Talk:California: Difference between revisions
→Wyoming: dated comment |
→Mexico as a bordering country: new section |
||
Line 110: | Line 110: | ||
[[User:JaimzCC|JaimzCC]] ([[User talk:JaimzCC|talk]]) 23:44, 18 January 2013 (UTC) |
[[User:JaimzCC|JaimzCC]] ([[User talk:JaimzCC|talk]]) 23:44, 18 January 2013 (UTC) |
||
:Now changed. Thank you for pointing that out. [[User:AlexiusHoratius|<span style="font-size:14px;font-family:times new roman;color:navy;">'''Alexius'''</span>]][[User talk:AlexiusHoratius|<span style="font-size:14px;font-family:times new roman;color:darkred;">'''Horatius''']]</span> 00:50, 19 January 2013 (UTC) |
:Now changed. Thank you for pointing that out. [[User:AlexiusHoratius|<span style="font-size:14px;font-family:times new roman;color:navy;">'''Alexius'''</span>]][[User talk:AlexiusHoratius|<span style="font-size:14px;font-family:times new roman;color:darkred;">'''Horatius''']]</span> 00:50, 19 January 2013 (UTC) |
||
== Mexico as a bordering country == |
|||
The introduction mentions Oregon, Nevada and Arizona as bordering states, but completely ignores the border to Mexico. I think that should be changed [[Special:Contributions/2001:630:12:242C:89D8:6C09:5D33:F6D5|2001:630:12:242C:89D8:6C09:5D33:F6D5]] ([[User talk:2001:630:12:242C:89D8:6C09:5D33:F6D5|talk]]) 19:32, 7 March 2013 (UTC)Mo |
Revision as of 19:32, 7 March 2013
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the California article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Auto-archiving period: 3 months |
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on July 7, 2004, September 9, 2007, September 9, 2008, September 9, 2009, and September 9, 2010. |
California was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
Current status: Former good article nominee |
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the California article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7Auto-archiving period: 3 months |
GDP comparisons don't sound correct
Italy's nominal gdp is 2.3 trillion. Canada's is 1.5 trillion. the difference would have to made up by a gdp per capita much higher than Canada's since according to population projections Canada and California only differ by about 2.5 million people. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)_per_capita USA gdp per capita 46,858 Canada gdp per capita 45,428
California nominal gdp would be about 1.7 trillion more similar to Russia (in 2009 Russia's gdp falls a lot though).
Additionally, the idea that California's GDP is larger than all other US states combine is ridiculous. Texas and New York (the next two largest) are in the neighborhood of $2.45 trillion, as opposed to California's $1.94 trillion. Hardly larger than all other US states combined.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Vitae drinker (talk • contribs) 23:02, 3 December 2012
Are White Hispanics "minorities"?
As stated above, Hispanic is not an option for race on the census. It's an additional category for ethnicity. There are Hispanics of all races. Combining all Hispanics into one group, excluding White Hispanics from inclusion among all Whites, and then declaring them "minorities" is not only inaccurate, it is insulting and racist. Were Italians, Greeks or Jews "non-white" 100 years ago? What are they now? How are White Hispanics different, and why are they being called "non-white"? What is the agenda here? It seems some sort of distortion is being done intentionally. Based on the ACS already cited in the article it should read:
According to the 2006–2008 American Community Survey, California's population is:[41]
* 76.4% White * 12.5% Asian * 6.7% Black or African American * 2.6% Multiracial * 1.2% Native American
* 36.6% are Hispanic or Latino (of any race)
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.197.6.148 (talk • contribs) 17:12, 27 November 2010
Wyoming
In the inital history paragraph it describes the original make-up of the then called California, there is no verification on the listing which normally I would understand but in this case is needed as Wyoming was never a part of that area. So a footnote ref or removal Wyoming from they listed land area would help the veracity of the article. Thanks all — Preceding unsigned comment added by BespokeFM (talk • contribs) 17:45, 19 June 2011
Poor article quality, link needed to answer a simple basic question
The equality of this article has gone down. It would have almost been quicker to consult a paper almanac (which would a pretty poor excuse).
The "See Also" section needs the link:
List of California state symbols
This raises other kinds of similar issues which this article are possibly lacking which a good editor. 171.66.173.49 (talk) 18:47, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
- The blue bar below the infobox includes a list of the major symbols and a link (via the title) to List of California state symbols. Usually the "See also" section shouldn't contain stuff that is already mentioned in the article, but I don't think many would complain if the list was linked there as well. Per WP:Summary style, though, the more obscure stuff (it looks like California has an official state fife and drum corps...) should be left to the list instead of a general article about the state. AlexiusHoratius 20:34, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
Time flow problem in the history section
The paragraph about US trappers moving into California in the 1820's is followed by a paragraph which begins with the Spanish beginning to set up missions. Considering that the missions were set up decades before the trappers, et al arrived, this should be reworded. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.177.17.94 (talk) 02:14, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
california independence
it is stated in the article on independence from Mexico under section 3 (History) that "Following the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo that ended the war, the region was divided between Mexico and the U.S.; the western territory of Alta California, was to become the U.S. state of California, and Arizona, Nevada, Colorado and Utah became U.S. Territories, while the lower region of California, the Baja Peninsula, remained in the possession of Mexico." I live in Santa Fe, New Mexico and believe you left us out as do so many people. "Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico, Colorado & Utah became U.S. Territories" would be more accurate, I believe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.225.52.129 (talk) 00:46, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Balance in Demographics section
The section contains two images, one stating the liberal leanings of San Francisco, and the other labelled "Immigration Reform", additionally it has a large section regarding LGBT rights. Although those have a place in the article, having only left-leaning content creates an undue weight only towards left leaning topics. No mention is made of the 30+% that is right leaning. Perhaps an image of Orange County should be included, or a counter image of a tea party rally should be included to provide balance.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 20:35, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
- Part of the problem is in the article layout. The left-right/statist-libertarian/gay-straight/etc.-et seq. schemes really don't fit into the description of demographics. Since WikiProject:States does not have article layout guidelines, I suggest we look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline as an example and move some of these weighted images/commentary into their own sections. E.g., culture, politics, etc.--S. Rich (talk) 20:56, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
- Agreed, the section needs to be depoliticized and such things should be moved into their appropriate sections.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 19:55, 7 July 2012 (UTC)
World Stage
I think there could be more detail on California's international diplomacy efforts and other efforts to influence the world (such as through the recent California Global Warming Solutions Act (AB 32)). California's international efforts go back at least to 1998, and a good article that summaarizes the history of these efforts through 1998 is Dave Lesher (January 8, 1998). "Golden and Global California". Los Angeles Times. p. 1. Retrieved October 28, 2012. {{cite news}}
: |section=
ignored (help) -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 12:18, 28 October 2012 (UTC)
- Please see WP:NOTSOAPBOX, if anything is added it needs to be balanced including criticism of the legislation. Moreover, it already has its own article, and need not be included in this article.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:36, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
- California is a leader in certain ways, but it is a sub-unit of the USA and not its own country with a diplomatic corps or ambassadors. Instead, the California governor or similar high-ranking person may choose to promote the state "diplomatically" on the world stage, or to promote ideas that reflect well upon the state, being that the state has some expertise to offer in that enterprise.
- In general, I think such a section would be too easily made into a pep rally promoting California rather than an encyclopedic analysis of the success or failure of such endeavors. I don't think it is necessary to bring such a section into this article. Binksternet (talk) 04:36, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
- True, and don't forget that such promotion and other diplomatic efforts by state governors both inside (e.g. Chris Christie visiting Israel) and outside[1] the US is not unique. There's nothing particularly notable about California's manifestation of it. --Stacey Doljack Borsody (talk) 06:43, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
Edit request on 18 January 2013
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the Immigration part of the Demographics section, the article refers to immigrants coming from "Mexican Countries". This seems to be lumping in all of Latin America to Mexico. I suggest that this is changed to "Latin American Countries". JaimzCC (talk) 23:44, 18 January 2013 (UTC)
- Now changed. Thank you for pointing that out. AlexiusHoratius 00:50, 19 January 2013 (UTC)
Mexico as a bordering country
The introduction mentions Oregon, Nevada and Arizona as bordering states, but completely ignores the border to Mexico. I think that should be changed 2001:630:12:242C:89D8:6C09:5D33:F6D5 (talk) 19:32, 7 March 2013 (UTC)Mo
- All unassessed articles
- B-Class California articles
- Top-importance California articles
- WikiProject California articles
- B-Class United States articles
- High-importance United States articles
- B-Class United States articles of High-importance
- WikiProject United States articles
- B-Class former country articles
- WikiProject Former countries articles
- Selected anniversaries (July 2004)
- Selected anniversaries (September 2007)
- Selected anniversaries (September 2008)
- Selected anniversaries (September 2009)
- Selected anniversaries (September 2010)
- Former good article nominees
- Old requests for peer review