in the article is undue weight..... especially without a source claiming is dominance over all the other native versions. A review should be done on other articles to make sure this isn't happening all over. Moxy🍁 02:46, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

You say it's undue weight, but that's false, and it's proven by the notability of the community, and the verifiability.

This community has the same historical weight (almost 200 years now) as the the Russian Creoles for Alaska, Pennsylvania Dutch for Pennsylvania, and Louisiana French for Louisiana. These communities have all made major contributions to their respective states, and have given their states native names.

As for your claim that their is no source, i've already added a source, so that point is incorrect too. This addition is about adding a native name from a notable, native community of California, and both the notability and verifiablity of this community and its native name are proven. Aearthrise (talk) 02:54, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

As there is no consensus for adding this content to the infobox, it must stay out. End of story. Cullen328 (talk) 02:57, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

The source doesn't at all explain why we should be choosing this one over the 250 other languages especially the indigenous terms. It's too bad the city and or state Wiki project doesn't have guidance on things of this nature..... mass image spam in the lead and random native names added. Should follow what the countries do "The etymology of a country's name, if worth noting and naming disputes, may be dealt with in the etymology section. Foreign-languages, pronunciations and acronyms may also belong in the etymology section or in a note to avoid WP:LEADCLUTTER." Moxy🍁 03:00, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

You're making an irrelevant point now about native names of indigenous tribes.

If a notable tribe has a native name for the state of California, then it can be added too, like the Eskimo-Aleut languages for Alaska, Hawaiian language for Hawaii or the Dakota language for South Dakota. It's absurd to argue that we must add native names first to qualify California Cantonese's native Gold Mountain name for addition.

It's absurd firstly, because we don't know if tribes (very few today because of depopulation) have a native name for their state, or what tribes they are. We do know what the California Cantonese call their state, though, and it's verified.

Secondly, it's a not a random name, it's a name of a notable historic community. I talked to the other fellow arguing about population size over time, where we don't give a Spanish name to Pennsylvania because that would be a random name, where the notable Pennsylvania Dutch have given their state a native name.

As for WP:LEADCLUTTER, this guide isn't referring to native names, as that would invalidate the whole reason for their being an included "native_name = " section for state infoboxes. The Leadclutter MOS is referring to adding too many elements that can clutter, like multiple pronunciations for the same word. Aearthrise (talk) 03:14, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Again no source claiming it's virtues. Clearly no consensus for this inclusion perhaps an RFC is your best course forward. Moxy🍁 03:19, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

You say "no source claiming its virtues" (whatever that means), but i've indeed added relevant, verifiable sources for the use of Gold Mountain as a native name by the California Cantonese, being the University of California Press, and the Beijing University Press. This is the third time i've repeated the verifiability, and the community is notable, as they have been in California and highly impacted it, which is why they're notable. Aearthrise (talk) 03:22, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

That is correct multiple people have reverted your addition that appears to be completely unsourced yet you keep pushing forward. I suggest an RFC with sources for your claims that this is the most prominent alternative name used. Moxy🍁 03:28, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Now you're saying it appears to be completely unsourced, even though you can see one of the sources right below us? You're making an unreasonable argument; the Gold Mountain native name is indeed sourced. Aearthrise (talk) 03:30, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

In the article...... it appears completely unsourced that's why it's been reverted multiple times. This is followed by a source that has no page numbers so no one actually verify your claims on a book about women in the gold mountains that has a multitude of meanings. Moxy🍁 03:36, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Why are you even saying it appears completely unsourced then?

Only two reverted it and claimed it for reasons that have nothing to do with native names, one making an argument about "Official Languages" of California (irrelevant regarding inclusion of a native name); the second reversion was from someone who said that this name is not native to California (proven incorrect).

The meaning of Gold Mountain is unique to the California Cantonese, as it's obsolete for the Cantonese of Modern China (foreign Cantonese only call California Gaazau); i've added page numbers from sources that are indeed relevant to the community, explaining the usage of this term.

Here are some recent usages of Gamsaan (Gold Mountain) in regions of California: Gamsaan history: Oakland Museum of California, the Gamsaan Adventure, Inauguration of Gamsaan Trail in California's El Dorado County State Park, Opening of Gamsaan Trail to Marshall Gold Discovery State Historic Park

Again, these and the other sources clearly show the native name's verifiablity in California and that it comes from a notable community. Aearthrise (talk) 03:57, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Yup cant find anything academic that this is used widely at all for this state outside passing mention in the media that seems conflicted over its meaning. Will ask a few others to review if this is the case for other states. Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL. Moxy🍁 04:16, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

There is no conflict of meaning; there are only two mondern meanings of Gamsaan in California Cantonese, one being the state, and the other being San Francisco, specified as Gau Gamsaan "Old Gold Mountain".

This is the same kind of appellation style as in Mexico where Mexican citizens call Mexico City simply "Mexico" as an endonym and refer to themelves by their state names (whereas all other Spanish speakers call it Ciudad de Mexico, Mexico City), Quebec used by French Canadians as both their Province and the City, or "Canton" referring to both the Province and the City.

More than enough sources have been added to show the meaning of California with Gamsaan name (five sources).

Your argumentation is shot Moxy, and all you're doing is trying to find ways to get around the truth: that this native name from the California Cantonese is verifiable and comes from a notable native community in California. Aearthrise (talk) 04:22, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Again your free to start an RFC....just recommend you have sources that explores why this term has more weight that other terms.... that is not mentioned in the etymology section here or even at Etymology of California - but should be in the lead. Looks to me like WP:RGW and Wikipedia:Main article fixation thus far. Moxy🍁 04:35, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

I already explained the reason why this community has weight, and it's obvious why it has weight. It's a historical community that has made a massive impact on the state if California, and have been in the state for almost 200 years.

It's puzzling why you think including a native name from a notable, native community of California in "native_name = " infobox section has something to do with "writing wrongs" or a "Fixation" on Main articles; all you're doing is making assumptions and conspiracies, and they're simply fabrications from your mind.

You're ignoring the evidence of notability and verifiablity, and you've made me repeat myself several times with you; all this because you don't want to acknowledge reasons for inclusion of this historic native name from the California Cantonese, and ignore why we include native names from notable historic communities in infoboxes. Aearthrise (talk) 04:48, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Yup keep saying same argument over and over.....yet ts clear not one person here agrees that your obscure sources or you pov shows that "weigh or notability" that this should be in the lead let alone in the article itself. Suggested read on what to do User:Guy Macon/One against many Moxy🍁 04:58, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

You keep repeating irrelevant arguments that have nothing to do with inclusion of pertinent information on Wikipedia- verifiability and notability.

The only arguments so far are easily refuted, from someone who says it wasn't an official language (irrelevant), one from someone who says it isn't native name (proven false), and you who is trying to say that this historic community isn't notable (talking about cultural weight), and ignoring evidence to avoid the truth.

I've repeated over and over, this community is notable for California (proven), and they have a verifiable native name for state (proven). Aearthrise (talk) 05:03, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Most do not consider our protocols "irrelevant arguments" ...so lets quote so its clear what everyone is referring to

• WP:DUE "Undue weight can be given in several ways, including but not limited to the depth of detail, the quantity of text, prominence of placement, the juxtaposition of statements, and the use of imagery."
• MOS:INTRO "The lead section should briefly summarize the most important points covered in an article, in such a way that it can stand on its own as a concise version of the article. "
• MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE "The purpose of an infobox is to summarize, but not supplant, the key facts that appear in an article"

Moxy🍁 05:13, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Now you're making the same charge as the Cullen328 here did earlier with no evidence, claiming that I said protocols don't matter, and that's false and is just a character attack.

As for the weight of this culture, it is already proven by the community's notability, and impact on the state, being here since beginning and making massive contributions; WP:DUE doesn't fit.

MOS:INTRO is not part of this discussion, because that has to do with the lead paragraph not the infobox.

MOS:INFOBOXPURPOSE, this is about using the infobox in lieu of tthe article and instead writing in the article itself (the meaning of supplant), which isn't a factor in this case as nothing is supplanted.

In the same MOS, MOS:INFOBOXUSE gives the example of correct infobox usage, give the weight of somebody or some animal, but the addition of "weight at birth" or "weight at maturity" is irrelevant.

In the same way, Gamsaan is a relevant native name from this historic notable community, the California Cantonese, but adding multiple pronunciations would be irrelevant, e.g. Gamsaan, and then adding the multiple spellings "also known Gam Shum, Gam sum, Gam Saan." Only one pronunciation is necessary, and only one was included. Aearthrise (talk) 05:26, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Not sure what to say if you dont think the infobox is not part of the lead MOS:LEADELEMENTS or that mention in the lead and not in the article or sub articles in not undue. Moxy🍁 05:38, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

This isn't really a response, but just an attempted "gotcha".

Even taking into account that the infobox is in the lead, if you read and understand MOS:LEADNOTUNIQUE, it's talking about non-unique information for the lead, which isn't relevant in this case.

The Gamsaan name is unique as its only used by the native California Cantonese population, it is unlike writing a random name from an unnotable community in California.

For example putting a Greek translation for California "Καλιφόρνια" would be a violation of MOS, as Greeks have neither made a notable impact in California, nor is the Greek name unique for the state. Aearthrise (talk) 05:45, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Aearthrise, you have not gained consensus and therefore the content stays out. You keep hammering on about California Cantonese which is an article that you edited heavily on November 20, 2024 to transform it from a mediocre student written article about Cantonese people in the California Gold Rush into an article that posits an ethnic group native to California and a language native to California, neither of which exists in the academic literature. "California Cantonese" is a term that does not appear in Google Scholar or Google Books or in the titles of any of the sources in that article. You have used synthesis to create a concept that does not exist except in your mind in the last week, and six days later, you are bludgeoning this discussion with a spurious notion that you whipped up yourself and that has no validity. Cullen328 (talk) 06:05, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Now you're claiming the name "California Cantonese" is not a term used at all in scholarship, which is incorrect.

California Cantonese has not been the most common name historically, as they were usually called "California Chinese", but the term California Chinese is problematic today because it refers to all Chinese living in California; for that reason California Cantonese is used instead, for specificity.

The historic Cantonese community in California came from Liangguang of Qing dynasty China, almost all from Guangdong Province (Canton); it's only in recent years especially with the opening of China that California has received an influx of foreign Mandarin Chinese.

As for citations that show the use of California Cantonese in scholarship, here you are:

"Using the Words that Were Theirs

Dialect, Accented Speech and Languages Other Than English in Asian American and American Indian Literature, Barbara Downs Hodne, 1995, pg.18": Through the narrator's perspective, we see California Cantonese as defining a complex and disjunctive linguistic identity.

"The Story Behind the Dish Classic American Foods, Mark McWilliams, 2012, pg.142": ...the cookies growth from Japanese traditions; another confidently asserts that they are a "true California Cantonese tradition".

"Departing Tong-Shaan: The Organization and Operation of Cantonese Overseas Emigration to America (1850-1900)

Volume 4 The Gum-Shaan Chronicles: The Early History of Cantonese-Chinese America, 1850-1900, Douglas W. Lee, PhD, 2024, pg.301": ...Hakka totals, while small, remained somewhat consistent, even as their "market share" declined steadily in the period 1860-1889. The slight change in this group's numbers over the decades is generally insignificant because its totals remained the smallest in nineteenth-century California's Cantonese community.

"California Magazine - Volume 7, Issues 1-4, University of California, 1982, pg. 91": California's Cantonese considered anything outside of Canton as North. Aearthrise (talk) 06:31, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

"Assignment Peking, Issues 1-4, Edward S. Aarons, 1989, pg. 33": She spoke unnaturally, in English. "I can only speak California Cantonese..."

On YouTube if you search "California Cantonese", you can find a plethora of videos on this community. California Cantonese is indeed an established term. Aearthrise (talk) 06:31, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

No consensus to include = the content stays out. Cullen328 (talk) 06:39, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

I agree. It should not be included. Meters (talk) 08:29, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

I think this name should be included 98.174.88.181 (talk) 09:20, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

This is the very first edit ever by this IP address. Cullen328 (talk) 17:15, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

I dont think it should, mainly for the fact less than 15% (or more historically less than 10%) of the Californian population actually used it. It has never been included and should stay never included. MrNeighbor (talk) 15:50, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

New random account...and an IP .. could all involved here to pls review WP:CRONY Moxy🍁 17:43, 26 November 2024 (UTC)