From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bakersfield?

Most people would agree that Bakersfield is in Central California as it is in the Central Valley. Most people associate them selfs with Central California not SoCal. Any thoughts? thanks, House1090 ( talk) 05:38, 4 May 2013 (UTC) reply

Even by wikipedia's own definition. [1] House1090 ( talk) 05:43, 4 May 2013 (UTC) reply
  • [Responding not just to the 2013 comment above but also recent edits which were reverted and told to go to the talk page.] Defining a boundary of Southern California is a challenge for Wikipedia due to lack of quotable references - it boils down to the division of north and south. The only region of California which is mutually exclusive with Southern California is Northern California. Central Coast and Central Valley can and do overlap with both. Think about it... if you want to exclude any of the southernmost 10 counties from Southern California, then you're proposing they're in Northern California. That's why it doesn't work. Southern California is not synonymous with the Los Angeles Basin, even though LA's dominance in SoCal often leads to generally referring to it as SoCal. But that doesn't work any more than saying the San Francisco Bay Area is the full extent of Northern California - you can drive north for 6 hours and still be in the state. Those are references to the economic centers but not the boundaries. Ikluft ( talk) 22:50, 5 September 2019 (UTC) reply
  • So what if there is overlap? That is a silly reason to not use better-known distinctions. A lot of things over lap and they still have their own page (see North and Central America). It does make sense because that's how Californians see it. Our place is not to create new distinctions but to state fact. The fact is these distinctions are not used by common people outside of this page. These ridiculously generous distinctions of northern and southern California are completely useless to anyone interacting in the Central Valley, Central Coast, and southern California and as such is a disservice to readers. Glegleglo ( talk) 20:08, 4 May 2020 (UTC) reply

IP edits – Northern boundary

Multiple editors, including myself as well as @ Binksternet, Pf1127, and Fettlemap: have undone 98.207.182.194 ( talk · contribs)'s additions for being, in short, unjustified by what the sources say. A region like this one that is not a political division will almost always have ambiguous boundaries and there is no reason to expect otherwise. I suggest the IP stop editing this article until they resolve these concerns here with us.-- Jasper Deng (talk) 00:37, 2 April 2020 (UTC) reply

As it stands, the article describes how there are several definitions of the northern boundary of SoCal, but Santa Barbara is inside all of them, so our disruptive friend doesn't have any support from the sources we have been citing. He will have to go out and find some sources of his own that say Santa Barbara is not Southern California. Until then, he's just a nuisance. Binksternet ( talk) 01:02, 2 April 2020 (UTC) reply

I agree. To say that Santa Barbara is not in Southern California, or that the southern Central Coast is in Northern California, is absurd. Thank you to everyone who’s done their best to remedy the situation. Pf1127 ( talk) 01:06, 2 April 2020 (UTC) reply

(edit conflict) Yes, the IP is wrong about Santa Barbara. BUT... I’d be curious to know the source of our information that Southern California comprises ten counties. It’s baldly asserted as fact, but based on what? IMO San Luis Obispo County and Kern County are highly questionable as part of “Southern California”. The sentence in the lead is unsourced, and the section “Northern boundary of southern California” is mostly unsourced - three of the six paragraphs are completely unsourced, as are the maps. The LA Times [1] is cited as listing eight counties, including Santa Barbara but not San Luis or Kern. I think if you ask any Californian what part of the state San Luis and Kern are in, they would say “Central California”. I propose dropping San Luis and Kern from the definition, with the LA Times as the source. Anybody care to show me the evidence that San Luis and Kern counties are generally regarded as part of Southern California? -- MelanieN ( talk) 01:11, 2 April 2020 (UTC) reply
Pinging @ Zzyzx11: who has defended the 10-county definition before. I personally consider SLO to be more central California than southern (the IP is also wrong, by the way, that we need to divide the state into just two pieces). This unsourced "definition" has deep roots, and seems to have derived from the efforts of multiple editors, see this edit too, and this one. The IP is partly right in that Kern County is not generally considered a part of socal.-- Jasper Deng (talk) 01:43, 2 April 2020 (UTC) reply
That edit I made dates back to 2014, and I do not remember exactly what I was thinking. I assume it was because I was restoring what appears to have been selective removals: the version before that edit, including its lead, "northern boundary", "Geography", "economy", "transportation", and other sections, still listed a lot of content in Kern and SLO.
Looks like at one point in 2015 there actually were in fact citations in the lead for both "[it] generally comprises California's southernmost 10 counties" and "traditionally described as 'eight counties'". [2] After a bunch of copyedits, the gist of that "eight counties" and "extensive 10-county definition" content was removed from the lead by another IP in 2019. [3]
This debate seems to have been ongoing forever, so I do not really care at this point what it should be, just as long as it is determined by reliable sources and not just original research. Should we restore that 10-county-definition content that was removed in 2019, or find better sources that that ACSC report, or just stick with the eight counties? Zzyzx11 ( talk) 03:25, 2 April 2020 (UTC) reply

I thought I would take a look at how other articles handle this question. Here's what I found:

  • The lead sentence of the San Luis Obispo County, California article says “San Luis Obispo County, officially the County of San Luis Obispo, is a county in  Central California.” No sources are cited.
  • The Kern County, California article does not mention southern California. It says the county “spans the southern end of the Central Valley”. It is not classified as northern, central, or southern California in the lead section or the Geography section.
  • Central California says it is a subregion of Northern California and does not include either of these counties. No sources are cited for that definition or for the entire Geography section.

Conclusion: Apparently the northern California and southern California articles were written from the point of view of dividing the state into two, rather than from common usage or reliable sources. The SLO County and Kern County articles do not buy into that approach. (I can understand that; I have family roots in SLO County, and if you try to tell anyone from SLO that they live in southern California, their response will range from “bite your tongue!” to something unprintable.)

I would like to change this article's definition to one based on common usage and the LA Times definition of southern California - which at this point is the only Reliable Source we have that addresses the question. But if that is too drastic a change to longstanding practice - if we decide to keep the ten counties - then we should change our lead sentence from “generally comprises the southernmost counties of California” to “comprises the southern half of the state of California”. There is no way that “southernmost” applies to San Luis Opispo or Kern counties. -- MelanieN ( talk) 16:01, 2 April 2020 (UTC) reply


Sources

  1. ^ Bernstein, Leilah (December 31, 1999). "L.A. Then AND NOW". Los Angeles Times. Archived from the original on February 27, 2017. Retrieved February 27, 2017.
I think we need to cast our net wider to get the proper balance. A great many definitions have been put forward over time, and we shouldn't latch on to one of them unless it really stands out. A look through older book sources shows some interesting definitions, including 11 counties with Tulare in a March 1920 issue of Spanish California and the Gold Rush, 10 counties in a 1940 committee meeting of the United States National Resources Planning Board's California Central Valley-Central Coast Drainage Basin Committee, "the southern third" of California "from Santa Barbara County southward" as defined by a 1942 article in Farmer's Bulletin, 8 historically bigger counties prior to WWI as defined by a 1955 report by the Southern California Planning Institute ("Before World War I, southern California was commonly defined as the area south of the Tehachapi Range, and included eight counties"), and 14 counties in a 1964 report by the Lower Colorado River Land Use Advisory Committee. Let's tabulate a bunch of sources to get a sense of balance. Binksternet ( talk) 17:14, 2 April 2020 (UTC) reply
The tripartite division of California seems most common these days, implying the more conservative definitions of "southern" California are the most common, but few folks say "I'm from central California".-- Jasper Deng (talk) 19:14, 2 April 2020 (UTC) reply
Tripartite is rising up, eh? I haven't seen it running so strongly as you have. Otherwise, San Francisco would be referring to itself as Central California, which isn't happening. The old North–South division is far from dead. Binksternet ( talk) 21:09, 2 April 2020 (UTC) reply

Yes, but a clean-cut North-South division is also far from accurate. These regions of the state are not mutually exclusive with Central California, so the best way to resolve the issue might be to acknowledge that some counties act as a buffer or overlay area between regions, such as Kern and San Luis Obispo for Southern/Central California.

There are similar issues with the Central California and Northern California articles as well (i.e. Central California is erroneously described as a subregion of Northern California in the lede), so I would definitely recommend investigating these further and coming up with some sort of resolution for all three portions of the state. Pf1127 ( talk) 07:47, 8 April 2020 (UTC) reply

Sounds like you're intent on a three-way division of the state despite just about nobody in California referring to their area as Central California. I don't expect to have "resolution" here; the best we can do is tell the reader what are the most common definitions of Southern California. Binksternet ( talk) 08:01, 8 April 2020 (UTC) reply
I agree: "tell the reader what are the most common definitions of Southern California." County lines do not follow the geographic features that are "placemaking' to us. This is very similar to defining neighborhoods in Los Angeles. The city can't make large community groups as the micro-local voices will not be represented to their councilmember but the larger "neighborhood" is often mentioned in the media and by the general public. The coastal cities in Ventura County feel close to Santa Barbara as part of the Central Coast. Simi Valley and Thousand Oaks relate closely to the San Fernando Valley and might go to the Malibu beaches rather than those in Ventura County. There will always be ambiguity in defining areas that do not have legal boundaries as cities and counties do. Fettlemap ( talk) 18:53, 8 April 2020 (UTC) reply

Capitalization redux

MOS:COMPASS lists "Southern California" as an example of a title that should be capitalized, but it looks like a local consensus was former here in 2010 to lowercase it. Since the MOS overrides the local consensus, I believe we should restore the capitalization. {{u| Sdkb}}  talk 20:43, 9 November 2020 (UTC) reply

The dividing line near the 36th parallel

The longstanding definition of Southern California is the lower third of the state, cut in a straight line at 35°45' (just north of Mission San Miguel Arcángel) as proposed in 1859, [4] or following the northern borders of the modern counties San Luis Obispo, Kern and San Bernardino, which are more or less drawn at 35°45' degrees latitude, not exactly a straight line. This definition of Southern California has been in the public mind for more than 160 years, and is still the main definition. It was codified in 1859 by the Pico Act approved by 75% of California voters and signed by Governor Weller, to create the new territory of "Colorado". See Territory of Colorado (California).

Today, this definition of Southern California holds ten counties. Back in 1872, the same area contained six, then seven, then eight counties by 1889. [5] In 1897 the same area held nine counties. Finally, in 1907, San Diego County was divided to create the tenth county: Imperial.

Certainly, there are other viewpoints about the definition of Southern California. But each one of them is of minor importance compared to the widely held ten-county definition. We can and should tell the reader about them, but not at the expense of proclaiming the ten-county definition as foremost by far.

A recent effort by Uni3993 sought to widen the scope of the definition to make Southern California a much smaller place, equivalent to the western urbanized areas of the "South Coast", leaving out the sparsely populated eastern desert areas and northward from the Santa Barbara coast. Uni3993 found website sourcing at TripSavvy, a travel site, and Oakdome, a self-published home-schooling website. These are nowhere near authoritative enough to establish the notional "South Coast" definition as equally important.

Many sources establish Southern California as being the lower third portion of the state, cut west-to-east in a nearly straight line. Post-1907 sources may also talk about a ten-county definition of Southern California.

  • In 1944, the United States Forest Service acknowledged the ten-county definition: [6] "Taking Southern California as a whole, the ten counties usually considered as comprising..."
  • The 1952 University of California Press textbook State and Local Government in California talks about the definition of Southern California on page 37, saying that it was made up of the "ten counties below the straight line formed by the northern boundaries of San Luis Obispo, Kern and San Bernardino counties..."

We should strive to represent the literature in balance, giving much greater weight to the mainstream viewpoint. Binksternet ( talk) 23:15, 23 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Binksternet Ok but whats wrong with mentioning, as a side note in the lead section and a new separate definitions section, that popularly or colloquially especially by people living in SoCal, it also carries a South Coast definition, again colloquially. Which is already included in a sentence in the geography section of this article. That very urban agglomeration has to have a name right by people living there and it does see here too Megaregions_of_the_United_States#Statistics_(RPA_reckoning) and also my other sources? Uni3993 ( talk) 00:39, 24 November 2022 (UTC) reply
Your sourcing is terrible. Your sources say nothing at all about how Californians view their state. If you ever found suitable sources, the mention would be appropriate for the body but not the lead section. Binksternet ( talk) 03:03, 24 November 2022 (UTC) reply
Binksternet It's just very hard to find any other source about this specific information. OK then tell me this, dont you think there would a be a term that would refer to the huge urban agglomeration, I know the article mentions South Coast, but how many times have you heard people talking about the South Coast? Uni3993 ( talk) 03:28, 24 November 2022 (UTC) reply
Binksternet Ok I gave up, you win let the article be wrong. I just added sources to AN ALREADY EXISTING SENTENCE and also moved the regions in the section Geography to the section Regions which obviously makes much more sense. Uni3993 ( talk) 03:39, 24 November 2022 (UTC) reply
So now you've violated WP:3RR to get your nonsense put into the page, which means you may be blocked. Any time you find yourself in the situation where it is "very hard to find any other source about this specific information" then you should just stop trying to stick it in. Wikipedia is supposed represent the published literature in summary form; people usually read the literature and then add something to Wikipedia. You, however, came up with a personal observation and then you tried and failed to find adequate sourcing to support it. THAT'S NOT HOW THIS WORKS. Binksternet ( talk) 03:44, 24 November 2022 (UTC) reply
Binksternet I didn't revert first of all this change is a completely different change, and I wholeheartedly believe that my sources are reliable. If you want we can find someone from Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard to confirm? Do you want that? Uni3993 ( talk) 04:03, 24 November 2022 (UTC) reply

New reference found for the narrower definition

Binksternet Since you wrongly only consider official sources as accurate, do you think this reference is enough to at least add my definition with the word sometimes?

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title43-section390h-4&num=0&edition=prelim

Uni3993 ( talk) 10:47, 15 December 2022 (UTC) reply

"Wrongly" LOL. I consider reliable sources reliable, not strictly "official" ones.
This government page in your link doesn't define anything as "South Coast". It only contains the term "south coast" without capitalization, and without a definition. This page says that the California Department of Water Resources is the body that defines something, but it is unclear whether the CDWR defines "Southern California", the "Colorado River hydrologic" region, or the "south coast" region. To find out, you would have to search for the CDWR definitions laid out clearly in some other publication. Binksternet ( talk) 14:37, 15 December 2022 (UTC) reply

Literature section being removed

Why was that literature section removed due to lack of notability? I do not agree with this change and it looks okay to stay in article. Would you like to give me further details about why was literature section omitted after editing? I definitely want to listen to that editors. Thank you for reading this. And do not forget the links cited in this source. —-: ThatCaliforniaLover2019 ( talk) 19:22, 15 May 2023 (UTC) reply

Add Map of Southern California with Original Indian Tribes (Indigenous)

It would be useful to add a map of what Southern California looked like when the Indian tribes (Indigenous Americans) lived there. Such as this map: The Gabrielino Indians at the time of the Portola Expedition. It was designed by historian Allen Welts and copywritten in 1962 by the Southwest Museum. Another example: this map shows ancient tribal routes and communities. Here's a map of the Tongva villages in the Los Angeles Basin. - Artanisen ( talk) 09:21, 3 March 2024 (UTC) reply

Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:Southern_California&oldid=1211585625"