Talk:Environmental issues in the San Joaquin Valley

California Low‑importance

	California portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Environment Low‑importance

	Environment portal 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.

Sourcing[edit]

A lot of issues with the sourcing here, probably over the line with WP:OR. Nweil (talk) 05:24, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are 100% correct. Andrevan@ 01:40, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dynamite[edit]

Looking at the history and the sources, most of this article fails attribution from the day it was published in 2016 by @Viannarigor:. I looked at the 2016 archived copy of the NRDC report as well just to be sure it didn't change, but no, I think it's just inexperience and maybe scattering the correct references. Of particular concern is the table of "Water Releases (Pounds from TRI sources)", which I can't trace to any source (the units don't make sense anyway). The basis for half of this was a 2002 NRDC report that's no longer even accessible on the main site (all search references to it go to their general essay on water quality, so apparently NRDC thinks it's old news -- doesn't mean it's not encyclopedic). This article might just need WP:TNT. SamuelRiv (talk) 01:33, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it's fairly grim, it definitely needs some really invasive surgery at least. Andrevan@ 01:36, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 27 January 2023[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved. (non-admin closure) Adumbrativus (talk) 05:27, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Environmental issues in Fresno, California → Environmental issues in the San Joaquin Valley – nothing in this article is specific to Fresno as far as I can tell. Aquifers don't end at city limits, neither does air, and many of the mitigations are performed on a county level. The air quality district is similarly named "San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District." I think changing scope to the valley would make this page way easier to fix. Nweil (talk) 19:27, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

support Broadening the scope makes a lot of sense. Anything that is community specific can still be included since it is within the topic. Cheers, Fettlemap (talk) 22:26, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Drought[edit]

Drought is not an environmental issue on this list: List of environmental issues

I think it should be removed from this page entirely. Nweil (talk) 17:38, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Natural disasters in the list includes droughts. Schazjmd (talk) 17:58, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]