User talk:Norcalal

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Regarding recent major restructuring of Eureka CA article

...to understand why my restructuring from last night are not there now... —Preceding unsigned comment added by norcalal (talk • contribs)

What do you mean? Your rewrite of Eureka, California is still there, nobody has reverted it. - Dinnerbone (Talk/Cont) 19:16, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your assistance. For whatever reason, when I tried to access the article initially it appeared pre-"WikiProject City" restructure. It does seem ok now. If a reversion happens to and edit how does one revert it? Thanks Norcalal 19:52, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
See Help:Reverting. - Dinnerbone (Talk/Cont) 19:56, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Notes/References

I'm hardly "advocating" a unified notes/references section. I'm just pointing out what I perceive to be the current community concensus as indicated by usage. Mike Dillon 23:28, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I guess I did say that I lean toward unified notes/references, but that's mainly a concession to lower the bar of entry. Mike Dillon 23:31, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I'd suggest disussing the reversion with the editor who made the changes (User:Xaxafrad). I don't want to facilitate an edit war. Mike Dillon 23:36, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Nobody said making an encyclopedia was easy ;) Mike Dillon 23:38, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Theater

Please read Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Wikipedia:Verifiability to see the sort of changes that should be made to articles and the type of sources that all significant additions should cite. I'm sure sorry, but the information you added regarding your family using the building must come from verifiable source material. No undocumented claims are allowed. I'm sure you understand this effort to maintain verifiable information for the encyclopedia. The notation regarding the theater is well documented, and unless you can source your family history the claim will remain deleted. Remember, no original research. Again, sorry and thanks. Feel free to contact me.--al95521 13:13, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I restored the link to the theater without the (erroneous) claim. I'm trying to unorphan the Minor theater article Patenaude 02:04, 12 April 2007 (UTC)


Test Norcalal 21:37, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Eureka Article

I wasn't necessarily referring to you on the talk page. Most of my editing time is spent dealing with blatant vandalism and adverts or confirmed cut-and-paste copyright violations, for which I have zero tolerance. Next is the rambling and editorialising, usually in the wrong article or section. If that's coming from an anon IP or some other hit-and-run, I remove it. If someone is clearly engaged in something productive, I often forget to take it further than a citation needed warning. (Consider the Humboldt County Avenue of the Giants trees thing you just brought back to my attention.)

So knock yourself out editing the NW California articles. I was just trying to keep the "bad guys" on notice.

But since we're treading so lightly, how would you feel about restoring the demo section back to my 6 July edit ([[1]])? I believe that giving the U.S. Census information prominence keeps the article more in line with other California city articles.

I got some information about the Ranally city rating system that I referenced on the talk page. Eureka is part of the Eureka-Arcata RMA. Here's what they have to say about RMA's:

Ranally Metro Areas (RMA's) represent Rand-McNally's definition of the developed areas around each important city. RMA's include one or more central cities, satellite communities, and suburbs but are not restricted to county boundaries as are MSA's. For this reason, RMA's provide a more precise [unintelligible] at areas of concentrated population. For compilation of detailed statistics" or making general "comparisons, the MSA's are sometimes more convenient."

The area of the Eureka central city is 10 mi², the area of the Arcata central city is 8 mi², and the area of the RMA is 211 mi². Thi is a slightly more refined definition of the region than Census' micro area, but still includes a substantial hinterland. My own experience having worked for three of the city's largest employers (CR, ECS, and St. Joe's) confirms that people commute from much further than makes any sense for a decent job.

I thought there was some reference to the larger trade area, but except for what is implied by the city rating (3-C), there was nothing. Basically the '3' puts Eureka on a par with much larger cities, but the 'C' indicates a rather small trading area. Much of this information is proprietary and there is no push to include it in city articles. You could find out precisely what the region includes, but it's gonna cost ya. (You could also find out Census' precise core urban area for free, but it couldn't possibly be worth the frustration!)

Good eye on the "Greater Eureka" ref from eurekawebs. I had browsed similar pages and it didn't even register. The time I spent in the area made this pretty obvious, but I hadn't expected it outside of CoC-speak (Chamber of Commerce-speak, or brochure-ese). But don't go around telling people in Cutten that they live in Eureka! That's almost as bad as telling people anywhere in California or Oregon that their town is turning into Los Angeles.

This is why I like the hardcore GIS and database geeks—can you imagine disputes when all these places are just numbers (FIPS or CBSA codes &c.)? "No! block 02-326 is part of group 3196, you group 3197 imperialist!" and so forth. But now I'm the one that's rambling.

.s

X ile 13:28, 13 July 2007 (UTC) - Talk


[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Eureka Inn 7.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Eureka Inn 7.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 16:07, 12 September 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Eureka Inn 5.jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Eureka Inn 5.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI 17:04, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Removal of the Eureka, California Amtrak Stop ARTICLE

Hi. I deleted Eureka - Bus Stop, CA (EKA) because it had been proposed for deletion as a "nn bus station" by User:Secret and no-one had objected during the five-day waiting period. Bus stations do not normally merit Wikipedia articles. However, looking more carefully at the original article I see it might additionally be a train station, which would in most cases be a suitable subject for an article. If it is indeed a train station, I'd be willing to restore the article, but I would suggest that you made this clearer in the article. Cheers, Espresso Addict (talk) 23:34, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Indian Island (Humboldt Bay)

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Indian Island (Humboldt Bay), and it appears to be very similar to another wikipedia page: Gunther Island. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case.

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 12:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, going forward please use the move function on wikipedia instead of doing a cut-and-paste move. This would preserve the page history as required by GFDL. --WinHunter (talk) 13:56, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] US 101

Generally, not all intersections are included along non-freeway portions; as a local, do you feel that the Jacobs Avenue intersection is major? I fixed the city limits. --NE2 16:21, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Humboldt State University - Intercollegiate Athletics

Thank you very much for cleaning up Humboldt State University#Intercollegiate Athletics! It sounds much more appropriate and less like an ad/press release now. -Clueless (talk) 17:02, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] North Coast, California AKA Behind the Redwood Curtain

I am very new at this. I don't know all the rules and protocols, but what I was attempting seemed very straightforward. I had noticed several links in different articles to the term "Redwood Curtain" (such as Humboldt County, California), but there existed no actual "Redwood Curtain" article. I did not think the term "Redwood Curtain" merited its own article, so I created a redirect under Redwood Curtain to the North Coast, California, and then felt a one-sentence explanation of the relationship between the term "Redwood Curtain" and the region in question would be appropriate, so I made the edit which you undid. The best reference / attribution I could find was at the UrbanDictionary website: [[2]]. I'm sorry if my edit was hamhanded or inappropriate - we all must begin somewhere, right? I appreciate any feedback or suggestions. Caveatdumptruck (talk) 07:14, 19 April 2008 (UTC)