Talk:San Diego/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Is there any way to block this one phrase?

Is there any way to block edits to this article that contain the phrase "whale's vagina"? That tired old joke, from the movie Anchoman, gets added here again and again. We have had some respite during periods when the article was semi-protected, but they won't give us semi-protection permanently, and anyhow the problem is not actually with non-autoconfirmed users as such - it is with non-autoconfirmed users who try to insert this one phrase into this one article. Is there anyone with the skill to make a bot that would automatically reject this edit? Is there anyplace I can ask for it? --MelanieN (talk) 18:00, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

I actually found the place! I asked for help here: Wikipedia:Bot requests#Bot to target a common vandalism at San Diego article. Let's see if some nice bot-writer can come to our rescue. --MelanieN (talk) 15:22, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

The folks at that site said semi-protection would be better than a bot or edit-filter, and they gave us an indefinite semi-protection. Yay! --MelanieN (talk) 17:00, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Not sure why we can't get permanent semi protection for a high traffic article.JOJ ^Hutton 17:05, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Looks like we just did! --MelanieN (talk) 17:10, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Edit request on 24 April 2012 -- fixed broken SDSU library link

Found a Wayback Machine copy of ref#112; please add it in: http://web.archive.org/web/20051103013223/http://infodome.sdsu.edu/research/libdirectory/index.shtml -- 132.239.188.243 (talk) 21:17, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Y Done. Thanks for the link. --MelanieN (talk) 05:23, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Border Name

Hello. I understand trying to give Mexico credence, but this can be done to a fault. If we are writing about the United States or cities within the United States, and then we refer to the national border, this should be written as United States - Mexico border, not Mexico - United States border. However, if we are talking about the country of Mexico or Mexican cities, then it should be written as Mexico - United States border. A little pyschology: The United States is the strongest country on Earth, the only superpower. As a result, some feel the need not to put the United States' name first, because they believe it may imply that the other country (whatever country that may be) is second tiered compared to the US. So they tend to try and compensate for this by putting the other country's name first. But the correct way to handle this is by actually keeping things consistent. In other words, whatever country or city you are writing about, that country's name should always go first when referring to a border with another country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.251.112.134 (talk) 18:34, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't even see the place in the article you are talking about - where it says "Mexico-United States border". Can you point it out, please? --MelanieN (talk) 19:42, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Spain didn't Exist at that time

I would like to propose an edit to be historically accurate.

In second paragraph is said that Juan Cabrillo claimed the entire area for Spain.

That's totally inaccurate since at that time Spain didn't not exist as a political unity, country, estate or nation... it was the Kingdom of Castilia (Reino de Castilla) which was one of the kingdoms of the "Spains" (Reino de las Españas). And the Isabel la Católica (Elisabeth the Catholic) Queen of Castilia, was clear that any land discovered will be only from her kingdom, Castilia.

At that time Spain was a geographical designation, something like now we define Scandiavia. Not existing any political entity existing as Scandinavia.

Spain becomes a de facto political entity in the 1716 with the Decree of New Plant and in 1812 with the first Constitution.

Before Spain (as a region) was a conglomerate of different kingdoms as it was in most Europe.

Although that may be "Technically" correct, most of the sources usually say "Spain".--JOJ ^Hutton 21:42, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

This discussion is transcluded from Talk:San Diego/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the reassessment.

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   "Many San Diego home buyers tend to buy homes within many affordable neighborhoods, while others…" should be "Many of San Diego's home buyers tend to buy homes within many affordable neighborhoods, while others…"  Done

   "…regular scheduled service in spring 2012, an economic loss to the region of more than $100 million." needs to say that it was "which was an economic loss" Done

   "Transient Occupancy Taxes (TOT) create funding for the City of San Diego Commission for Arts and Culture." should be have created instead of just created.  Done

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   Reference #33 was tagged as a dead link but still needs to be taken care of.  Done

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   The sentence about the study that Walk Score did is unnecessary.  Done - Removed.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   That is all, the article has changed a bit, but it is still doing well.

What is a GA reassessment

This was requested by MelanieN. A Good article reassessment (or GAR) is a process to determine whether articles that are listed as good articles still merit their good article (GA) status. GAR can sometimes provide more feedback for delisted articles or failed GA nominations. However, it is not a peer review process; for that see Wikipedia:Peer review. The outcome of a reassessment should only depend on whether the article being reassessed meets the good article criteria or not. Obtund^Talk 04:59, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

And I gather from what you said on your talk page that reassessment is a routine thing - it doesn't necessarily mean that anything was wrong or anyone complained. I was wondering if we should be alarmed; apparently not. I will get to work tomorrow on some of the problems you have identified. Thanks for your review. --MelanieN (talk) 05:02, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh, and I looked here to see what that little purple clock face means; apparently it means the article is "on hold" to give us time to fix the problems. --MelanieN (talk) 05:06, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Yes it is on hold for three day, but I usually give a week anyways. Don't be alarmed it is just us GA reviewers doing our jobs. There are only 3 or 4 minor things to take care of so it should not take up too much of your time. Obtund^Talk 05:11, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your edits to fix the items you identified above! Reference 34 appears to be a live link [1]. This review actually provided a good incentive to reread the entire article and fix a few things. --MelanieN (talk) 17:36, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Tuna

SusanLesch reminded me that we had discussed adding information to the article about San Diego's history with the tuna industry. It wasn't that many decades ago that San Diego was the tuna capital of the country, and that fishing for tuna and canning it were major industries here. That industry is pretty much gone now. I plan to add something about it but would like people's opinions about which section it should go into - History or Economy? --MelanieN (talk) 01:29, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

I would think both, but mainly in the history section. Chicken of the Sea and Bumble Bee are still based in San Diego, so that might be good to mention in the economy section (along with sportsfishing, which I see needs to be added as well...). Thanks for adding this, Melanie! Dohn joe (talk) 16:35, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Y Done - with a mention under Economy, a paragraph under History, and a larger paragraph at History of San Diego. --MelanieN (talk) 23:35, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5