This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Energy Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. California Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Environment: Sustainability Low‑importance This environment-related article is part of the WikiProject Environment to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the environment. The aim is to write neutral and well-referenced articles on environment-related topics, as well as to ensure that environment articles are properly categorized. Read Wikipedia:Contributing FAQ and leave any messages at the project talk page.EnvironmentWikipedia:WikiProject EnvironmentTemplate:WikiProject EnvironmentEnvironment articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Sustainability task force. Physics: Fluid Dynamics Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Physics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Physics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhysicsWikipedia:WikiProject PhysicsTemplate:WikiProject Physicsphysics articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Fluid Dynamics Taskforce. Mills Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mills, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mills on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MillsWikipedia:WikiProject MillsTemplate:WikiProject MillsMills articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Added a note on a fourth major wind area. The info about the three areas listed was from 2004. Since then, the Shiloh Wind Power Plant in Solano County has come on line. That's probably it for good large-scale onshore wind sites in California. -- John Nagle ( talk) 19:26, 18 April 2010 (UTC) reply

This needs to be pointed out. It is NOT true that 5% of power generated in California is wind generated. California only reaches 5% if you include power purchased from other states. You can look at the EIA Electric Power Monthly and you will see that instate Wind generation is not 5% of total instate generation. The reports that 5% of power in california comes from wind ALL eventually source to the reference I've cited, which states that that includes power purchased from other states (in the fine print). This caveat needs to be included here to avoid being POV. -- Aflafla1 ( talk) 04:46, 13 February 2012 (UTC) reply

From the wiki style manual

Lists, tables, and other material that is already in summary form may not be appropriate for reducing or summarizing further by the summary style method. If there is no "natural" way to split or reduce a long list or table, it may be best to leave it intact, and a decision made to either keep it embedded in the main article or split it off into a stand-alone page. Regardless, a list or table should be kept as short as is feasible for its purpose and scope. Too much statistical data is against policy.

I can't see a real purpose for including data that's fairly old. The charts give an idea of how the production varies in a year. More than two or three year's worth don't really provide more insight. -- 74.38.72.190 ( talk) 21:15, 24 March 2016 (UTC) reply

Trends are important, and cannot be derived from just 3 years of data. I'm sorry but this is not a large data table by Wikipedia's standards in any way. GliderMaven ( talk) 21:42, 24 March 2016 (UTC)Too much statistical data is against policy. reply

Trends of seasonal variation can be seen in the two or three years of montly data. Overall time trend information is still in the chart of energy growth.

No. GliderMaven ( talk) 15:32, 25 March 2016 (UTC) reply