Talk:Silicon Valley/Archive 3

Untitled
Please follow Wikipedia's standards for US city naming. Also, I question that some of these cities, notably Fremont, Union City and Newark, are on the "southern San Francisco Peninsula". -- Zoe — Preceding undated comment added 03:27, 3 October 2002 (UTC)

I'm not completely sure and I would hate to be wrong, but it seems a lot of the content on this page has been plagiarised from the book "Silicon Boys", by David A Kaplan. Correct me if I am wrong though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.26.123.63 (talk) 06:51, 17 December 2003 (UTC)


 * If you look at the "Page history" you can see that it's been built up gradually, except for the history which was added by Maury Markowitz, who really does write that well, check out his other material. Stan 14:07, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I just added a small section listing the three universities physically located in Silicon Valley. It seemed appropriate given that the local institutions of higher education also made contributions alongside the local companies. -- Tobycat — Preceding undated comment added 01:13, 18 January 2004 (UTC)

Image
Obviously there are enough images here, but you can find some excellent spots for a wide view of the valley by going up Page Mill Road to the south of 280. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.231.182.24 (talk) 03:14, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

sillicon valley all question's here
why is it called sillicon valley — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.131.0.219 (talk) 16:34, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Demographics
Take a look at this paragraph from the Demographics section:


 * As of 2014, many Silicon Valley companies consist primarily of men, and Non-Hispanic Whites. Higher education, particularly from many top American universities, is a common factor among Silicon Valley employees. In 2014, Facebook found that 77% of its senior level employees were men and 74% were White. Overall, 41% of its employees were Asian, whilst 2% of employees were Black. Similarly, at Google, 17% of employees are women, and 72% of leadership positions are held by Whites (Hispanic and Non-Hispanic). These findings brought criticism by some for their low employment of female and Black employees, and the overrepresentation of Asian employees when compared to national demographics, where Asians make up only 5% of the national population.

Notice anything odd? All races are capitalized. I don't regularly edit articles about race or race issues here on the 'pedia, but is this common and supported by some standard? I can see capping "Asian" (since Asia is a proper noun), but why "White", "Black" and "Non-Hispanic White"? If someone can please justify this to me, I'd be obliged. Otherwise, I'll consider changing them all to lowercase (except for Asian). Thanks. — Fr&epsilon;ckl&epsilon;fσσt | Talk 14:41, 3 July 2014 (UTC)


 * I just removed the first sentence as its unsourced. The rest is sourced and could likely be presented in a more encyclopedia manner. Statistics seem to be abused fairly often IMO. Currently the paragraphs reads like some sort of "accusation" versus just a plain, balanced reporting of facts. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) 16:26, 19 July 2014 (UTC)


 * My problem with this section is that it's supposed to be on the demographic makeup of the entire valley, but is focused on the workforce of two companies, who between them employ only a small percentage of area residents. 108.254.160.23 (talk) 22:09, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

✅ I agree and have removed the paragraph as being WP:UNDUE since it does not represent the entire region. I have also asked for semi-protection for the article. If vandalism or posting of similar content continues, I'll ask for more stringent protection. --Scalhotrod - Just your average banjo playing, drag racing, cowboy... (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 16:49, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

This has resurfaced again, this time under a section heading of "Gender". It seems that the User is trying to insert material that is blatantly POV. If there are academic backed gender studies about the technology industry, great, but I can't see any more than a basic mention being added in a neutral and non-POV manner. --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 17:43, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Gender
 * The source of the material: "For the most part successful founders of major firms in Silicon Valley have been white men. This phenomenon is exemplified by the career paths of the class of 1994 at Stanford University. In an environment with first-mover advantage, rather than founding start-ups, the talented women in the class of 1994 chose demanding but safe careers such as medicine or law." is a well-researched New York Times article. see "A Brand New World In Which Men Ruled" User:Fred Bauder Talk 19:42, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I'll admit that its a nicely written article from a source that is considered reliable on Wikipedia, but your use of it and how you chose to integrate it into the article, in my opinion, leaves much to be desired. Giving it its own paragraph and section with a prefatory sentence just screams WP:UNDUE to me and brings into the question the intention behind its addition. I'm not against material like this, but it needs to be properly cited with multiple sources, not the occasional random observation that reads more like editorial than analysis or a "story telling". --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 20:07, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
 * There is a book, Silicon Valley, Women, and the California Dream: Gender, Class, and Opportunity in the Twentieth Century ISBN 978-0804747967 User:Fred Bauder Talk 20:21, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
 * This book seems to focus on the agricultural history of the area, however. User:Fred Bauder Talk 20:26, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
 * The information that nearly all major silicon valley firms were founded by men actually doesn't need a source. No scholarly source will unearth the women who founded Apple or Google. User:Fred Bauder Talk 20:21, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

In the absence of good reasons for excluding well-sourced material I have restored it and the material previously deleted. As "Of the 20 companies probed by CNNMoney, 17 successfully petitioned for their data to be excluded from the report. " it is not a valid criticism that only data from two companies is discussed. Facts are not "POV," only how they are set in context could be. If, without removing content, this material could be set forth in a better way, feel free. User:Fred Bauder Talk 23:18, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
 * My reasons are that the content is prejudicial towards an entire region and industry and based upon single point of data, in this case the Stanford class of 1994. If you can justify how this fairly, accurately, and neutrally represents 50-60 years of industrial progress and development in Silicon Valley, then it might be worth a mention, but not its own section. You are presenting opinion as fact. Regardless of how well researched the article is, someone else's WP:SYNTH does not equate to content you can present as factual information here. --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 04:08, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
 * As a major contributor to this article (who happens to have taken most of the pictures), I personally feel that racial and gender bias is a major problem in Silicon Valley, and I vaguely recall that it has been given a far better treatment elsewhere by other journalists and researchers than that New York Times article (which attempts to extrapolate far too much "macrocosm" from a "microcosm" snapshot). But I also concur with User:Scalhotrod that User:Fred Bauder's presentation of the issue is inappropriate and violates WP:NPOV, specifically WP:UNDUE.--Coolcaesar (talk) 07:55, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
 * It should not violate WP:UNDUE as the information does not represent a minority opinion. It is quite clear that men played the major role as innovators in starting up and that firms hire based on talent rather than quotas. This seems a rather productive area. I'll look for better sources though. I think something about real estate prices and their effect on demographics would probably be of value. User:Fred Bauder Talk 11:20, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
 * No valid policy reason has been advanced so far for deletion of this well sourced material. Perhaps other material should be added and the material presented in a better way. User:Fred Bauder Talk 12:33, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Please do not beg the question. It does nothing to persuade or advance your position. Your edits do violate WP:UNDUE (as well as WP:NPOV generally and WP:NOT) in the sense that they are overemphasizing one subtopic relative to others and thus impliedly turning Wikipedia into a soapbox.  If you believe it is possible to include an adequately sourced and balanced presentation of the issue in a way that is proportionate to the scale of the article (including expanding the overall depth of the entire article or branching off a separate article on bias in Silicon Valley), it is your burden to do so. --Coolcaesar (talk) 13:40, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
 * There must be a showing that the information added violates the cited policies. There is none. User:Fred Bauder Talk 20:10, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Actually, an extensive showing has already been made that your edits do violate the cited policies, as several editors have kindly attempted to explain to you at length above. I count at least four lengthy and detailed good faith attempts in the preceding paragraphs.  It is extremely insulting on your part to use the word "none" to describe that when everyone is trying to engage in good faith with you. Why aren't you responding to the points raised above? Is it because you know you have no valid response? Please engage on the issues. Thank you. --Coolcaesar (talk) 07:32, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry you feel that way, but a policy must actually apply for it be a valid reason. Only in extreme instances can well-sourced material be simply deleted from an article. Political correctness is not a reason. However, all's well that ends well; the summary deletion motivated me to do much more research. User:Fred Bauder Talk 13:36, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Silicon Valley is both the tech industry in the area but also the area itself. It is easy to lose that distinction. For example, the section Demographics could include both information about internal demographics in firms and in the area generally. User:Fred Bauder Talk 12:33, 24 December 2014 (UTC)


 * You logic is flawed and short-sighted. Just as Facebook and Google do not represent the Silicon Valley in its entirety, Silicon Vally does not represent the entire tech industry. As many Users have debated on this page previously, there are plenty of other tech centers or regions around the world.


 * I will admit that the term "Silicon Valley" is used in reference to both an anamorphic, non-exact region and as part of worldwide industry. But you are trying to treat the area like its a single city or company with easily definable borders or parameters. --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 18:00, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

It's not so much about the dual meaning as about whether the race and gender demographics data are relevant and appropriate to the article, yes? Here's what added and removed, twice each (here demoted by one heading label to keep it in this section): Dicklyon (talk) 18:43, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Depending on what geographic regions are included in the meaning of the term, the population of Silicon Valley is between 3.5 and 4 million. A 1999 study by AnnaLee Saxenian for the Public Policy Institute of California reported that a third of Silicon Valley scientists and engineers were immigrants and that nearly a quarter of Silicon Valley's high-technology firms since 1980 were run by Chinese (17 percent) or Indian CEOs (7 percent).
 * Demographics

For the most part successful founders of major firms in Silicon Valley were white men. This phenomenon is exemplified by the career paths of the class of 1994 at Stanford University. In an environment with first-mover advantage, rather than founding start-ups, the talented women in the class of 1994 chose demanding but safe careers such as medicine or law.
 * Race and Gender

In 2014, Facebook found that 77% of its senior-level employees were men and 74% were white. Overall, 41% of its employees were of Asian origin, while 2% of employees were black. Similarly, at Google, 17% of employees are women, and 72% of leadership positions are held by whites (Hispanic and Non-Hispanic). These findings brought criticism by some for their low employment of female and black employees, compared to the over-representation of Asian-American employees compared to the national population, where 5% is of Asian descent.

I recommend we discuss this. Dicklyon (talk) 18:33, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Discussion

Here's my opinion: mostly it's good, on topic. The first two sources are specifically about Silicon Valley, and the next two at least mention Silicon Valley. I'd omit the last sentence and last two refs, as those don't mention Silicon Valley. Dicklyon (talk) 20:07, 24 December 2014 (UTC)


 * As and I mentioned above, we are not opposed to the inclusion of information like this. But, how this information is presented and, just as importantly, where its sourced must be thoroughly checked and vetted for consistency in order to prevent WP:OR via loose paraphrasing or even accidental WP:SYNTH. That said, the Public Policy Institute of California source seems worth keeping. Otherwise, so far all that has been presented is a source (which is a bit Op-ed-ish) about a single graduating class at one school and statistics about 2 companies. This is hardly representative of an industry let alone a single region that is just one part of it. --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 20:14, 24 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Dicklyon's suggestions are acceptable. User:Fred Bauder Talk 20:20, 24 December 2014 (UTC)


 * I disagree. They are problematic for the reasons that I keep stating. They are far too limited to represent an entire region or industry. They are perfectly fine for the respective subjects, Facebook and Google, but not enough for this article. Just find better sources and we won't have to debate this issue. --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 21:09, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Obviously, more data would be nice; that's not a reason to not report on what limited data have been released and discussed in secondary sources. If you think the first sentence, For the most part successful founders of major firms in Silicon Valley were white men. is not well supported by the sources, you might modify it, or look for a good source.  Otherwise, the facts are pretty simple, just examples, not pretending to represent a whole region or industry as more than examples. Dicklyon (talk) 00:05, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
 * "limited data" - There lies the problem, without sufficient support someone else can come along and claim WP:FRINGE or that its just a (no pun intended) minority view. Again, Tech isn't alone is how it treats women, lets not present it that way. --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 18:15, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree we should not have our own "presentation", e.g. spinning it as unique to Silicon Valley, or covering all of Silicon Valley, based on synthesis. But we should have no problem stating neutrally what various sources say about Silicon Valley.  Please help get the presentation neutral and balanced, as opposed to just removing the sourced material.  Dicklyon (talk) 18:21, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Right, but comments about a company or two, regardless of how big the company is, do not represent all of "Silicon Valley". The list of notable companies in this article is long, the list of non-notable is even longer. I'm not opposed to extrapolation or interpolation, but it needs to be within WP policy. Even the most logical and common sense statements get challenged if another Editor can't "connect the dots". Furthermore, we have to be careful about how we use "Wikipedia's Voice". If a source states something that is the opinion of its author including a conclusion drawn from collected data, then we have to state that explicitly as well. --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 18:45, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Here's a good source for the opening sentence: Mother Jones, "Silicon Valley's Awful Race and Gender Problem in 3 Mind-Blowing Charts"—By Andy Kroll| Thu Jun. 6, 2013.  Dicklyon (talk) 00:16, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
 * It's a hard question to answer or research but with respect to "89 percent of California companies that got crucial seed funding were founded by men" what was going on? User:Fred Bauder Talk 09:20, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

In general The New York Times coverage of the subject is conventional along the line of not enough women, which is the content of their editorials on the subject, "You have to do better" User:Fred Bauder Talk 00:00, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
 * New York Time's coverage
 * "Out of the Loop in Silicon Valley"


 * Yes, that looks like a good source worth including. Dicklyon (talk) 00:08, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Hey, now we're getting somewhere, please keep going. By the way, we'll need general hiring statistics and information as well, not just sources that highlight the lopsided-ness of the Silicon Valley or Tech. Unfortunately, plenty of industries are this way... Automotive, Construction, Professional sports... We need to keep things balanced and avoid WP:UNDUE. --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 07:47, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

National Center for Women & Information Technology (NCWIT): User:Fred Bauder Talk 09:26, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
 * National Center for Women & Information Technology
 * "NCWIT Scorecard: A Report on the Status of Women in Information Technology"
 * Full report
 * "In the News: NCWIT Headlines (November 2014)"
 * Women in computing User:Fred Bauder Talk 10:46, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

Free/Libre and Open Source Software: Policy Support User:Fred Bauder Talk 12:17, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
 * FLOSSPOLS
 * "Gender: Integrated Report of Findings" "the social dynamics within F/LOSS that keep it so thoroughly male dominated, at the same time as the majority of participants express a preference for a more balanced community."
 * I looked through this and although it looks like a good source, its really not appropriate for this article or the subject you're working to source. Using its analysis concerning Open Source software and then applying it to a region or industry is treading on WP:SYNTH. --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 18:08, 25 December 2014 (UTC)


 * On the other hand, a lot of what you are locating would be perfect for the Women in computing article. --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 18:10, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
 * After we finish up here I may copy any material we discover here to that talk page. I don't want to start two conversations. Women in computing has a defined point of view and some of the material we are discussing does not conform to that point of view, or, to put it better, are not relevant. User:Fred Bauder Talk 09:07, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Removal of Sexism section
A single article (from Newsweek or otherwise) is completely insufficient to post a biased and POV section regarding an entire industry or region. Sexism is not unique to the Tech industry nor Silicon Valley. Include the content in an article about Sexism, but not here, it's WP:UNDUE. --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 05:15, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

I created the "sexism" subsection (after "Diversity") saying it was only the beginning of the section. Here are just some other sources that may be incorporated: --Lightbreather (talk) 07:43, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
 * From 2006 UC Davis study:
 * Santa Clara County, which includes the Silicon Valley, has the largest number of companies (103) and one of the lowest percentages of women directors (6.5%).
 * Silicon Valley (Santa Clara County) has only 8.8% women executive officers.
 * (Item 4: The sexism is real...)
 * (Item 4: The sexism is real...)
 * (Item 4: The sexism is real...)
 * (Item 4: The sexism is real...)
 * (Item 4: The sexism is real...)
 * (Item 4: The sexism is real...)
 * (Item 4: The sexism is real...)
 * (Item 4: The sexism is real...)
 * (Item 4: The sexism is real...)
 * (Item 4: The sexism is real...)
 * (Item 4: The sexism is real...)
 * (Item 4: The sexism is real...)
 * (Item 4: The sexism is real...)

Media Coverage of UC Davis studies Lightbreather (talk) 16:58, 25 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Then why can't you learn to use the Sandbox and develop your writing (including drafts, editing, and refinement) without affecting mainspace? Why are you forcing your thought process and its pace on the general public? Regardless of your wall of sources above, your "sexism" section is still based on one Newsweek article and what a couple people think of the cover graphic. --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 11:55, March 25, 2015 (UTC)


 * Newsweek makes its own editorial decisions, and that one was both controversial and widely noticed. Others have certainly shared your reaction to that story. If you believe other sources should be used for balance, please add them. In my experience, the Silicon Valley has some workplace cultures, social norms, gender and race relations that are rather different from other cities and industries in the US. I did spot at least one article attempting to explain regional differences for women in tech, if you care to dig it out. It has also crossed my mind that there may be many people on this site who are afraid to say anything critical about the Silicon Valley's culture because they're scared they won't find work if they do. Regarding the question on "why can't you do a better job here," it would be perfectly valid for a paid writer on deadline, but does not apply to a volunteer contributor with other obligations. We either all pitch in our little bits as volunteers and cooperate, or we fail to cooperate, and the result turns out accordingly. --Djembayz (talk) 23:24, 30 March 2015 (UTC)


 * , thank you for your comments. I agree that the Newsweek article has received attention, but as I've stated before I do not agree that its enough to base an entire section about "Sexism" in Silicon Valley. As for the culture, I used to work in Tech, but no longer do. That said, we are still limited to and by available sources. I made these same contentions several months ago when User started to expand the Demographics section. Initially the section included statistics on two companies out of hundreds (maybe thousands) of tech companies in the region. If that is not clearly WP:UNDUE, then I don't understand the concept. For the record, I'm not trying to say that gender bias or sexism does not exist in Silicon Valley. I know it exists, I've witnessed it first hand and been subjected to it, but anything written about it needs to factually represent the entire region and not be based on anecdotal story or an Op-Ed source. --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 16:39, 31 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Defined as suboptimal, or below average gender-related behavior, all venues are "sexist." Criteria change as consciousness develops, or deteriorates. Thus any place may have a section "Sexism." As with all aspects of reality notability depends on publication in reliable sources. In the case of Silicon Vally, a great deal of attention, partially due to Pao v. Kleiner Perkins, has resulted in many published sources. Therefore a section drawing material from those sources in properly included. User:Fred Bauder Talk 14:11, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Home truth
"it’s easier to speak out when it comes to some bigots in flyover country" User:Fred Bauder Talk 08:41, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Request
, I have traveled to another state to help my friend in the hospital... and today I broke my elbow! Request that we leave "Gender and race inequality" and "Sexism" alone, please. The material is NOT undue per my edit summaries. I am pinging on this since it's something she has worked on recently, too. Lightbreather (talk) 22:06, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Noted. Keep in mind that Silicon Valley, compared to many venues, such as steel mills, the merchant marine, lumberjacking, solitary confinement. and many other manly pursuits is not very sexist. The Newsweek article describes Silicon Valley as "a culture that has been described as savagely misogynistic." Compared to places that ARE misogynistic, that is a gross exaggeration. However, the situation must be measured against contemporary ideals of non-discrimination, not against sordid realities. User:Fred Bauder Talk 14:15, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
 * It's our job to include what is reported in reliable sources. These problems (gender and race) are widely reported in WP:V, WP:RS. Nonetheless, I am away from home with a broken arm so I'll have to wait a few days to restore some balance. Lightbreather (talk) 18:41, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Lightbreather, please give it a rest. Nothing MUST be included in this article just because you say so. As for your pleas and excuses, you were essentially laughed off WP:ANI recently for the same assertions. Add your extensive material to the Sexism in the technology industry article, but please stop mucking up this one. --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 20:48, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry if it seems from my comments that I don't agree with Lightbreather. If there is extensive published material regarding a matter, such as "sexism in Silicon Valley" it must be included in the article, not because she says so but because of Neutral point of view. There is a plethora of material. As to a sight delay in fixing the article, I've been working on this article for about 6 months after the material I added was deleted, but I can't say I've given up on it. In fact the Newsweek article links to that New York Times article. Explaining how gender discrimination in Silicon Valley has its roots in clubs and activities, including risk taking, which boys and men participate in does not justify permanent exclusion of women from the extremely profitable opportunities which exist there now in what is an established industry. User:Fred Bauder Talk 21:47, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Scalhotrod, I asked for help with one article (this one) and one editor (you), and an admin responded: "provide a list of all articles you would prefer to be full-protected until you are ready to edit at your normal level again." He also said "it might be simpler to just full-protect the entire encyclopedia until you're ready to return." I thought that was uncalled for under the circumstances, but decided to let it go as an episode of an admin not at the top of their game - kinda like me right now...

You've told and others that you'd like to be an admin someday. Do you think the way this admin responded to my request was appropriate? Perhaps you'd like to twist my right forearm, poke me in the eye, and throw a stink bomb in my best friend's hospital room while you're at it?
 * , you have deleted the preceding paragraph three times now, without my permission, which is against WP:TPOC - as I've told you twice now. Also, you never answered the question: Do you think the way my request was handled was appropriate? If you want to ignore the paragraph, so be it, but please stop deleting it. You've written far, far more personal comments about me. If you think what I wrote was a personal attack, instead of a reminder that my best friend is in the hospital (three weeks now) and that I have a broken arm, by all means, start the appropriate DR process. I am still out of town for a few days, but I'll respond as well as I'm able. Lightbreather (talk) 04:02, 5 April 2015 (UTC)
 * You are correct, of course, but your comment IS rather nasty, We have enough trouble as it is getting anyone to run the gauntlet. I'm pretty sure you would both make fine administrators. User:Fred Bauder Talk 09:08, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

BTW: I made over 30 improvements to this article's source citations: replaced bare URLs, broken URLS, missing authors, dates, titles, publishers. I made THIS article (not mine, or yours, or anyone else's) BETTER. Because we're having a content dispute in one section is no reason to generalize my contributions here as "mucking." Lightbreather (talk) 22:34, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Lead paragraph and definition/description of place
A minor edit was just recently made, although with what I believe is a major misrepresentation. An unknown editor just changed the first sentence with the explanation that "it's world's first science park so the introductory sentence should define it as a science park)."

Myself, I live in San Jose, which is the self-proclaimed "Capital of Silicon Valley," since it's the largest city here at this designation.

First of all, the term "science park" is not used as frequently here anymore, since the area's architecture has changed over the years, as well as the overall infrastructure. For example, Adobe Systems is not in a science park, but instead located at downtown San Jose in what's a complex of three towers. The surrounding buildings to Adobe Systems are not necessarily technology related business.

There's still companies located in what we years ago more typically called a "campus" type environment, versus what's sometimes called a "science park". But again, that's not always the norm these days. Many technology companies have since adapted to high-rise towers in urban settings, if not that they have multiple type facilities in the same region (here in the Silicon Valley/San Francisco Bay Area), if not around the world.

Early Silicon Valley typically used the term "campus," which is probably still the preferred term here, although no longer the generalization. At that, a campus or science park is considered a large parcel of land, if not something similar to an economic zone within a city. So, anyone that comprehends the size of Silicon Valley would know this is not a proper description or representation of Silicon Valley… it's much larger than that.

Also, to say that Silicon Valley is "the world's first science park," is very debatable. In my own opinion, don't think that's necessarily true, even if Silicon Valley is relatively exceptional in world history and culture.

Today's Silicon Valley is primarily based in Santa Clara County, although it stretches further through the region, south from Santa Cruz County (its northern tip), all the way north to parts of San Mateo and Alameda Counties (their southern parts). Indeed, some companies like Twitter and AirBnB are based in San Francisco, with some presence in the South Bay and Silicon Valley. Common knowledge seems to prevail that the epicenter of Silicon Valley is primarily between the cities of San Jose and Palo Alto (both in Santa Clara County).

So, in short, Silicon Valley is not a science park, but what's a rather expansive region in northern California. It is comprised of several cities, counties and, indeed, "campuses."

I would like to turn revert this article immediately, because I think this is a very misleading mistake. Ca.papavero (talk) 04:31, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Concur in full with your reversion of that edit. It appears to either be vandalism or at best, a good faith edit by someone who has never actually visited Silicon Valley (or for that matter, the United States). --Coolcaesar (talk) 06:12, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

A list
What do we have here: Working through this list might be productive for a variety of reasons. By starting with the articles on each woman in Silicon Valley Business Journal and looking for other sources, some good articles might result about both the woman and the organizations they are at. User:Fred Bauder Talk 09:40, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) Michelle L. Avary of Aeris Communications Avary V.P. Articles for deletion/Aeris Communications, Inc.
 * 2) Karen N. Ballack of Weil, Gotshal & Manges "Weil, Gotshal & Manges' Karen N. Ballack | Women of Influence 2015" Each woman has an article on Silicon Valley Business Journal in this form. User:Fred Bauder Talk 10:06, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
 * 3) Aparna Bawa of Nimble Storage
 * 4) Stefanie Lingle Beasley of Gentry Magazines and SV. Magazine
 * 5) Jeanne Beliveau-Dunn of Cisco Systems
 * 6) Rhonda Berry of Our City Forest Rhonda Berry
 * 7) Tammi Blundo of DTZ CassidyTurley Tammi Blundo Human resources Northern California region
 * 8) Jill Bourne of San Jose Public Library
 * 9) Kelyn Brannon of Arista Networks Kelyn Brannon Arista Announces Departure of CFO Kelyn Brannon Kelyn Brannon, Arista Networks: Public, private business acumen guide IPO Joy Covey, CFO of amazon.com
 * 10) Alice Brooks of Roominate
 * 11) Hema Budaraju of PayPal
 * 12) Dr. Marie-Elaine Burns of San Jose City College
 * 13) Doreen Cadieux of Deloitte Tax
 * 14) Aimee Catalano of Citrix
 * 15) Virginia Chang Kiraly of Menlo Park Fire Protection District
 * 16) Bettina Chen of Roominate
 * 17) Diana Albarrán Chicas of Space Systems Loral
 * 18) Elizabeth Wilems Clark of ockheed Martin
 * 19) Sarah Cooper (executive) of M2Mi
 * 20) Erica G. Courtney of 2020vet
 * 21) Gay J. Crawford of Cancer CAREpoint
 * 22) Mary Culley of Catalyst Strategies
 * 23) Elise Cutini of ilicon Valley Children's Fund
 * 24) Evelyn de Souza of Cisco Systems
 * 25) Edna DeVore of ETI Institute
 * 26) Donna A. Dulo of Unmanned Aircraft Safety & Security Society, Inc.
 * 27) Nuria Fernandez (public transportation) of Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority
 * 28) Heather Gordon Friedland of eBay
 * 29) Claudia Galvan of Society of Women Engineers Santa Clara Valley
 * 30) Dale Green of Sleepy Hollow Management and Investment Company
 * 31) Melissa D. Hardaway of KPMG
 * 32) Nancy Householder Hauge, human resources executive]]
 * 33) Pamela S. Hedblad of Abbott, Stringham & Lynch
 * 34) Kathy L. Hibbs, Esq. of 23andMe Inc.
 * 35) Ari Horie of Women's Startup Lab
 * 36) Sherry Houston of Stroke Awareness Foundation
 * 37) Nadia Hussain (executive) of Polyvore
 * 38) Tricia Iboshi of BlackArrow,Inc.
 * 39) Anabel L. Jensen (executive) of SixSeconds
 * 40) Ann Stimmler Johnson of Interana
 * 41) Deborah Juran of RBC Wealth Management
 * 42) Tina Kapoor of City of San Jose
 * 43) Alice Katwan of Genesys
 * 44) Anjali Kausar of Cupertino Chamber of Commerce
 * 45) Jennifer Kelleher Cloyd of LawFoundation of Silicon Valley
 * 46) Anne Kennedy (real estate) of Keller Williams Peninsula Estates, Keller Williams Coastside
 * 47) Amy Klement of Omidyar Network
 * 48) Kelly Kline of City of Fremont
 * 49) Sarita Kohli of Asian Americans for Community Involvement
 * 50) Ute Krudewagen of DLA Piper
 * 51) Ruma Kumar, M.D. of Kaiser Permanente
 * 52) Renee La Londe of iTalent Corporation
 * 53) Eleanor Lacey of Survey Monkey Inc.
 * 54) Vanessa Larco of Box (company)
 * 55) Lori Laub of Yiftee
 * 56) Denia M. Leal of San Jose Water Company
 * 57) Jacqueline K.S. Lee of Jones Day
 * 58) Carrie LeRoy of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom
 * 59) Chandra Lopez-Brooks of Career Systems Development/Job Corps
 * 60) Kira Makagon of RingCentral
 * 61) Wendy Mattes of Jasper Ridge Farm
 * 62) Sandra Miley of Vocera
 * 63) Marie Millares of San Jose Made (SJMADE)
 * 64) Catharina Y. Min of Reed Smith
 * 65) Beverly Nabors of MRC Smart Technology Solutions
 * 66) Patricia Nakache of Trinity Ventures
 * 67) Lucie Newcomb, M.A. of The NewComm Global Group, Inc.
 * 68) Phuong H Nguyen, M.D. of Santa Clara Valley Medical Center
 * 69) Carmen O'Shea of SAP
 * 70) Joan Opp of Stanford Federal Credit Union
 * 71) Helen Marchese Owen of Marchese Family Properties
 * 72) Phuong Y. Phillips of SolarCity Corporation
 * 73) Elizabeth Pipkin of McManis Faulkner
 * 74) Dr. Yan Qu of ShareThis
 * 75) Erin Rand of Service Rocket
 * 76) Christina Richards of AOptix
 * 77) Melinda Riechert of Morgan Lewis
 * 78) Annie Rogaski of HIPLegal
 * 79) Kerrie Romanow of City of San Jose
 * 80) Jenny Rutherford of Bluescape
 * 81) Sherri R. Sager of Lucile Packard Children's Hospital Stanford
 * 82) Dr. Michelle Sandberg of Santa Clara Valley Medical Center
 * 83) Anita Scott of eBay Inc.
 * 84) Saina S. Shamilov of Fenwick & West LLP
 * 85) Dana Shaw of ICon Professional Services
 * 86) Ilyce Shugall of Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto
 * 87) Catrina Simbe of Robert Half
 * 88) Christina Smedley of PayPal
 * 89) Allison Spinner of Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati
 * 90) Debra Springer-Bowman of TechCU
 * 91) Sash Sunkara of RackWare Inc.
 * 92) Dawn Sweatt of Berliner Cohen
 * 93) Erin Teague of Yahoo
 * 94) Eva Tsai of vArmour
 * 95) Luz L. Urrutia of Oportun, formerly Progreso Financiero
 * 96) Lisa Van Dusen of Silicon Valley Social Venture Fund (SV2)
 * 97) Norma Watenpaugh of Phoenix Consulting Group
 * 98) Elizabeth Xu of BMC
 * 99) Dori L. Yob of Hopkins & Carley
 * 100) AnnMarie Zimmermann of Loaves & Fishes Family Kitchen


 * Thanks for highlighting this list that I suggested. I think it's a start, such as to take a closer look or give better insight.  Of course, going through that can be much work.  But, I think it's worth showing how demographics, as well as how silicon valley's labor culture has slowly evolved.  Especially, if possible, showing which areas of the company have changed more than others, as hypotheized per my previous statement.  Ca.papavero (talk) 18:59, 22 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Haven't found much so far, mostly solid middle management. Joy Covey, however, if sources can be found, could be greatly improved. User:Fred Bauder Talk 22:33, 22 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Yup… I would figure as much. But, I'd keep an eye on many of these people, long term, perhaps.  Meanwhile, I would also look for articles that mention some of my other points.  If possible, show the differences and possible segregation by division of labor.  This would be a more sociological approach, to which I'm more inclined. But, of course, if that's not cited anywhere, we just leave it out for now.  It remains just a theory or generalized assumption for inner thought.  Given popular sentiment, I'd keep it mind. Ca.papavero (talk) 19:28, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
 * There are women's niches, human relations is one, book keeping and secretarial another. A CFO may have begun that way. Bottom line, for our purposes, they should have done something a reliable source finds interesting or important enough to publish about. User:Fred Bauder Talk 19:34, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Diversity section
Hey, I think what you added is a good start. I just did some editing to fairly represent it and to use Wikipedia's voice properly as well as restoring some of the original material which can IMO be presented in proper context. Please continue to dig, we need additional sources as a lot of the material is based on the research of one person, Vivek Wadhwa. Without more, we're going to get challenges based on the material being WP:UNDUE. Your thoughts? --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 22:48, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I think we are finally getting somewhere. I'll return to this later, BatMUD calls. User:Fred Bauder Talk 07:01, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Enjoy! --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 19:40, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

User:Fred Bauder Talk 13:36, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
 * A very good source: http://www.siliconvalley.com/workplace-diversity siliconvalley.com/workplace-diversity]
 * "Quinn: The forces that lie behind the Silicon Valley workforce numbers"


 * If you look at PARC_(company) you will see a significant number of women, however, with the dead weight of Xerox on them their efforts were not monetized. So safe was only that as the safe environment had a superstructure incapable of creative marketing. User:Fred Bauder Talk 12:48, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Macintosh_128K User:Fred Bauder Talk 12:55, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
 * http://archive.org/stream/byte-magazine-1984-02/1984_02_BYTE_09-02_Benchmarks#page/n59/mode/2up User:Fred Bauder Talk 12:59, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

, I see that you first added a "Gender" subsection the the "Demographics" section, which another editor labeled POV and deleted. Then you restored it as "Race and gender," which the same editor deleted again. Then you tried calling it "Diversity issues," The section has since undergone numerous changes and we've ended up with subsections "Gender and race" and "Sexism." Have you tried to add any diversity material lately? How about you ? There doesn't seem to be any material about the homelessness and lack of affordable housing in the region. I thought you had added something about that. Lightbreather (talk) 17:19, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Still my goal, sidetracked, as usual, by numerous other topics. I have Silicon Valley, Women & the California Dream, but haven't worked past the canneries, so to speak, ISBN 978-0804747967 Thanks for reminding me. I'll put my nose on the grindstone… User:Fred Bauder Talk 18:32, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Done. Silicon Valley has two economies, one paying in 6 figures, another, the production side, barely above average. Meanwhile the high end is driving up real estate. User:Fred Bauder Talk 07:09, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Living in Silicon Valley and the Bay Area, I realize that affordable living and displacement has become a very hot issue here in just the last year (if not earlier). If this can be covered in view of discussions about tech industry's greater influence on the area, such as with income, class and other occupational divisions, then so be it.  I think it could possibly be a good contribution to the article.  Take for example, the latest controversy with AirBnB and Twitter, etc.  But, this cannot be overly POV or political, instead staying on the hard critiques and evidence of real estate patterns, cost of living and living wage issues.  As far as going into homelessness, that too is a big issue, but depending how the article goes into that, I'd question its particular relevance.  Homelessness in the area might better be included in articles about cities, or namely the county, such as Santa Clara County, not Silicon Valley.   In my own knowledge and experience, it's the county that deals more with welfare issues, as well as the city that removes or manages homeless people.  But, of course, it's a complicated area, to which I'd think again before going there. After all, there's very affluent areas of greater Silicon Valley, compared to the seemingly more disproportionate share of poverty, low income and homelessness in other cities like San Jose.  Consider that the notable homeless encampment in San Jose, known as "The Jungle," has since been disbanded and removed, although many of these people are now scattered though the urban ecology/creeks and trails, etc.  Ca.papavero (talk) 19:45, 24 April 2015 (UTC)

Sources for diversity


--Lightbreather (talk) 00:27, 13 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Thx! Hey, the Business Insider article links to this report which looks like it might have a few good content snippets. --Scalhotrod (Talk) ☮ღ☺ 18:40, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Many better sources cite that source. User:Fred Bauder Talk 09:21, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

--Lightbreather (talk) 01:25, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Vani Kola
Vani Kola of RightWorks Software is another notably successful woman. Draft:Vani Kola might be a different person. She has website, see http://www.vanikola.com/inthenews/sanjosemercury2.html She returned to India in 2006 to Bangladore. http://www.vanikola.com/inthenews/passagebacktoindia.html User:Fred Bauder Talk 07:19, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
 * "Indian entrepreneurs increasingly go home to join tech-industry explosion" She seem to be in venture capital in Bangladore Kalaari Capital. User:Fred Bauder Talk 07:39, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
 * A recent post she made: [ http://yourstory.com/2015/04/billion-dollar-company-india/ "Building a billion dollar company in India"] User:Fred Bauder Talk 07:43, 25 April 2015 (UTC)