Talk:California's 1st congressional district

creation date
I'm puzzled by the assertion that the district was created in 1865, given that California achieved statehood in 1849. Were there no congressional districts for 16 years? What about Cornelius Cole, whose bio says he represented the district from March 4, 1863 to March 4, 1865? —Stepheng3 (talk) 19:29, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Resolved at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject U.S. Congress. —Stepheng3 (talk) 21:08, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

redistricting has not been accounted for
the map and the information do not match. i suspect due to redistricting that occured in california a few years ago. clausen 20 years etc etc, happened in the former first district, which went down the coast - del norte, humboldt, mendo trinity? sonoma? etc. ---64.194.66.86 (talk) 00:53, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on California's 1st congressional district. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090203072316/http://sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2002_general/congress.pdf to http://sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2002_general/congress.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081127061822/http://sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2006_general/congress.pdf to http://sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2006_general/congress.pdf
 * Added tag to http://sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2008_general/congress.pdf

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:03, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 10 one external links on California's 1st congressional district. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110520021824/http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2000_general/ssov/cong_dis.pdf to http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2000_general/ssov/cong_dis.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110520021829/http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2000_general/ssov/us_senate_cong_dis.pdf to http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2000_general/ssov/us_senate_cong_dis.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101111170552/http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2002_general/ssov/gov_cong.pdf to http://sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2002_general/ssov/gov_cong.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110520020512/http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2003_special/ssov/recall_ques_cd.pdf to http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2003_special/ssov/recall_ques_cd.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110520020528/http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2003_special/ssov/gov_cd.pdf to http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2003_special/ssov/gov_cd.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110520020308/http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2004_general/ssov/pres_general_ssov_congressional.pdf to http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2004_general/ssov/pres_general_ssov_congressional.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110810211138/http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2004_general/ssov/us_senate_ssov_congressional.pdf to http://sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2004_general/ssov/us_senate_ssov_congressional.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110810210917/http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2006_general/ssov/us_sen_by_cd.pdf to http://sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2006_general/ssov/us_sen_by_cd.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120816114936/http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2008_general/ssov/6-pres-by-congress.pdf to http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2008_general/ssov/6-pres-by-congress.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080821045347/http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2004_general/us%20reps%20all%20formatted.pdf to http://sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2004_general/us%20reps%20all%20formatted.pdf

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:16, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on California's 1st congressional district. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110520072347/http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2010-general/ssov/ssov-complete.pdf to http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2010-general/ssov/ssov-complete.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110520072347/http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2010-general/ssov/ssov-complete.pdf to http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/sov/2010-general/ssov/ssov-complete.pdf

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:51, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Election Results
For simplicity, the second set of numbers for the election results should be eliminated. Except for a recall (yes-no vote) the numbers do not add-up to 100%. It appears that whatever information that the second set of numbers was meant to convey, has been deleted from the data set that was presented. So, for simplicity, retain the winner of the elections, and (presumably) the actual percentage of the vote that the winning candidate received; allow the intelligent reader to do the unnecessary math, (100% - x% = y%). Eliminate the unexplained numbers that are seen to follow, instead of trying to explain them, (since they are not important enough to have been explained in the first place).