Talk:San Bernardino Valley

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(null header)[edit]

Victorville is NOT in the San Bernardino Valley (it is in the desert on the north side of the San Gabriel Mtns)-- It should be removed from the list of cities in the SBV. 12.191.244.12 (talk) 05:08, 4 July 2008 (UTC)--[reply]

Reorganization project by Wikiproject Inland Empire[edit]

Please help with the Reorganization of this article brought to you by Wikiproject Inland Empire in an effort to help articles relating to the Inland Empire Metropolitan Area. House1090 (talk) 20:46, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

House, I've decided to come here before going to WP:AN with links to [1] and [2] and [3] requesting you be topic banned from all Southern California articles. The information you are presenting is already in the IE and SB articles; what you are doing is recreating those articles here. This article was previously focused on the natural geology of the San Bernardino Valley, and should be improved in that direction, rather than replicating information that is already presented more appropriately elsewhere. I'm going to give you a day to think about it before engaging further. Ameriquedialectics 22:55, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I hope you know I am creating it so that this article follows along with the other valley SoCal articles like San Gabriel Valley, and San Fernando Valley. I will be writing in some stuff my self but I really think the article look way more impresive than it did before I started to reorganize it. Also I dont like that improving or trying to improve an article is a reason to block a user. Also thanks to WikiProject IE alot of articles have improved and will continue to do so. I will be expanding this article and many more including Morongo Basin, Victor Valley and plan to start the Perris Valley Article, once I get enough refrences and sources. I would like to thank you for consulting me first before going to WP:AN, but next time we need to talk before starting to revert each other. PS:I will be more carefull of what I'm doing. House1090 (talk) 23:09, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What you are doing is recreating another IE article. But I will let it go for now. Ameriquedialectics 23:15, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
My goal was to expand the SBV article, just like I will be doing to Victor Valley and Morongo Basin. But next time if you dont agree with me please let me know, and that way we can come to a resonable compromise. House1090 (talk) 23:21, 5 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Is there an outline or a particular FA you are using for a reference on the structure of this and the other articles? -Optigan13 (talk) 01:18, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is similar to that of the one that User:Mission.Jim created here, but not exactly. I believe that the outline was created from diffrent FA articles. House1090 (talk) 03:30, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greater San Bernardino Area?[edit]

I removed "sometimes referred to as the Greater San Bernardino Area" from the lead after a google search showed no sources. User:House1090 reverted my edit, claiming that "If you lived in the area you woud [sic] know why that was there" in his edit summary. Rather than engage in an edit war, I'd like to lay out my reasoning here: I found no sources for the alternate name, and claiming that I am not a local does not invalidate that. --TorriTorri(Talk to me!) 00:07, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I should of put it here first, any way you should add the citation needed tag rather than taking off unsourced stuff. I am searching for that and I cant find anything soon I will take it off. Sorry for just reverting you, I apologize. House1090 (talk) 00:26, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Found and added a reference. House1090 (talk) 00:31, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think many people outside of SB would consider Apartments.com a reliable reference. Ameriquedialectics 21:57, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Here's two other references:
  1. [4]
  2. [5]

There is also a lot of other commercial areas that use Greater San Bernardino Area, well the point was to show that Greater San Bernardino is used and I dont just make stuff up. House1090 (talk) 03:13, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would recommend changing the reference then. Ameriquedialectics 17:26, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I will add the two stated above. House1090 (talk) 18:26, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just an observation, but the sources that use the term "greater San Bernardino area" do not capitalize greater or area, and they do not appear to clearly associate the greater San Bernardino area with the San Bernardino Valley. My interpretation, for what it is worth, is "greater San Bernardino area" is not a name, but a general term. The "greater (insert city name here) area" could be used to refer to any city and its surrounding area. I wouldn't be inclined to claim that the "greater San Bernardino area" is a synonymous term for the San Bernardino Valley, particularly using the references provided. MissionInn.Jim (talk) 01:55, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yea but usualy Greater SB is used to refer to the SB Valley, as most businesses like Redlands Honda do. I can provide a link for this too. But please note that the article reads "...sometimes rfered to as the Greater San Bernardino Area". House1090 (talk) 02:01, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The references currently in the article do not indicate that the Valley itself is also known as the "greater SB area", they only mention the phrase. Adding onto what Jim said, I would argue that the Valley and "greater area" are not interchangeable terms in that the Valley is a specific geological formation, while the "greater area" is a vague catch-all term that could even include some of the mountain communities. Perhaps. as a compromise, a "greater SB area" article could be created that would focus more on demographics, etc? --TorriTorri(Talk to me!) 09:00, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, please not another SB area article. The term is obviously ill-defined. You would only succeed in giving House another object to fight over. Based on MissionInn.Jim's and your concerns, I'd support removing the term and eliminating the associated cruft from this article entirely. Ameriquedialectics 01:18, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
There's a source the name is used thats what the sentance states. Done. Amerique you always fight with me you see the source accept it and move on! Other times your right, theres no source but now there is. House1090 (talk) 01:36, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No House, as others have stated, there was nothing in the references to indicate that "Greater San Bernardino area" they referred to was the SB Valley. I cleaned the article up again so that this article can focus on the Valley's natural geography and the other articles can focus on the urban areas. Ameriquedialectics 02:03, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No one told you to do that. Mabey you could of added another [unreliable source?]. How do you know I am not looking for more references? I found those two for now, I'm still looking. And what does Greater San Bernardino have to do with natural geography? Last, what other articles? there is not another article about the Greater SB Area or the SB Valley. House1090 (talk) 02:32, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The sources provided do not support the claim. WP:V states that "Any material lacking a reliable source may be removed". Please do not re-add your claim, User:House1090, unless you also provide a reliable source. --TorriTorri(Talk to me!) 03:36, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I readded it because the sentence where the reference is it states that it may be known or also known as the Greater San Bernardino area. It does not state that its officialy known as the Greater San Bernardino area. I have another source that lists some of the cities and I will put it here. House1090 (talk) 05:25, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Heres another source:

  • [6] (look at the bottom of the page its even highighted). What more do you want? House1090 (talk) 05:29, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
House. I think you are missing the point. Although the references do mention the greater San Bernardino area, none of them associate the greater San Bernardino area with the San Bernardino Valley. The latest reference (above) includes Riverside and Moreno Valley in the greater San Bernardino area, neither of which are in the San Bernardino valley. Instead of helping your argument, it seems to prove the point that the "greater San Bernardino area" is not synonymous with the "San Bernardino Valley". MissionInn.Jim (talk) 05:12, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I would not support the idea of creating a separate article named "Greater San Bernardino Area". Every city in the united states would end up having a similar article. MissionInn.Jim (talk) 05:12, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yea, I know I am going to see if I find another better source, if not I wont add it. House1090 (talk) 05:52, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Census map[edit]

The US census uses it as seen on the US census picture. Case closed. House1090 (talk) 00:50, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at File:Inland empire within southern california.png I'm seeing that as a WP:CIRCULAR source, with the image being created by a wikipedia user based on census data, but no actual link to the census data provided. So we can't check whether the census used that, or the map creator did. Were you able to locate any other new sources for the Greater San Bernardino = San Bernardino Valley? -Optigan13 (talk) 06:50, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I looked around the Census site for that data a while back, but could not find it. A lot of their files require specialized GIS software to open, however. It might be there, but who knows. Ameriquedialectics 22:49, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That map does not match Census Bureau data (I tried census tracts, urbanized areas, census county divisions, and places). The closest match is place boundaries but then the map omits some. At best, the map is a selective subset of the place data. Now the divisions appear to be arbitrary as well. My best guess is that area 1 is the set of places encompassing the part of the Los Angeles urbanized area in San Bernardino County; area 2 is the set of places encompassing the part of the Riverside-San Bernardino urbanized area in San Bernardino County; area 3 is the set of places encompassing the Victorville-Hesperia-Apple Valley urbanized area; area 4 is the set of places encompassing the part of the Riverside-San Bernardino urbanized area in Riverside County; and area 5 is the set of places encompassing the Temecula-Murietta and Hemet urbanized areas. Again, this way of subdividing these areas, as well as their names, is nowhere in the Census Bureau data. --Polaron | Talk 23:29, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Parts of the SB Valley can be called Greater San Bernardino, as businesses tend to use that name. Also a region can be named "Greater 'city name' Area because the area revolves around that city in this case San Bernardino. Type Greater San Bernardino on google and you will get a lot of hits. PS: San Diego kept it w/ no source not even a company, but SBV cant? House1090 (talk) 23:33, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This article appears to be primarily about a geographic feature (the physical valley). You're probably better off explaining the urban and socio-economic aspects of what "Greater San Bernardino" is in the Inland Empire article, which is primarily about the urban region. --Polaron | Talk 23:36, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, the IE has two central cities. We could still say it is often or informally referred to as the Greater SB area as I had put it. House1090 (talk) 23:46, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sure but metro area articles with two cities do discuss both cities in the article. See Minneapolis-St. Paul or Dallas-Fort Worth, for example. There's nothing preventing you from discussing "Greater San Bernardino" in the metro area article that includes San Bernardino. If that's too awkward, there's always the option of discussing the immediate environs of the city in the city article itself. --Polaron | Talk 00:02, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Concur with Polaron. Also, the extent of valley, so far as the Santa Ana Mountains form its southern boundary, naturally includes a sizable portion of Riverside County. I don't think even House would argue that "Greater San Bernardino" includes Riverside, therefore the application of the term is inappropriate for this article. Ameriquedialectics 00:45, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is where we begin to realize that not everything has sources, and we need to rely on locals. Any ways I think this discussion is now closed (Unless we find a source). House1090 (talk) 01:11, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Focus of article[edit]

This article originally focused on the geography of the San Bernardino Valley. Starting with this edit, it appears House felt the article should be more like the San Gabriel Valley and San Fernando Valley articles and include other material such as sports, commerce, etc. I don't think there is a right or wrong, but a focus does need to be established. IMO, the information about local attractions and sports is just duplicating material already found at San Bernardino, Inland Empire (California), and other articles. I think having a more detailed focus on just the environment (before people arrived, so to speak) is an article that is needed, not just recycling content from other articles. I think once we agree on the talk page on the focus, the reverting will hopefully discontinue. Thanks, Alanraywiki (talk) 15:52, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for broaching the topic Alanray. Of course, I totally agree. I should have made a proposal on talk before making such a drastic edit. Oh well, you can't make an omelet without breaking eggs, as they say.
I think a single section on the urban environment would be ok if it provided a concise summary of some of the information that appears now, but not all of it. Ameriquedialectics 18:21, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I concur with a single section summary on the urban environment. Alanraywiki (talk) 18:44, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I completely agree with Alanray and Amerique's suggestions. Perhaps this discussion should be taken to WP:CAL, seeing as it applies to other California articles? --TorriTorri(Talk to me!) 22:50, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So how will this work out? How will it turn out? House1090 (talk) 23:00, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Personally, I would like to see the article closer to something like Central Valley (California). It would mainly deal with the natural environment and, as noted, one short summary about the urban environment. Alanraywiki (talk) 23:14, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That would look nice, if I would of seen that a while back I would of let it happen. I would like to know if I can make the urban page? I will use my sandbox, and when I feel its ready I will let you guys know and there you can fix wrong, what not appropriate, so we dont have another large arrgument/possible edit war. House1090 (talk) 01:13, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I recommend one section, four sentences. That will take some tight editing, but let's see what you come up with. I like the idea of using your sandbox to work on it. Alanraywiki (talk) 01:32, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okay thanks, but what would go there? What should I include? Cities and suburbs would go under geography correct? House1090 (talk) 01:37, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Again, this is just my opinion. I think one of those sentences would list, in prose, a few of the major cities. A laundry list of cities and suburbs is not necessary. For example, something like "The San Bernardino Valley today is populated by cities such as San Bernardino, Ontario, and Redlands." These would be wikilinked of course, and you can replace a couple of the cities, but that is the idea. Thanks, Alanraywiki (talk) 01:42, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, but I do think that the section will be more like 10 sentences? I will see how I fit universities, some only major attractions, not the mountains, major roads and the two airports. I will post a lik to my sandbox as soon as its ready. House1090 (talk) 01:54, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think TorriTorri's suggestion of having this moderated by WP:Cal would be a good idea. As to the natural environment, most of the more recent academic references I've looked at only discuss the SB Valley in passing; sources that mention it are mainly focused on the San Andreas Fault system or the watershed of the Santa Ana River. However, there is enough information between those two for an article.
Here is an interesting public domain reference that may be used to provide some information on the early development of the urban environment and makes extensive use of the term "San Bernardino Valley": [7] (This could also support a lot of content across the IE-related articles.) Ameriquedialectics 02:45, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I might need some time to finish it okay. House1090 (talk) 00:13, 4 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tags[edit]

A COI and a "too few opinions" tag has been added to the article, but no discussion was added to the talk page to explain the concerns. Some explanation of the concerns should take place or the tags should go. Alanraywiki (talk) 01:33, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Boundaries of the valley[edit]

I've placed a {{Request quotation}} template on the page because, as it stands, the boundaries described would seem to include a large amount of Riverside County as well. The 1922 book describes very different boundaries for the valley. --TorriTorri(talk/contribs) 21:49, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on San Bernardino Valley. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:52, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on San Bernardino Valley. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:51, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on San Bernardino Valley. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:24, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:San_Bernardino_Valley&oldid=1205175339"