California: Inland Empire Project‑class | ||||||||||
|
Welcome to the WIkiproject Inland Empire talk Page! House1090 ( talk) 01:05, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
This project might work better as a taskforce of Wikipedia:WikiProject California. A parameter can be added to Template:WikiProject California to mark articles within its scope. If you need help with this, please let me know. — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 07:34, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
The reason I dont want to join SoCal is because the IE needs individual help. The IE does not take alot of credit, its the 3rd largest metro in Cal. and 14th in the U.S. The IE is a very large region having the largest county in the nation (lower 48). So if we have people consentrating in the IE alone it would be better, just like WP Los Angeles. But I will give it some thought! House1090 ( talk) 04:38, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Well it's been almost a month now, and I've merged all the other California sub-project into task forces. Before I have a bot to replace the template usages would you consider either switching to a task force or working via the Southern California task force? - Optigan13 ( talk) 21:27, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
:I am setting up task force Los Angeles to cover all of Los Angeles and Orange Counties. Why not merge this with the Los Angeles task force and turn this into a new Los Angeles wikiproject?
WhisperToMe (
talk) 07:19, 27 September 2009 (UTC) - NVM - This covers the counties adjacent to Orange and LA counties.
WhisperToMe (
talk) 07:24, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
We've waited too long. This needs to be merged with WP:CAL like everything else Purplebackpack89 ( talk) 16:25, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
I spent some time this weekend reviewing the Riverside, California page and many related articles. Regarding House's question about what it needs, my opinion is more than anything the information needs to be better organized. Second, it needs to show more focus on the things that Riverside is most noted for, and less focus on listing a lot of facts. I'm not sure where you draw the line between important information, and unimportant facts. I will try to put together a plan to get it more organized. I'll be using other cities, such as San Francisco, New York and LA as models. It might take me a while. MissionInn.Jim ( talk) 04:40, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
I went ahead and reworded the opening of the Riverside disambiguation page, and placed Riverside, California at the top. I also placed an explanation on the discussion page. It will be interesting to see if anyone responds. MissionInn.Jim ( talk) 03:11, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
i can help with this whether it remains a wp or gets converted to a tf at some point. so far, i'm interested in the sbv article and getting it better organized, currently needs a definite reorganization and better structuring. also (and i guess this might be a better discussion for the sbv talk page, not here), what exactly are considered the bounds of the valley? that dictates quite a lot of what would be included and excluded from that article. Snoopyloopy ( talk) 22:47, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
i figure we can use this area to discuss any items in the "image requests" section and also inform each other when one is done. like the one for kont terminal. i see one in the infobox, so do we want another pic of the terminal that's more head-on or what? Snoopyloopy ( talk) 15:27, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
It's been three months. The project is a little too small to be its own project, and it only has four members. Larger California-related projects have already been merged. I suggested a merge here and also on the big Cali. Needs to be done Purplebackpack89 ( talk) 15:40, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
<<<a comment from the WT:CAL>>> As an afterthought, because the Inland Empire is not as major of a region as the other parts of California, I feel that it makes sense to make the Inland Empire project a task force of WP California. If regions of California were to have their own projects, it would first be Los Angeles, and then SFBA. To raise awareness of the latter I am posting the San Francisco portal (which indirectly leads to the task force) in several prominent articles. WhisperToMe ( talk) 20:36, 2 December 2009 (UTC) <<<end comment>>>
While it is admirable that there are people who are wishing to focus on improvement of articles in the "Inland Empire", the project falls within the scope of a much larger project, and other projects similar to this one have been made task forces, and subordinate to the larger task force. That doesn't mean that members of this project cannot continue to work on their area of interest within this project as a task force. -- RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 02:21, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
I guess we could move it to a task force as long as it doesn't mess up our goal, which is to improve IE articles...will we be able to keep our user box? House1090 ( talk) 03:08, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
I've begun the merge. House1090 in response to your question about Userboxes, yes the userbox is being kept, but I've moved it to
Wikipedia:WikiProject California/Userbox/Inland Empire, and I've modified the boxes wording and category. Also take a look at the sandboxed project template at the top of this page and make sure it is ok. Once implemented the calls will be {{
WikiProject California|class=foo|importance=blah|inland-empire=yes|inland-empire-importance=High}}
. If that's ok I'll have the template updated and we can proceed with the replacements. I'll post more information as I go through with other parts of the conversion. -
Optigan13 (
talk) 04:56, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Would it be possible to add the San Jacinto Valley to the template, I know it is a small valley but is still part of the ie. Let me know. I hope I can be of use to this project! Jstroudr 09:37, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
When I add the WikiProject California template, should I add both the SoCal and IE task forces or just the IE one? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Torritorri ( talk • contribs) 03:40, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Task Force members: Please review the discussion here and add your thoughts on the following two questions. Even if you don't want to read the whole discussion, your response to the following questions would be helpful.
Thank you. MissionInn.Jim ( talk) 18:46, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
It was suggested previously that if we are going to have an Inland Empire task force, that we work together to improve articles and pages related to the Inland Empire. I am proposing that the task force focus on the following during March and April of 2010. The main reason for doing this is to make sure we have a way of easily finding all IE related articles, and to ensure that all IE related articles are represented in at least one category related to the IE.
Proposal: Categorize all IE-related articles by city:
Optionally, we could also:
Taking them in order of how they are listed in the Municipalities and communities of Riverside County, California template, or the comparable San Bernardino County template, I plan to start with the following cities. If you would like to participate, please indicate which cities you would like to work on by adding them to the list below. If you finish the city or cities you are working on, then feel free to do the next on the list.
Riverside County
San Bernardino County
I am interested in your opinion regarding this proposal, but if you would like to discuss this proposal, please start a new section for that discussion. That will allow us to keep this section for the actual project coordination. MissionInn.Jim ( talk) 02:41, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
So do you want us to name all the city categories we are working on here, as you have done above? House1090 ( talk) 03:03, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
Should articles about cities be in both their city categories and the "cities in X county" categories? For example, San Bernardino, California is in both Category:San Bernardino, California and Category:Cities in San Bernardino County, California, even though the first category is a subcategory if the second. I looked for an applicable policy/guideline on this, but could not find one. -- TorriTorri( Talk to me!) 18:56, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Metrolink (Southern California) is being reviewed for Good Article status and only requires a few tweaks to pass. Please check out the review here and improve the article if possible. Thanks! Butros (talk) 11:23, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
I noticed by chance that people are having fun with your Hesperia page. fyi 76.247.165.226 ( talk) 16:11, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Feel free to participate in this discussion. -- TorriTorri( talk/ contribs) 04:36, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Is there an administrator available to protect the Coachella entry? An IP user has added extraneous material. I un-did the entry, but it was re-entered. Thanks.--S. Rich 15:40, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.
We would like to ask you to review the Inland Empire articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.
We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!
For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 23:10, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
With the recent incorporations of Eastvale and Jurupa Valley, it seems that area needs some reworking/sponsorship. A lot or merging will need to be done to combine the previously unincorporated areas of Mira Loma, Pedley, Rubidoux, Glen Avon, and Sunnyslope into the new Jurupa Valley page. I would love to help out in the consolidation/refinement, but i'm a wiki-noob, and could use the support of a group like this task force in getting the format up to snuff. CraziFuzzy ( talk) 17:27, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
A discussion of interest to WikiProject California and the Inland Empire task force on merging the Los Angeles metropolitan area and Inland Empire (California) articles into the Greater Los Angeles Area article is going on at Talk:Greater Los Angeles Area#Merge Los Angeles metropolitan area and Inland Empire (California) into this article?. 08OceanBeachS.D. 03:10, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
TF members may want to comment on the AFD for Ronald O. Loveridge. – S. Rich ( talk) 19:40, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
https://wikiconference.org/wiki/Submissions
--
RightCowLeftCoast (
talk) 00:42, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Meetup/San Diego/April 2018 . RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 18:47, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at meta:Talk:San Diego Wikimedians User Group#Wikimedia movement strategy conversation . RightCowLeftCoast ( Moo) 23:53, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.
We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma ( talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
Members of this project might be interested in knowing there is a discussion regarding the Tahquitz (disambiguation) page. The discussion is at Talk:Tahquitz (disambiguation). OvertAnalyzer ( talk) 16:24, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
California: Inland Empire Project‑class | ||||||||||
|
Welcome to the WIkiproject Inland Empire talk Page! House1090 ( talk) 01:05, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
This project might work better as a taskforce of Wikipedia:WikiProject California. A parameter can be added to Template:WikiProject California to mark articles within its scope. If you need help with this, please let me know. — Martin ( MSGJ · talk) 07:34, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
The reason I dont want to join SoCal is because the IE needs individual help. The IE does not take alot of credit, its the 3rd largest metro in Cal. and 14th in the U.S. The IE is a very large region having the largest county in the nation (lower 48). So if we have people consentrating in the IE alone it would be better, just like WP Los Angeles. But I will give it some thought! House1090 ( talk) 04:38, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Well it's been almost a month now, and I've merged all the other California sub-project into task forces. Before I have a bot to replace the template usages would you consider either switching to a task force or working via the Southern California task force? - Optigan13 ( talk) 21:27, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
:I am setting up task force Los Angeles to cover all of Los Angeles and Orange Counties. Why not merge this with the Los Angeles task force and turn this into a new Los Angeles wikiproject?
WhisperToMe (
talk) 07:19, 27 September 2009 (UTC) - NVM - This covers the counties adjacent to Orange and LA counties.
WhisperToMe (
talk) 07:24, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
We've waited too long. This needs to be merged with WP:CAL like everything else Purplebackpack89 ( talk) 16:25, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
I spent some time this weekend reviewing the Riverside, California page and many related articles. Regarding House's question about what it needs, my opinion is more than anything the information needs to be better organized. Second, it needs to show more focus on the things that Riverside is most noted for, and less focus on listing a lot of facts. I'm not sure where you draw the line between important information, and unimportant facts. I will try to put together a plan to get it more organized. I'll be using other cities, such as San Francisco, New York and LA as models. It might take me a while. MissionInn.Jim ( talk) 04:40, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
I went ahead and reworded the opening of the Riverside disambiguation page, and placed Riverside, California at the top. I also placed an explanation on the discussion page. It will be interesting to see if anyone responds. MissionInn.Jim ( talk) 03:11, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
i can help with this whether it remains a wp or gets converted to a tf at some point. so far, i'm interested in the sbv article and getting it better organized, currently needs a definite reorganization and better structuring. also (and i guess this might be a better discussion for the sbv talk page, not here), what exactly are considered the bounds of the valley? that dictates quite a lot of what would be included and excluded from that article. Snoopyloopy ( talk) 22:47, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
i figure we can use this area to discuss any items in the "image requests" section and also inform each other when one is done. like the one for kont terminal. i see one in the infobox, so do we want another pic of the terminal that's more head-on or what? Snoopyloopy ( talk) 15:27, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
It's been three months. The project is a little too small to be its own project, and it only has four members. Larger California-related projects have already been merged. I suggested a merge here and also on the big Cali. Needs to be done Purplebackpack89 ( talk) 15:40, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
<<<a comment from the WT:CAL>>> As an afterthought, because the Inland Empire is not as major of a region as the other parts of California, I feel that it makes sense to make the Inland Empire project a task force of WP California. If regions of California were to have their own projects, it would first be Los Angeles, and then SFBA. To raise awareness of the latter I am posting the San Francisco portal (which indirectly leads to the task force) in several prominent articles. WhisperToMe ( talk) 20:36, 2 December 2009 (UTC) <<<end comment>>>
While it is admirable that there are people who are wishing to focus on improvement of articles in the "Inland Empire", the project falls within the scope of a much larger project, and other projects similar to this one have been made task forces, and subordinate to the larger task force. That doesn't mean that members of this project cannot continue to work on their area of interest within this project as a task force. -- RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 02:21, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
I guess we could move it to a task force as long as it doesn't mess up our goal, which is to improve IE articles...will we be able to keep our user box? House1090 ( talk) 03:08, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
I've begun the merge. House1090 in response to your question about Userboxes, yes the userbox is being kept, but I've moved it to
Wikipedia:WikiProject California/Userbox/Inland Empire, and I've modified the boxes wording and category. Also take a look at the sandboxed project template at the top of this page and make sure it is ok. Once implemented the calls will be {{
WikiProject California|class=foo|importance=blah|inland-empire=yes|inland-empire-importance=High}}
. If that's ok I'll have the template updated and we can proceed with the replacements. I'll post more information as I go through with other parts of the conversion. -
Optigan13 (
talk) 04:56, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Would it be possible to add the San Jacinto Valley to the template, I know it is a small valley but is still part of the ie. Let me know. I hope I can be of use to this project! Jstroudr 09:37, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
When I add the WikiProject California template, should I add both the SoCal and IE task forces or just the IE one? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Torritorri ( talk • contribs) 03:40, 9 January 2010 (UTC)
Task Force members: Please review the discussion here and add your thoughts on the following two questions. Even if you don't want to read the whole discussion, your response to the following questions would be helpful.
Thank you. MissionInn.Jim ( talk) 18:46, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
It was suggested previously that if we are going to have an Inland Empire task force, that we work together to improve articles and pages related to the Inland Empire. I am proposing that the task force focus on the following during March and April of 2010. The main reason for doing this is to make sure we have a way of easily finding all IE related articles, and to ensure that all IE related articles are represented in at least one category related to the IE.
Proposal: Categorize all IE-related articles by city:
Optionally, we could also:
Taking them in order of how they are listed in the Municipalities and communities of Riverside County, California template, or the comparable San Bernardino County template, I plan to start with the following cities. If you would like to participate, please indicate which cities you would like to work on by adding them to the list below. If you finish the city or cities you are working on, then feel free to do the next on the list.
Riverside County
San Bernardino County
I am interested in your opinion regarding this proposal, but if you would like to discuss this proposal, please start a new section for that discussion. That will allow us to keep this section for the actual project coordination. MissionInn.Jim ( talk) 02:41, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
So do you want us to name all the city categories we are working on here, as you have done above? House1090 ( talk) 03:03, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
Should articles about cities be in both their city categories and the "cities in X county" categories? For example, San Bernardino, California is in both Category:San Bernardino, California and Category:Cities in San Bernardino County, California, even though the first category is a subcategory if the second. I looked for an applicable policy/guideline on this, but could not find one. -- TorriTorri( Talk to me!) 18:56, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
Metrolink (Southern California) is being reviewed for Good Article status and only requires a few tweaks to pass. Please check out the review here and improve the article if possible. Thanks! Butros (talk) 11:23, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
I noticed by chance that people are having fun with your Hesperia page. fyi 76.247.165.226 ( talk) 16:11, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
Feel free to participate in this discussion. -- TorriTorri( talk/ contribs) 04:36, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
Is there an administrator available to protect the Coachella entry? An IP user has added extraneous material. I un-did the entry, but it was re-entered. Thanks.--S. Rich 15:40, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Version 0.8 is a collection of Wikipedia articles selected by the Wikipedia 1.0 team for offline release on USB key, DVD and mobile phone. Articles were selected based on their assessed importance and quality, then article versions (revisionIDs) were chosen for trustworthiness (freedom from vandalism) using an adaptation of the WikiTrust algorithm.
We would like to ask you to review the Inland Empire articles and revisionIDs we have chosen. Selected articles are marked with a diamond symbol (♦) to the right of each article, and this symbol links to the selected version of each article. If you believe we have included or excluded articles inappropriately, please contact us at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8 with the details. You may wish to look at your WikiProject's articles with cleanup tags and try to improve any that need work; if you do, please give us the new revisionID at Wikipedia talk:Version 0.8. We would like to complete this consultation period by midnight UTC on Monday, October 11th.
We have greatly streamlined the process since the Version 0.7 release, so we aim to have the collection ready for distribution by the end of October, 2010. As a result, we are planning to distribute the collection much more widely, while continuing to work with groups such as One Laptop per Child and Wikipedia for Schools to extend the reach of Wikipedia worldwide. Please help us, with your WikiProject's feedback!
For the Wikipedia 1.0 editorial team, SelectionBot 23:10, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
With the recent incorporations of Eastvale and Jurupa Valley, it seems that area needs some reworking/sponsorship. A lot or merging will need to be done to combine the previously unincorporated areas of Mira Loma, Pedley, Rubidoux, Glen Avon, and Sunnyslope into the new Jurupa Valley page. I would love to help out in the consolidation/refinement, but i'm a wiki-noob, and could use the support of a group like this task force in getting the format up to snuff. CraziFuzzy ( talk) 17:27, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
A discussion of interest to WikiProject California and the Inland Empire task force on merging the Los Angeles metropolitan area and Inland Empire (California) articles into the Greater Los Angeles Area article is going on at Talk:Greater Los Angeles Area#Merge Los Angeles metropolitan area and Inland Empire (California) into this article?. 08OceanBeachS.D. 03:10, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
TF members may want to comment on the AFD for Ronald O. Loveridge. – S. Rich ( talk) 19:40, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
https://wikiconference.org/wiki/Submissions
--
RightCowLeftCoast (
talk) 00:42, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Meetup/San Diego/April 2018 . RightCowLeftCoast ( talk) 18:47, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at meta:Talk:San Diego Wikimedians User Group#Wikimedia movement strategy conversation . RightCowLeftCoast ( Moo) 23:53, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.
We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma ( talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
Members of this project might be interested in knowing there is a discussion regarding the Tahquitz (disambiguation) page. The discussion is at Talk:Tahquitz (disambiguation). OvertAnalyzer ( talk) 16:24, 25 November 2020 (UTC)