Talk:Yokuts Valley, California

Put Name as a subcategory under History
The "Name" section could be a small subcategory under History, or at least be more concise.

For the new name change, see: https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/interior-department-completes-vote-remove-derogatory-names-five-locations and https://geonarrative.usgs.gov/names_taskforce/ CityLightsAndMaps (talk) 21:51, 13 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Some settlements have a separate heading for their names, but it is usually called "Etymology" instead of "Name". RobotGoggles (talk) 05:02, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Placename change
An IP made his edit reverting the placename throughout to Squaw Valley claiming it "unfair" and not voted on. The policy and practice at Wikipedia is for editors to boldly make changes, especially when one expects them to not be challenged. If such an edit is made the person reverting is expected to start a discussion. The IP has not done that, so I will.

The changing of placename involving "squaw" has been going on for a while and the consensus is already established to change these to match local and federal mandates. I have reverted the IP's edit on that basis. But if the IP wishes a survey (we do not vote, we survey), we can start one here. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 19:52, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Survey

 * I support the recent changes minimizing the use of "Squaw Valley" to a passing mention as a past name. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 19:52, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅ There's some overlap with the considerations in last year's debate about Olympic Valley. This community has a longer association with the name "Squaw Valley" than Olympic Valley, but without the marketing and world renown in sports, making this case more like any other unincorporated community that gets renamed officially at the state and federal level. While WP:COMMONNAME does generally prefer the most common name for a place, which might still be "Squaw Valley" for all I know, it allows us to make an exception when the most common name is "problematic" in some way and fall back to another common name. For an unincorporated community, any state and federal usage should probably weigh heavily in determining whether a name such as "Yokuts Valley" is common enough to serve as an article title. – Minh Nguyễn &#x1f4ac; 19:02, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

I think this change was premature. The official name is till S Valley. I think there's confusion here because the geographic valley has undergone an official name change, but the community has not. Crescent77 (talk) 18:14, 8 February 2023 (UTC)


 * @Crescent77: This is incorrect. The USBGN approved renaming the valley last September ("has voted on the final replacement names") and subsequently approved renaming the unincorporated populated place last month ("has voted on the remaining replacement names"). The two features underwent the renaming process in parallel. The CACGN's submissions to the USBGN regarding the valley and populated place are detailed in the January 2022 and August 2022 quarterly review lists, respectively. Minh Nguyễn &#x1f4ac; 06:55, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Incorrect Minh. As per your source, the name change of the community is not official, the name change of the geographic feature is. Crescent77 (talk) 03:42, 10 February 2023 (UTC)


 * @Crescent77: All I'm saying is that the "unincorporated populated place" (their words, not mine) has been officially renamed. If we need to split hairs between "unincorporated populated place" and "community", then this article is in the wrong categories. Minh Nguyễn &#x1f4ac; 04:57, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Once again, the name of the "unincorporated populated place" has not undergone an official name change. As per your sources, it is still under review.

Once again, I'm not concerned enough to "split hairs" and make the change, and instead wait until a change becomes official, but I do support anyone's willingness to edit for the sake of encyclopedic accuracy. Crescent77 (talk) 17:01, 10 February 2023 (UTC)


 * @Crescent77: The sources cited in the article categorically state that the review has taken place and the decision to approve the new names is now "immediately effective for federal use". Perhaps you overlooked the use of past tense in "The seven places for additional review included", as well as the title of this press release? In case there's any doubt regarding the change that took place, here are some additional sources:
 * GNIS, the federal government's official gazetteer
 * Local media coverage:
 * In a footnote, KFSN states that they will refer to the place as "Yokuts Valley" from now on in news and weather reports. Others are doing likewise without saying so.
 * National media coverage:
 * Supervisor Magsig's op-ed criticizing the official rename
 * In any case, the natural feature was renamed to "Yokuts Basin", not "Yokuts Valley". "Yokuts Valley" only refers to the populated place.
 * – Minh Nguyễn  &#x1f4ac; 17:40, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
 * National media coverage:
 * Supervisor Magsig's op-ed criticizing the official rename
 * In any case, the natural feature was renamed to "Yokuts Basin", not "Yokuts Valley". "Yokuts Valley" only refers to the populated place.
 * – Minh Nguyễn  &#x1f4ac; 17:40, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Supervisor Magsig's op-ed criticizing the official rename
 * In any case, the natural feature was renamed to "Yokuts Basin", not "Yokuts Valley". "Yokuts Valley" only refers to the populated place.
 * – Minh Nguyễn  &#x1f4ac; 17:40, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation
FYI, I moved this page from Yokuts Valley to Yokuts Valley, California. Even though there's only one notable Yokuts Valley in the whole wide world, the convention for U.S. geographical articles is to include the state in the article title, regardless of whether the name is unique, making exceptions for only a handful of major cities. This isn't an arbitrary guideline; it's based on a very strong written convention in American English. Minh Nguyễn &#x1f4ac; 19:13, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Incorrect information
Squaw Valley has not changed it's name to Yokuts Valley. This issue is still in dispute with the local authorities. Please remove Yokuts Valley from this article. You can confirm this with the office of Nathan Magsig in Fresno Ca. 96.67.217.74 (talk) 17:47, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

It does seem the name change here was premature. I believe the confusion stems from the fact that the Valley itself has undergone an official name change, but the CDP (the subject of this artice) has not yet. Crescent77 (talk) 18:11, 8 February 2023 (UTC)


 * The recent state law went further than the USBGN decisions around natural features, also directing counties to stop calling places by the old names and Caltrans to change road signs about them. But it is awkward that this article is about both the community and the CDP, which might have different names for the time being. Maybe the infobox, which is purely about the CDP, should be different than the article title? Minh Nguyễn  &#x1f4ac; 20:43, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

The distinction between the community and CDP isn't that relevant here. The state law did direct a change, but it did not identify what that change would be to, as of yet. At this point, Yokuts is not official, nor is it WP:COMMON. It comes across as non-encylopedic to declare a name change that has yet to gain consensus among its own community / CDP nor declared law by higher authorities. I would expect the change to be official in the near future, but I think currently we are premature with the implementation.

That said, I personally wouldn't (and won't) bother making the change, as I do expect the situation to update soon, but I would support someone's effort to make the correction. Crescent77 (talk) 21:57, 8 February 2023 (UTC)


 * @Crescent77: As noted above, the community's name change is official with respect to federal agencies as of last month. The only reason I would hedge about the CDP is that the Census Bureau updates its demographic estimates and Boundary and Annexation Survey maps on a schedule, and this decision missed this year's maps by a month. Under the provisions in AB 2022, the CACGN was required to coordinate with other government agencies on getting signs and maps updated within 90 days of having approved the new name (which actually happened last March). However, you're right that Supervisor Magsig's office won't be legally prohibited from calling it by the old name until January 2025. Minh Nguyễn &#x1f4ac; 07:02, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Once again, as per your sources, the name change of the geographic feature is official, the name change of the community is not. Crescent77 (talk) 03:43, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

Oops
As for encyclopedic accuracy, some please tell Encyclopaedia Britannica ' s fact checkers that they still managed to mix up the Fresno and Placer county communities even after the name changes:

🤦‍♂️

– Minh Nguyễn  &#x1f4ac; 17:45, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
 * WP:NOTAFORUM We discuss this article here. An Encyclopaedia Britannica article is not handled from here. You go to https://corporate.britannica.com/contact to report errors to them. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 01:20, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
 * @Richard-of-Earth: That's fair. I mainly wanted to point this out to explain the additional hatnote in this article, which otherwise wouldn't be necessary. Sorry I didn't make that clear. Minh Nguyễn &#x1f4ac; 05:46, 12 February 2023 (UTC)