User talk:08OceanBeach SD/Archive 1

Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3

Welcome!

Hello, 08OceanBeach SD! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Jojhutton (talk) 13:22, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines
The community
Writing articles
Miscellaneous

About San Diego Bay Area

Hello, OB, glad to see somebody new here with an interest in the San Diego area! I do have a question, though, about your new article San Diego Bay Area. I have never heard that term applied to the combination of San Diego Bay and Mission Bay, and I wondered if you can find some references to support that usage. I posted this same question at Talk:San Diego Bay Area so let's discuss it there. Thanks, I look forward to working with you to improve Wikipedia!

Hi OB - I'd also like to welcome you to Wikipedia! I hope you take folks' criticisms as constructive - we're all here to make WP better every day. Let me know if you have any questions! Dohn joe (talk) 01:40, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 23:42, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Long Beach

Hello 08 Ocean Beach. I suggest that you review the coastal cities, such as Huntington Beach, Newport Beach or Laguna Beach. I know you are new here to Wiki and would like to thank you in advance for your consideration --WPPilot 06:41, 27 January 2011 (UTC) By WPPilot (Own work) [CC-BY-SA-3.0 (www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0) or GFDL (<A class="external free" href="http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html" rel=nofollow>http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html</A>)], via Wikimedia Commons --WPPilot 06:49, 27 January 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by WPPilot (talk • contribs) It looks far too much like a postcard of places IN long beach. The Aerial pic is not only costly to aquire and it shows the WHOLE city, rather then a number of places around the city. Thank You --WPPilot 07:05, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your concern but major cities with similar populations show a similar style montage. This is nothing new. All major cities of Southern California, i.e. Los Angeles and San Diego also feature this type of montage. It is not a scanned postcard, it is made up of all images from commons and follows the rules for Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license. 08OceanBeach SD (talk) 04:46, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

- - - Let me make a suggestion to you. You are new here on Wiki, as a matter of fact only a few days into your signing up. It looks like your edits have in fact caused others to take note, and a debate in fact is underway regarding some of your offerings.

I sir am a professional and have been able to offer Wikipedia hundreds of high quality photos from a persp[ective that many never benifit from. Perhaps you might be better off starting with edits that are less abrupt and of such a nature that you do not offend others whom have worked here for years to gain a look that is in concert with Wiki standards.

Please try doing some smaller edits, or perhaps work on some places that are in need of your efforts, so as to better learn how Wiki works rather then just stur up the water. I have reviewed your montage with many people and I am sorry, as a featureed photographer that has hundreds of published credits to my name all over the world, it does not look pleaseing to the eye.

Please refrain from posting it again. Try some other edits for now and perhaps take a lower profile posture to learn more about being an editor on Wiki sites. Thank you WPPilot (talk --WPPilot 04:52, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Fortunately for users of Wikipedia, the idea is to contribute and grow, not develop a name as you so put it. I highly doubt you are a "professional" photographer as you so put it, however that is not the point. The picture you would have displayed is rather unattractive and shows a barren mess of concrete. It does not take a professional to notice when a work of art is pleasing to the eye. No matter, you did not address my note of the commonality of montage photos throughout large city pages. Nevertheless, i will bring the discussion up in the desired talk page. 08OceanBeach SD (talk) 10:01, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

- - - Once again what is the true value to Wikipedia of your collective montage? Anyone can assemble it and it looks unbalanced and unprofessional. While the photos I have taken in everything from Sports Illistrated to Time Mag. it could be said that my work speaks for itsself. Clearly you have edited here before, and I feel that you must be some type of sock puppet so I will bring that to the attention of the Wiki admins. --WPPilot 03:59, 30 January 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by WPPilot (talk • contribs)

Nomination of San Diego Bay Area for deletion

The article San Diego Bay Area is being discussed concerning whether it is suitable for inclusion as an article according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/San Diego Bay Area until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Dohn joe (talk) 18:55, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Possible new article?

Hi, OB! I am just back from being AFC (away from computer) and I see that San Diego Bay Area is up for deletion - which I gather you are OK with. But as I was commenting on that nomination, I was remarking that "San Diego Bay Area" is not a common term here like North County or South Bay - and I discovered there is no Wikipedia article for South Bay. I think there should be one, comparable to North County, San Diego, and I suspect plenty of references could be found to show that South Bay is a term in general use. If you are looking for a new-article project, maybe you could take some of the info you used in San Diego Bay Area and incorporate it into a new South Bay article? Just a suggestion. You have been doing a lot of valuable work here (I especially like the photos you have been adding) and I want you to know your input is appreciated! --MelanieN (talk) 17:08, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

My mistake, there is a South Bay, San Diego article already - but it could use a LOT of work! --MelanieN (talk) 03:53, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
Of course thanks! However i've been a bit busy myself. If you would show me the references i could get started! 08OceanBeach SD (talk) 00:17, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

Wikiproject San Diego

WikiProject San Diego I've noticed your edits on pages relating to San Diego. We encourage you to join WikiProject San Diego where we are working to expand, improve, and standardize all articles related to San Diego on Wikipedia.
If you would like more information on what needs to be done, please visit the project page. If you have any questions, please feel free join the discussion on our talk page.

XinJeisan (talk) 05:21, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

San Diego panorama

I like having more than one San Diego skyline (did you take the North Island photo? Awesome!) but it think it might be better to scatter them throughout the article as illustrations - rather than having them right next to each other under "cityscape". What do you think? Let's discuss at Talk:San Diego. --MelanieN (talk) 16:20, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Inland Southern California

The article Inland Southern California has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No sources stating this area exists or is notable. All the article basically consists of is the introductions of two other articles, which have apparently been copied and pasted into this one.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TorriTorri(talk/contribs) 22:43, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Inland Southern California for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Inland Southern California is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inland Southern California until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. TorriTorri(talk/contribs) 06:15, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Baja articles

Hi there - I've been taking the ", Baja California" back out of several article titles. There's no need to disambiguate when the article title is both the common name and the primary topic. U.S. cities generally add the state name, but that's not true for most of the world. Take a look at WP:NCGN#Mexico. Dohn joe (talk) 18:49, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're talking about? I was trying to fix someones undiscussed changing of the name title if that's what you mean? At any rate, if what I understand you to be saying is really what you are saying, then I agree with you. 08OceanBeach SD (talk) 01:43, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Oh know, I see what you're saying. I merely did that in case there was more than one city with the same name, such as the El Paso and Santa Isabel areas of Baja, which are very common Spanish names. 08OceanBeach SD (talk) 01:45, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Tabasco (Mexican state)

Can you please help me to move back the article Tabasco (Mexican state) → Tabasco? You recently undid another redirect (Baja California (state) → Baja California) made by User:Chihuahua State, who is now blocked as a disruptive sockpuppet. Seems like that user was trying to move several Mexican state articles and created a small chaos. AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 00:25, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

I would be glad to! The easiest thing to do is to go to the disrupted articles and just undo his changes. 08OceanBeach SD (talk) 01:57, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
I've fixed as many links as I saw on the contributions list. I also replied at the discussion for the page move. 08OceanBeach SD (talk) 02:12, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Thank you! I thought you were an administrator so you could move back the page. I appreciate you help a lot, especially with undoing the changes User:Chihuahua State did. AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 05:29, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Oh no haha, I'm not. But you're welcome either way! 08OceanBeach SD (talk) 05:40, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Oh hello again! I'm just here because I revert your edit in the article Americas. You see, when people talk about cities they usually mean the city as a whole, that's metro area. It is very rare that people think about big cities as "city proper". Thanks ^_^ AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 06:27, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I would have to disagree. At least in the United States, it is indeed the city proper being referred to. Perhaps a discussion at the talk page should be started. 08OceanBeachS.D. 06:30, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of East County (disambiguation)

The article East County (disambiguation) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No need for a disambiguation with only one target.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TexasAndroid (talk) 15:53, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

San Diego Metro, etc.

Hi 08OB. You know, I like a lot of your contributions, so I feel bad reverting your edits or making other changes on things you've worked on. I do appreciate, though, your interest in geography, as well as your willingness to accept constructive criticism.

Along those lines, I have a specific and a general issue I'd like to raise. The general issue is your tendency to create pages, categories, and template sections on topcis that don't quite match up with your description. An example was "Inland Southern California". It certainly makes sense as a concept, but it's not actually used as the name of a place. We can't just make up names for places.

Specifically, I don't think that "San Diego Metro" is the name of a place. "San Diego Metrpolitan Area", yes, but not "San Diego Metro". If you put that in somewhere like Google Books, you see that "San Diego Metro" appears almost always as an adjective (e.g. "San Diego Metro Arson Strike Force", "San Diego Metro area", etc.). But you don't see people talking about "a region within San Diego Metro", the way you've been using it in WP. I'd really like to remove "San Diego Metro" from SD articles.

The other issue I have with it is that, as you've pointed out, the San Diego metropolitan area is the same as "San Diego County". Thus, I think it's redundant to use both in the leads of SD articles. One or the other should be enough. Again, I appreciate the work you've been doing, but think the SoCal articles could be improved with more precise names of places. What do you think about this? Dohn joe (talk) 21:17, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

I agree. Thanks for helping me fix my mistakes. One thing I might say is lengthen "San Diego Metro" to San Diego metropolitan area. Also, I'm fine with removing the double reference of the County and Metropolitan area in articles where it is presented. 08OceanBeach SD (talk) 00:07, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks again for your openmindedness. I've changed most of the "San Diego Metro"s that I could find, but if you stumble across any, I'd appreciate your help. Thanks! Dohn joe (talk) 17:12, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Of course. 08OceanBeach SD (talk) 00:21, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

SD regions

Hi 08OB. I replaced your ref on the Regions of the San Diego metropolitan area page regarding the subregions of Julian and Pine Valley. I followed the link, and didn't see the names "Cuyamaca" or "North Mountain". What I found under subregions was "Palomar-Julian" and "Laguna-Pine Valley", in addition to Mountain Empire. I also linked to a SANDAG map that shows all those spots as being in the East County (I also added the ref to the Mountain Empire page). Please feel free to revert or add on as you see fit - I was just going where the links led me.... Dohn joe (talk) 23:32, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

I've started a discussion at the article talk. They are there i can assure you! I hope im not going crazy. 08OceanBeach SD (talk) 23:34, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

SD review

For the record, I don't agree with WTF on personal income coming under demographics because the census bureau happens to have that information! The bots dropped the stuff there back in the bad old days before there even was an economy subsection. I realize there's not much we can do with a reviewer, but I am questioning him on this. BTW, I do have some support for this. Don't know whether it can be brought to bear or not. This is not as trivial as it sounds since it exists in hundreds of other articles and is widely accepted. Student7 (talk) 14:04, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I can see what you're saying. But it is more about the people than the city itself so it makes some sense how it should be under the demographics section. I also disagree with a few things, but I can bear. At first I wasn't too whole-hearted about merging cityscape into geography but I've come to deal with it. Pick your battles ya know! Either way, if it bugs you that much, you might start a discussion. However this might impede the achievement of GA status, which I feel a lot of us are set on. 08OceanBeach SD (talk) 23:13, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
Concur with your goals. Don't want to interfere with anything on the article page. I asked the reviewer about it but he has not replied. I am trying to discuss this in other venues. Student7 (talk) 16:48, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
Sounds like you've got it under way. Keep me posted on what happens. 08OceanBeach SD (talk) 21:51, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Chula Vista

The Chula Vista Barnstar of National Merit
Thank you for your work on the Chula Vista article. Spongie555 (talk) 03:38, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
I dont know if you want to help the Chula Vista article reach FA or GA for its centennial. Also why do you have the HMS Surprise (replica ship) in the Chula Vista montage? Its not docked in Chula Vista and it was there for a visit. Spongie555 (talk)
I think I would! Oh, I thought it was docked.. I can replace it if you'd like.
The Suprise is currently docked at Maritime Museum of San Diego. But maybe it is docked thier i just know it came for a visit last year. Spongie555 (talk) 06:03, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
I think you're right, last time I went downtown it was there I believe. What to you propose it's replaced with?08OceanBeach SD (talk) 06:08, 27 March 2011 (UTC)
If only we had a image of city hall but we don't. Maybe the Chula Vista nature center might be a good one. I saw it on commons somewhere. Spongie555 (talk) 05:44, 30 March 2011 (UTC)
Maybe we could bring it up on WikiProject San Diego and request a photo of city hall? 08OceanBeachS.D. 03:54, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Minor edits

Hi 08OB - just wanted to let you know that this edit should not have been listed as "minor". Take a look at the policy. Basically, minor edits are only for typos, formatting, and rearranging. Anytime you change the content (by adding or subtracting words), it's not a "minor edit". Not a huge deal here, but I thought I'd let you know. Nice work on the SD article, by the way. Take care. Dohn joe (talk) 18:05, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up! 08OceanBeach SD (talk) 23:57, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

References

Thanks for your note about references. However, according to Wikipedia policy there is no particular policy or requirement for how to cite references. In fact most of the examples listed at Wikipedia:Citing sources are in the format I like to use - namely, just putting the information between <ref> and </ref>. That WP page also says "The use of citation templates is neither encouraged nor discouraged." In other words, there isn't a requirement that we use a template or do the references in any particular "proper format". If you want to convert them to the format you prefer, feel free - I don't mind. But I plan to continue using the format I am most familiar with.

BTW, in a recent reference of mine that you "corrected," you used the wrong template. It was a newspaper article but you used "cite web," with the result that the publication date was lost. The template for a newspaper article is "cite news". All the citation formats are listed here: Wikipedia:Citation templates --MelanieN (talk) 00:55, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Your San Diego GA nomination

Hello. When does your GA nomination of San Diego end? When do you expect to work on the article? I noticed that you changed my edit to Minneapolis. Which doesn't amount to much. I put in a lot of work on San Diego but I don't see anybody else's contributions lately at all. -SusanLesch (talk) 16:42, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

We have a week or so I believe. I actually did a lot of work during his first round of the GA nomination. I get rid of many of the bulleted lists, added prose to the cityscape section, transformed the transportation lists into prose, found many references, merged personal income into the demographics and got rid of the unnecessary subsections of the demographics and merged them as well. If you check the history of the article you can see. You, Melanie and I seem to be the only major contributors as of now, which is quite unfortunate. Forgive me if I offended you by changing the Minneapolis picture. I felt it showed to little of the skyline, though a discussion is going on now I believe. I'll try to work more on the San Diego article though, thanks for the reminder. 08OceanBeachS.D. 06:11, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks a lot and sorry if I gave you the third degree. I just worry a lot. I added a note at WikiProject San Diego just in case somebody else there wants to contribute. Good work, keep it up. -SusanLesch (talk) 17:08, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks and good idea! 08OceanBeachS.D. 22:44, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

French Coast CSD

Hello, 08OceanBeach SD, I believe you meant Fresh Coast, which is a redirect to Third Coast. I merged the information from your article into that one. The title appears wrong, and much of the article was from an old revision of Fresh Coast (which was [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Fresh_Coast AfD'd previously). Because of this, I will mark the article for speedy deletion.--NortyNort (Holla) 11:48, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

I see. Sounds reasonable and makes sense considering there is an existing french coast as you mentioned. 08OceanBeachS.D. 20:45, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

{{Tijuana-stub}}

Greetings! A stub template or category which you created has been nominated for renaming or deletion at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion. The stub type most likely doesn't meet Wikipedia requirements for a stub type, through failure to meet standards relating to the name, scope, current stub hierarchy or likely size, as explained at Wikipedia:Stub. Please feel free to make any comments at WP:SFD regarding this stub type, and in future, please consider proposing new stub types first at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals! This message is a boilerplate, left here as a courtesy, and should not be considered personal in nature. Grutness...wha? 00:02, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

disambiguating in Baja

Hi 08OB - I think I may have mentioned this before, but places in Mexico that don't need disambiguating shouldn't have the state name in the article title. I just noticed Pórticos de San Antonio, Baja California, which I moved to plain Pórticos de San Antonio (with the accent). If you've done other similar page creations, would you please go through them and take out the "Baja California" when it's not needed for dab purposes? If you have any questions, look at the WP:NCGN#Mexico page, or ask me. Thanks! Dohn joe (talk) 19:31, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

I was only disambiguating ones with seemingly common names, or so I thought. A place such as La Joya, Baja California, is one with a common name. 08OceanBeachS.D. 00:06, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
No big deal. An easy way to check, though, is just to type the name of the page you're creating in the search box. If it's all in italics when you're done, that means no page with that name has been created yet. (Try it with "La Joya", and then try it with "No page has this name yet" and see what happens.) Even better, when you type an unused name in the search box and hit enter, it automatically takes you to the create a new page template. Dohn joe (talk) 00:15, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
It turns out only two of the articles are unique to Wikipedia as of now. I'm in the process of moving the one you have not moved. The other being Terrazas del Valle. 08OceanBeachS.D. 00:18, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Your attitude

Is this a joke? [1] You have just gone mad. You're just editing the articles I do in order to pursue a kind of childish "revenge" given the fact that you couldn't booster Brazil and push your POV in the article Americas.

This behavior is shameful and I personally won't tolerate it since it is very easy to tell why you're doing this. It also scratches the limits of harassment. AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 03:37, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm offended at your attitude. I have always taken an interest in North America and the Americas. I was simply adding to the text. I had no idea you edited the North America article. I am also not aware how the text is offensive. The information is factual. I don't have a mindset of revenge because it was never my intention to boost Brazil. You have the wrong mindset with regard to others edits. 08OceanBeachS.D. 03:59, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
Ok you know what, I'll just assume good faith regarding this, ok? =P Because I see you're a good contributor and well, that's what we should do. I just want to make clear that I don't have anything against you or Brazil. I do have a thing against boosterism (I have a record about that) towards any nation and especially about cherry-picking references.
Ok, now I do know that some Caribbean nations have higher GPD per capita than Mexico I don't have anything against that part, but the introduction of the rarely used, obscure term "Middle America" is very objectionable. I honestly thought you were using it as a revenge since I and other editors have been against the use of such term because of what I just told you above, and because of a certain user that in a very racist way first tried to say Mexico was Central America, and when he was proved wrong, he just switched to the term Middle America (again, rarely used and very obscure) just to deny the fact that there is a North American Region in which Canada, US and Mexico are usually in.
So I hope you get my sensibility about this issue. I've been here trying to take care about a bunch of Mexico-related articles for 6 years. So yeah, I might have acted a little sensitive. Peace out. AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 04:15, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
It's fine. I would just like point out that I have edited North America before the discussion we had at the Americas article as shown by this edit[2], that was my most recent edit, four days before I started the mentioned discussion. I have never been aware that Middle America is a derogatory term or that editors disagreed with its use. I forgive your misunderstood assumptions with regard to my edits. Good luck with your Mexico-related work! 08OceanBeachS.D. 04:26, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
It's ok, I do recognize your good work and I sincerely apologize if I acted a little serious and cold. AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 04:41, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Christ the Redeemer

Oh I changed the picture of Christ the Redeemer. I think it looks better because of the nice lighting but what do you think? AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 04:42, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

It's fine. As long as the message that it's a symbol of Christianity gets across, I'm sure any picture of it will do! 08OceanBeachS.D. 04:44, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Imperial Beach end of border

I double checked your work, and used the SanGIS mapping tool and you are right. The end of Monument Road, and the end of the "private road" that leads to the last border monument, and it appears that the beach area within Border Field State Park is in fact Imperial Beach city limits, and San Diego city limits ends a parcel away from the shoreline. Good work!

Therefore, have this cookie:

--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 03:45, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately I wont be able to eat it, but thank you for the recognition! 08OceanBeachS.D. 03:54, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Balboa Park GLAM project

Hello, I hope you are doing well. I recently left a message at WP:SANDIEGO's talk page about a new GLAM collaboration with Balboa Park. I'm contacting you to determine if you'd be interested in participating in the project. The staff there would like to meet with a group of Wikipedians to eventually lead to tours of the museums, image donations, editing collaborations, contests, and other events. If you have any interest at all in helping in any capacity, please list your name at WP:GLAM/BP so we can determine what size group we're looking at. As this collaboration has just started, if you have any questions, comments, ideas, etc., please leave them on the project's talk page. Thank you! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:58, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Las Vegas metropolitan area redirect

I have been thinking about your change. Normally your change would be the correct one. However in this case the usage by the approximate 5,000 inbound links, most of which are hard coded redirects from Las Vegas, a dab page, calls for a different approach. I added this This redirect should remain in place until the 4,000+ articles that are not about the MSA but the Las Vegas Valley, that were hard redirected when the combined article was the only choice, are changed to point to Las Vegas Valley. to the text on the redirect. I hope that better explains the situation. Too many readers would be surprised by going to the MSA article when they expected something about Vegas. If you have any suggestions about how to switch all of those hard redirects, I'm open to suggestions. This is not trying to bypass the discussion you started on the project page, just to avoid confusing readers until the redirects are cleaned up. Vegaswikian (talk) 18:47, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Of course. I understand your reasoning. As of now I don't have any suggestions but the results of the discussion on the project page should help with that once the discussion is finished. 08OceanBeachS.D. 22:59, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

{{Las Vegas-stub}}

Greetings! A stub template or category which you created has been nominated for renaming or deletion at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion. The stub type most likely doesn't meet Wikipedia requirements for a stub type, through failure to meet standards relating to the name, scope, current stub hierarchy or likely size, as explained at Wikipedia:Stub. Please feel free to make any comments at WP:SFD regarding this stub type, and in future, please consider proposing new stub types first at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals! This message is a boilerplate, left here as a courtesy, and should not be considered personal in nature. Grutness...wha? 07:14, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

May 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Americas. When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Calabe1992 (talk) 01:19, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Populations statistics

In the article Americas: Fisrt, urban area is not a widely used concept as it is Metropolitan Area and City Proper. Secondly, even some sources do not place L.A. in 3rd place but in 5th or 7th. Lastly, why would you include a comparative sentence between L.A. and Mexico City? That's plainly weasel wording. Also, L.A. do not place top 3 in the other 2 categories so it's just too undue weight.

In the article Latin America: the issue of adding Metropolitan Area instead of the limiting administrative view of "City Proper" was already discussed. Also the article, since it started, has always included the metro area statistics, because people see the city as a whole.

AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 15:15, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Dude, I just checked the article List of Urban Agglomerations and List of Urban Areas and they do not rank L.A. near the 3rd place. What is going on here then? AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 15:41, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
Ok, it seems like a "vandal" User:Jorge112597 changed the statistics at List of Urban Areas just 19 minutes before you edited the article... so you thought L.A. was really the 3rd largest instead of Mexico City. Here's the edit [3]. His vandalic edit was reverted and the article returned to normal. AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 15:55, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
Pardon me for not reviewing discussion and the history of Urban Area information. Hopefully my edits will have been inocuous in manner and the accurate information restored accordingly. 08OceanBeachS.D. 04:44, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Harassment

I have noticed an alarming pattern in your editorial behaviour in the past weeks, ever since we had a disagreement at article Americas over metropolitan areas vs city proper. You might had felt you "lost" so you started editing the same articles I do, trying to intimidate me or to make me feel watched. You arrived to articles that you have never edited before, I can only assume you're following my edits.

  • Oganizacoes Globo [4]
  • Monterrey [5]
  • North America [6] (this one while we were still debating in Americas, you introduced a term that you know I was not OK with)

The history of each articles is very clear. You arrive and edit an article just after I do. Would you please tell me why? If this very clear pattern continues I will be forced to report you for harassment. AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 23:30, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

You may have noticed I take an interest in Brazil-related articles and I stumbled upon Oganizacoes Globo when reviewing an article on Conglomerates. Regardless of my explanation, this edit: [7], is viewed as constructive and in no way directed at you. Therefore it is not harassment. This edit: [8], was me expanding more on Monterrey as it had no city population reference and I took on a format observed on the Mexico City (and other cities) article. I have also edited the Monterrey article before the discussion on Americas, so again your accusations are falsified. At this point I would like to point out that I reached out for your assistance on the creation of a List of tallest buildings in Monterrey article but you deleted my post [9]. Finally we arrive at the North America edit: [10], in my edit explanation I said "addition of information; minor rephrase." Which is true; I expanded on information not present about Caribbean countries.
Your accusations are further falsified seeing as I have edited those articles prior to the Americas discussion - discussion began 06:35, 6 May 2011 - as viewed in these edits: 22:51, 27 February 2011 (time of first Monterrey edit) and 02:06, 2 May 2011 (time of first North America edit). My viewing of the articles even predates my edits. So I observe know correlation where "[I] arrive and edit an article just after [you] do."
WP:HA also defines harassment as a pattern of repeated offensive behavior that appears to a reasonable observer to intentionally target a specific person or persons, and my editing behavior is not targeted at you as shown by the nature of edits and their constructive usefulness. Only in one instance (Oganizacoes Globo) was an edit by I followed by one made by you and was an edit to an article we both edited not before the discussion at the article Americas; and I explained to you how I stumbled upon it. 08OceanBeachS.D. 23:57, 29 May 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your explanations. In this kind of issues, only time will tell. But thanks. AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 01:14, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
I appreciate your eagerness to resolve a situation, but in all honesty there is no situation. Time will only show how you and I both edit the same articles and how I have edited some articles before the discussion on the Americas talk page. I personally see no issue, but I do see you seemingly feeling intimidated by my edits - which I am sorry for. I hope in time you will come to see my edits as constructive and useful to Wikipedia. Until next time, goodbye. 08OceanBeachS.D. 01:22, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

North America

Text by AlexCovurrabias that should be moved to discussion on the North America Talkpage

It is very clear now that your attitude is just that of a angry child. Why would you do this? [11] It is very clear you didn't read the whole project page. It is clearly stated what's the scope of the project and we created and decided to use that image you removed as our WikiProject logo. It is just childish and a totally lack of Wikiquette.

Also, do not revert my edits. What you're trying to do in the article North America is also childish, plainly incorrect and can't be sustained due to a lots of reliable sources saying otherwise. That's why the article has been that way for years. Would you please indicate what sources are you talking about? AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 07:12, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Oh and can you please tell me what are you taking about in this edit summary? Feel free to revert, however do not re-add references not supported of prose; i feel you may not have seen my discussion post
I have read your post, I have also aswered but I can't see any references not "supported of prose". Can you please indicate your doubts before reverting? Thanks. AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 07:14, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
  • Please continue discussion at the talk pages where it has already began an cease any further "harassment comments" on my talk page, when time and time again I prove your accusations falsified. It is beginning to become tiresome and shows subtle signs of harassment. I also apologize for not reading the scope before I changed the image. Forgive me. However, you jump to conclusions much to fast without as much regard to inquiry as you have for throwing out accusations. 08OceanBeachS.D. 07:18, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
Ocean, do not paste private conversations in a talk page. I did not made those comments there, but here and those had nothing to do with the North America discussion but with your attitude of deleting WikiProject North America logo. So my message was aimed at you. You're free to remove my message from your talk page if you did not like it or already read it, but adding our talk in a serious debate seems very inappropiate.
And please, do not say I "jump to conclusions too fast", because you removed a good image from a WikiProject and you didn't even took the time to read what it was about! That's a fast conclusion! I understand that this is tiresome for you, but you have started this and what I don't understand is that you previously told me you were sorry for "including the term Middle America" and that you didn't know it was not right. Remember? Well I hope we can collaborate better. AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 07:40, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
It had everything to do with the discussion at the North America talkpage. You were inquiring about my removal of unsuitable references at North America. Therefore I saw it as an appropriate gesture. In my defense I skimmed the page but missed it. I am human, and we make errors at times. I do remember what I said and I will quote myself saying "I have never been aware that Middle America is a derogatory term or that editors disagreed with its use," however I did not solely state that as the name for the country grouping and referred to it as "Middle/Central America." Please continue the relevant discussion at the talk page. 08OceanBeachS.D. 07:46, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

San Diego

The Original Barnstar
To 08OceanBeach SD, on the occasion of San Diego reaching GA! -SusanLesch (talk) 15:28, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Category:Tijuana metropolitan area geography stubs

Greetings! A stub template or category which you created has been nominated for renaming or deletion at Wikipedia:Stub types for deletion. The stub type most likely doesn't meet Wikipedia requirements for a stub type, through failure to meet standards relating to the name, scope, current stub hierarchy or likely size, as explained at Wikipedia:Stub. Please feel free to make any comments at WP:SFD regarding this stub type, and in future, please consider proposing new stub types first at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals! This message is a boilerplate, left here as a courtesy, and should not be considered personal in nature.

This is the third time in only a little over a month that I have left a message here relating to your stub creation out of process. Please, the proposals page is there for a very good reason, as it saves a lot of work for all editors involved in stub sorting. Repeatedly creating stub types out of process is disruptive to efforts to systematise stubs across Wikipedia. In future, please propose any new stub types before creation of them! Grutness...wha? 02:55, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Even WikiProjects need to propose stub types, since individual subject-related WikiProjects don't actually do the maintenance of "their" stub templates and categories> In any case, it usually it makes far more sense for them to have a banner assessment template instead (see Wikipedia:Stub#Stub_types.2C_WikiProjects.2C_and_Assessment_templates). Grutness...wha? 03:05, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

1921 Mexican census

Hey, I'm using the 1921 Mexican census just as a reference to the last official time the Mexican government asked all Mexicans about their race (perception). Please don't remove it. I took like over 2 hours adding these things and researching it to better the article. And it's pretty annoying that you are throwing my time and work to the trash.

The website of the guy (Schmal) who researched the census is not one single personal website. this guy has written for LA Latino, Houston Culture, etc. The guy who researched it is not some random blogger, the document he researched is not false, and the his website is not a blog.

If you want to add something to the 1921 census mentioned in the states of Mexico, like "This was the last census to record race" or "Since then, the demographics have changed" then do so. But please don't just remove the stuff I put because I put time and effort into it.

So, please leave the census info there, and then, like I said, make it known that current demographics may have dramatically changed, but I think it is a good reference. And besides, it's an official government stat, it's not like Schmal is making the info up.

Have a nice day.--76.95.196.87 (talk) 23:39, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

I am hardly the only person who disagrees with the addition. I agree with User:Maunus about the suggestion on how do deal with this information. 08OceanBeachS.D. 01:17, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

North America and NAFTA

What is wrong with you? Your attitude in editing is plainly ridiculous. NAFTA nations? Let's see, when we talk about Central America, then they are Central American countries.... Caribbean? Caribbean countries... North America (as a region)? NAFTA nations?

Your edit clearly is politically motivated. You've seen the sources that clearly state Can, US and Mex do integrate a region also called North America. Most importantly, in other continental models North America is a region of the Americas.

So your edit is clearly a POV fork and politically motivated. I'm tired of your incivility and agressiveness. Will seek help because your attitude is very clear. AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 02:18, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

I didn't realize there was a problem using the term nation. I felt its use necessary because country was used frequently in that paragraph. 08OceanBeachS.D. 02:20, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Problem was replacing "North American nations" with "NAFTA nations". Problem has been fixed. AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 04:41, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
I have no problem with the change. The only thing is that your reason for reversion is very disrespectful and I find it distasteful. I quote "Removing political non-sense." My edits were not nonsense at all and I viewed them as highly contributing to the Economy section of the article. I have nearly tripled it's size since I began editing it. Thank you for resolving the conflict with yourself however, and not turning this into another extensive argument. Goodbye. 08OceanBeachS.D. 04:46, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Figures

Greetings. I would ask that you partially revert your edit that removed of the population chart, until consensus is reached here. Thanks! -- nsaum75 !Dígame¡‎ 21:47, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

No problem! 08OceanBeachS.D. 21:49, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! -- nsaum75 !Dígame¡‎ 22:01, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Vandalism at North America

The text I added is not up to rewording since it is a direct citation from a book. You're trying to play with the edit summaries. I'm not complaining about the removal of the reference, which you conveniently kept, but the removal of the quoted text. This is pure vandalism. AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 23:24, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Forgive me. I wasn't playing with the edit summary at all. Better communication was necessary as you didn't indicate the text was quoted. Please do so and take a look at Wikipedia:CITE#Non-English sources for the use of sources not in the English language. If the guidelines are not followed it may be re-worded as there is no indication of it being a direct quote. 08OceanBeachS.D. 01:05, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

North America

Hello! this edit that you made to the article North America introduces two named refs, "CIA_20110303" and "WorldFactBook" for which no text is included. This makes the article appear on the list Category:Pages with broken reference names. Usually this means you copied test from another article, but I cannot find the article it may have come from, or determine what else you may have meant to do. Would you please revisit the article and add-in the sources you intended? Thanks. - Salamurai (talk) 16:31, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

It means I borrowed sources from another article. I will be sure and find the original link. 08OceanBeachS.D. 20:44, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of List of Rede Globo slogans

The article List of Rede Globo slogans has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Most of the page is not English, and no references to verify the slogans.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Rainbow Dash 21:08, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of List of Rede Globo slogans for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of Rede Globo slogans is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Rede Globo slogans until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Rainbow Dash 21:31, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Cities table at North America article

Don't you think it is too much? Now the table takes the whole space and looks so bulky for such a small subsection. It was added to be a quick reference because there's a main article already cited. And the area and density columns say "square kilometeres" instead of km2 or sq km which makes the table even bigger.

What do you think? Do you think we can do something to make it smaller? I personally believe it has too much info. I don't think it was necessary to add a "core city" column. Seems redundant. AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 01:57, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

This may be better discussed at the talk page. A core cities column can be viewed as useful because there is often more than one core city, not simply the largest. Economics have a key role in deciding core cities, as is the case in South Florida where Hialeah is not deemed a core city, but is the second largest city in the area. The cited articles do not maintain density and area columns, so the information is not cited per say. Maybe it can be changed to "km 2" instead of "square kilometers" to reduce length? 08OceanBeachS.D. 02:09, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
The picture you selected to represent Mexico City is just horrible. It doesn't look good and especially it doesn't make justice to the city. It makes it look like it doesn't have skyscrapers at all. I don't want to think you're doing this once again to demerit Mexico, but oh well it is very clear considering everything. I've changed it back. There's no single "over-use" policy so... AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 06:41, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
That is an opinion. I favored the image. Mexico City is more than skyscrapers after all and it would be nice to see more than the same picture on wikipedia. 08OceanBeachS.D. 07:28, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Organizacoes Globo and reference

The reference you added here [12] to sustain that Organizacoes Globo is "Latin America's largest media conglomerate and world's 4th largest only behing ABC, CBS and NBC" doesn't support your claims. In fact, it doesn't say nothing about it!

It does mention Rede Globo as the world's 4th largest unrestricted television channel (literally says in Spanish "cuarto canal de televisión abierta del mundo"). But still it doesn't say anything about media giant Organizacoes Globo. I'm surprised by that addition given the fact that the reference says nothing about your claims. AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 01:44, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

I got the reference from the es:Organizacoes Globo. Seeing as you are fluent in Spanish you may want to change the source. 08OceanBeachS.D. 03:42, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Flags On Brics

Oh, sorry, I missed that; yes you are right, I should have titled it countries. I definitively should have changed it.Curb Chain (talk) 06:12, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

No problem. It's fixed now. 08OceanBeachS.D. 17:01, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

North America talk page

I'm not sure if you're aware that we had a talk at the article North America. Mexico is not part of Central America geographically.... or geopolitically or anything. It was made clear. I'm also not sure if you're just ignoring all this but you should take a look at the talk page in case you haven't. Your edits have been reworded per talk page. KarniFro( Talk to me) 18:10, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

I think you may have misunderstood the prose. Take a look at my talk page response. 08OceanBeachS.D. 20:09, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 Hours for Edit Warring. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. FASTILY (TALK) 22:09, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Trimming cities table at North America

Hello. I'm really sorry that you were blocked, I really am. We were all frustrated by your attempts to dismiss consensus, it was kinda necessary trying to cool you down. I really hope you don't take that personally and that we can continue to work productively and without biases.

You know, I do recognize your contributions about Los Angeles and especially about Tijuana-San Diego international metropolitan area. So if you didn't know I'm letting you know: good work. I wish we can leave behind this Mexico-Central America, anti-Mexico stuff and focus in other things now that it is solved. You're a good contributor and I really really wish we could work together, for example in the Monterrey buildings project you suggested me weeks ago.

I have to admit that I didn't pay that much attention to it because I was angry with you because of your attitude. I hope we can leave all this behind.

I'm writting you today because I proposed to trim down the cities table in the article North America. I've explained my reasons there but since you were the one that worked and expanded it to its present shape, I feel it was appropiate to let you know and contact you first, as a sign of civility. I hope you don't take it personally. I just think it is too wide and crowded and you maybe can suggest a good way to trim it down? Please read the talk page and let us know what you think about the table.

I sincerely hope we can be friends and I sincerely hope you can understand. Let's just be friends. AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 21:35, 27 June 2011 (UTC)