Talk:High Desert (California)

(null header)

I wrote the original High Desert article and I used population Victorville and Barstow stats from Wikipedia that corresponded with what I saw in Rand McNally. However, someone changed the population data and wrote it as nearly three times higher.

If the 300K+ figure is correct, then fine. But I would like to see a citation for that.

reference to Inland Empire and Greater Los Angeles Area

Re this portion: << This region is part of the Riverside-San Bernardino Area or also know as Inland Empire in the portions of San Bernardino and Riverside only and in Los Angeles County known as The Greater Los Angeles Area>>

I think it is best to remove this, for several reasons.

First, Inland Empire and GLAA are primarily urban areas outside of where most of the High Desert actually is. The sentence ends up being confusing.

Second, it is written in a somewhat muddled way that makes it hard to understand. "For census purposes, most of this region is ..." might make it better, but I'm not sure that was the intent.

Lastly, it was a little sloppily written. It didn't even include a period. ;)

Instead I added reference and a link to "Inland Empire" farther down, where it was more natural and appropriate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kushibo (talk • contribs) 18:27, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Define "High Desert"

See the ongoing discussion at Talk:High desert

FWIW, I've spent a lot of time in the Mojave, and don't recall ever hearing it referred to as "high desert." Cheers, Pete Tillman (talk) 20:31, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I think the High desert disambiguation page is not sure whether it is trying to be an article or just a disambiguation page. They are having their own troubles over there trying to figure out if they should be defining "high desert" as a scientific term or as a colloquialism.

As far as I'm concerned, and for the purposes of this article, the term as used in southern California is strictly a colloquialism. I, also, have spent a lot of time in the Mojave Desert, in California, Arizona, and Nevada, and I have only heard people there use the term "high desert" once in a while. On the other hand, in the Los Angeles region, it is commonly used to refer to most places immediately north of the San Gabriel mountains, especially the Antelope Valley and Victor Valley. The term has recently(?) expanded to include other areas like Twentynine Palms and the north half of Joshua Tree. The point is, the term "high desert" exists to differentiate it from the "low desert" to the southeast of LA. Low desert can mean Palm Springs, Coachella Valley, and other places to the southeast. Without both "high" and "low," neither term would exist, it would just be called "the desert" by southern Californians. I think, for the purposes of Wikipedia, we should treat it as only a colloquialism and define it vaguely as such. Darkest tree (talk) 20:21, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

The definition at the beginning of the article is clear, the term is used by weather people constantly for its self defining features, and organizations. With the looseness of the definition, why is tiny Landers used as a point of distinction from Palm Springs? Wouldn't Yucca Valley, at similar elevation, the first major settlement after making the change in elevation from Palm Springs, be a better example? I ask the question here before changing it, to see if somebody has done that for a reason. Trackinfo (talk) 22:14, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

• • Hello. I live in Joshua Tree next to Landers. I have lived here almost 2 decades. I didn't use Yucca Valley, because that is what it is....a Valley. You have to drive up a very steep grade and climb an additional 1000 feet to reach the High Desert. You end up just outside of Pioneer Town when you finally level out. About 6 miles more and you've reached Landers, which is actually the first community after the road levels out that is considered High Desert. Yucca Valley is Mid Desert. If you are in Joshua Tree which is the Eastern border to Yucca Valley, you are at a higher elevation than Yucca Valley, but not much. If you head toward Landers from Joshua Tree, you have almost the same climb up that you have from Yucca Valley. Once you've reached the top, you are still in Joshua Tree. Joshua Tree is both high and mid desert. That's why Landers is the best choice. It's the first Town that is completely High Desert once you climb out of Palm Springs. Pioneer Town is also considered High Desert, but it's still not quite at Landers elevation. If you feel you must change it for some reason, use Joshua Tree or Pioneer Town. Yucca Valley is not High Desert. Thanks Pocketthis (talk) 22:33, 3 May 2014 (UTC)

I've lived in Joshua Tree for six years now. I have been up to Victorville and Edwards AFB and the only reference I hear to "High Desert" in those areas in by businesses. Most consider the High Desert to be south of them, and the limits are often described vaguely at that. Most in those northern areas (Victorville and Edwards AFB) consider themselves as part of the Mojave. Most people living in and around Hwy 62 (Twentynine Palms Hwy) think of the High Desert as being above 2K feet. Once you go through the pass from the Palm Springs area and head east Morongo Valley is the first two hit (elev. 2,500 ft). Then Yucca Valley (2,700+ ft), Joshua Tree (2,800+ ft), and then Twentynine Palms 2,300+ ft). Actual elevation varies wildly - for example Hwy 62 in Joshua Tree sits at around 2,800 ft., but I live only 2 1/2 miles from it (on the south side), and my home is at 3,400 ft. (Ben marko (talk) 16:07, 13 December 2015 (UTC))

Merge

I think we should merge it with the San Bernardino Valley or with Inland Empire(CA) Articles. Write what you think here so we can come to a conclusion. MountCan (talk) 22:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Changed much of existing geo area

Much of the High Desert area consists of the area surrounding Hwy 62, much of the area north of this will be erroneously listed as part of this region. Much of the Tehachapi, Victorville, and Lancaster areas (to include Fort Irwin and Edwards AFB) are part of the southern portion of the Mojave, which falls outside of the High Desert. In fact if you talk to people from Tehachapi, they don't consider themselves as part of any desert...(!), they consider themselves as part of the mountains. Although many will cite these areas in the Mojave as part of the High Desert, much is unsubstantiated. Referencing a news article is not a valid reference. (Ben marko (talk) 16:12, 13 December 2015 (UTC))

• Hello Ben, I live in the Mojave. I also worked in Tehachapi for a season or two. I never heard anyone refer to that area as "High Desert", and it's not. It is way up there in elevation at 4,000 feet, which makes it a mountain community. Also, high desert areas have their own vegetation indigenous to the altitude (2000' to 3200'). Tehachapi's vegetation is not desert vegetation at all. I have eliminated it from the article completely. Thanks for bringing that up. I must have read that article 10 times, and missed Tehachapi completely. Also, as the crow flies, Tehachapi is actually west of the high desert, and not so much north. thanks-Pocketthis (talk) 17:07, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
• Ok, I reverted the whole undo though - and kept Tehachapi out, you are right. It has been about six months since I was up there (I am at Edwards for work 5-6 times a year). But Tehachapi is north/northwest, not west strictly. Again, this is assuming that the area east of it is part of the High Desert - it is not. (Ben marko (talk) 17:18, 13 December 2015 (UTC))
  • Right....like I said west, and not "so much" north, meaning west by northwest. Don't know why you removed the new photo. If you don't like it, I have 1,000,000 photos of the area, just tell me what you would like, and I'll exchange it.-Pocketthis (talk) 17:23, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
  • It is not the photo, it is that it isn't from the High Desert. Photo needs to actually be from the area referenced. Please stop vandalizing the edits. (Ben marko (talk) 17:30, 13 December 2015 (UTC))
    • Thank you for the photo - (Ben marko (talk) 17:38, 13 December 2015 (UTC))
  • You crack me up. That photo was taken SMACK in the middle of Landers, California, which is SMACK in the middle of the High Desert. YOU are the vandal my friend. I have been editing that article for 5 years!! You are a new editor reversing established editors, and doing it for all the wrong reasons. If you keep it up, you will be banned or blocked until you learn how to work with your neighbors. The only people that should ever be reverted are vandals. If you have an issue with an edit, either re-edit the problem, or contact the editor. Do not get in the habit of reverting established editors. It's not nice, nor is it respectful. We are all here to accomplish the same goal: To improve the information on this site -Pocketthis (talk) 17:45, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Very Cute. Now I just noticed that you blanked over 10,000 characters out of the article as an unregistered user, and then conveniently registered as Ben Marco. So you are now in my opinion an official VANDAL, and will be regarded as such. It will take me half the day to re establish that article, and if you mess with it when I'm done, Ben marco the sock puppet, will most likely become Ben marco the Blocked.-Pocketthis (talk) 18:33, 13 December 2015 (UTC)
  • Threats are not constructive, user Pocketthis. Please stop making destructive edits to the page. (Ben marko (talk) 00:18, 14 December 2015 (UTC))

Alert to editors and Administrators

The user, whom I believe to be a sock puppet: (Ben marko (talk), first blanked most of the article with his IP address, then he registered as Ben marko, and the article became "The High Desert according to Ben marko". After numerous reverts by him as I was trying to make heads or tails as to what was going on, and after being so foolish as to even to welcome him to Wiki, and create his user page, I discover his trick. It was so nicely done, I am positive he is a rouge or banned editor with a spur up his butt. It took me hours to reconstruct the article "line by Line", with copy and paste, because of all the intermediate edits, which I decided not to revert one by one. I just rewrote the 10,000 characters that were blanked. Please keep an eye out for this Vandal.-Thanks- Pocketthis (talk) 19:51, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Alert to editors and Administrators

I am not a sock puppet...and I didn't delete the photo of Landers intentionally. I have reported your destructive edits as vandalism. Please stop. (Ben marko (talk) 23:58, 13 December 2015 (UTC))

• • You just deleted 10,000 characters from High Desert AGAIN!. Please stop, this is your last warning!Pocketthis (talk) 00:05, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

• User Pocketthis, please stop vandalizing this page. Your edits are destructive and should stop. Also, please do not delete reports of vandalism. Thank you. (Ben marko (talk) 00:12, 14 December 2015 (UTC))
• Just a side note here for anyone reading this mess: I never deleted a report of vandalism in my life. Please consider the source. Anyone can review the view history of reported vandalism, and see that never happened. This wise guy is clever, but not "that" clever. Sometimes, because of users like this, editing here can really be a royal pain. I'm glad the article has been protected. - Pocketthis (talk) 02:06, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 14 December 2015

Ben marko (talk) 00:38, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

User Pocketthis has repeatedly vandalized the page for | High Desert (California). User has been warned twice to stop making non-constructive edits. Admin has now reverted the page to support this user. User Pocketthis has responded to warning by becoming hostile and making threats. How can this be disputed? I would like to restore my edits. Thank you - (Ben marko (talk) 00:28, 14 December 2015 (UTC))

See WP:DISPUTE. Focus on the content rather than editors. Materialscientist (talk) 00:47, 14 December

2015 (UTC)

Speaking as a passerby, I can neither see an objection to the second photo, nor a strong reason to have it, but I can damned well see something wrong with blanking the page. Anmccaff (talk) 00:51, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

• Even more interesting, is that it was Ben marko who removed the photo that was up there for years, using his IP address, and then blanked most of the article with his IP address. I never went there to change a photo. I saw that there was editing going on on my watch list. My error was that when I arrived at the article and saw there was no photo there, and got involved with trying to rectify that, I never looked at the lower part of the page to see that it was now a STUB...lol. If I had noticed that, none of the intermediate edits would have occurred, and I would have reverted everything under both names, and ran for an admin. But...I was too busy being Mr. dummy, and creating the man's user page, and welcoming him to Wikipedia..:-) When I finally realized what happened, I couldn't revert. I had to reconstruct the entire article with copy and paste. Took two hours of my Sunday. Thanks for you comment. Pocketthis (talk) 01:18, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Well, what would keep you from going back to a good version, and just editing that? Anmccaff (talk) 01:32, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

• That's what I did. However, The page wouldn't let me revert just his edits, because there were intermediate edits. I had to copy and paste the best version onto microsoft word, remove all the box work (he blanked all the cities that were in boxes), and then paste it into the article one section at a time. I tried to just copy the left side of the edit history, but you inadvertently capture the right side (his handy work) as well. What we have there now, is the previous version before his edits, all the positive additional edits made during the conflict, and a photo of mine, that I put there after he deleted the original one, and then complained about the one I replaced it with. All in all, the better part of my day, but well worth it to keep an article from being destroyed. Truth is, I am mainly a photographer here, and when it comes to reconstructing a page from edit history, or tricky editing codes to make the job more simple, I'm not an expert. Perhaps there was an easier way to reconstruct the page with all the boxes that had to be removed before pasting, if there was, I'm not aware it, and once the page told me I couldn't revert his edits, I did it the only way I personally knew how to. Pocketthis (talk) 01:46, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

We need to restore the lede section back to September 23 or 24. The High Desert is primarily the Antelope Valley (Lancaster/Palmdale) and the Victor Valley (Victorville/Apple Valley). Landers/Twentynine Palms have relatively little population and are simply relevant as close to Joshua Tree National Park and the boundary with Low Desert. Numerous businesses have "High Desert" in the name in the two areas I indicated above, e.g. High Desert Medical Group, High Desert Broadcasting, and on and on. To say High Desert is primarily east of the San Bernardino Mountains is ridiculous! HkCaGu (talk) 06:44, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

• Hello, I personally would have no issue with that at all. After we get back in there on the 17th, please make your edits, and we'll see what we have. I agree that there are just as many areas north and west of the San Bernardino mountains that are equally high desert as the areas along highway 62, and highway 247. Please understand that I was in a battle to keep him from deleting 3/4 of the article, and never really had a chance to study his perception edits of where he felt that the high desert was confined to. It's really pretty simple actually: Any desert area in California that is approximately 2,000 to 3,000 feet in altitude, will share the same animal life and vegetation, and is considered high desert. I've lived in the high desert most of my life, and that is why it is on my watchlist. This article is particularly difficult to stay on top of, because everyone has there own opinions of what high desert means. :-) Thanks for posting, and I look forward to seeing your edit. - Pocketthis (talk) 16:13, 14 December 2015 (UTC)

Introduction correction please

Would an administrator please correct the introductory paragraph to be objective & not expressing personal opinions? Though I am autoconfirmed, this article seems to have editing protection beyond that.
My longstanding understanding is that "High Desert" is a common/vernacular name for the unique and large Mojave Desert region scientifically determined and geographically defined by biogeography, climate, and altitude. It is not a local news media & local business names defined place, as it seems some editors may be using. Thank you — Look2See1 t a l k → 23:24, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

• The article is on hold right now and can only be edited by administrators until the 17th of December. Then you can rewrite the opener, and that would be appreciated. Just remember, population, and popularity of an area has no relevance. The high desert is defined by only three things in California: desert, altitude, (over 2000' and under 4000'), and those two constitute its vegetation. - Thanks - Pocketthis (talk) 02:57, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

One real problem is the word is used for several different reasons, which do not exactly physically overlap. Anmccaff (talk) 00:51, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Don't forget the Low Desert also in the Mojave. Mlpearc (open channel) 01:00, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

• The low desert in the Mojave has absolutely nothing to do with this article. That information goes in the Mojave desert, California article. Please don't confuse the two. That's where problems begin here. Thanks - Pocketthis (talk) 02:57, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

I was simply referring to the above discussion, if the High Desert was a common/vernacular name it would also be true for the Low Desert and that changes in that regard would also be true for the Low desert. It's pretty obvious that the Low Desert is not the same "location" as the High Desert. Mlpearc (open channel) 03:21, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

• lol...OK..However, these discussion pages are supposed to be limited for discussing the article they are attached to. If you have an issue with similar problems in the low desert articles, I suggest discussing those issues on those pages. P.S. I agree with you that there is a "world of difference" in all aspects of low desert, as compared to high. I spent ten years in Palm Springs. It is only 30 miles from Landers, but it's "a downhill drive". When you arrive, it will be 15 to 25 degrees warmer there. All vegetation, and animal life is unique to low desert. Even the coyotes have less hair on them. :-) Thanks- Pocketthis (talk) 17:26, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on High Desert (California). 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/20110220015631/http://www.sanbag.ca.gov/planning/subr_corridor_vville.html to http://www.sanbag.ca.gov/planning/subr_corridor_vville.html

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 04:28, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Constant image changes

I think the current images are just fine, and would request that consensus is required for any further changes, Wikipedia is not a personal photo album. There needs to be discussions as to why a current image is no longer appropriate or why a new one would be better. I have noticed that Pocketthis has contributed many of their own pictures and very nice ones at that, but Wikipedia is a collaborative project and image changes should be done by consensus. - FlightTime (open channel) 17:43, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

• When I first rewrote that article years ago, there were no photos, so I have been supplying them. I have never deleted anyone's photos,

and replaced them with mine. Anyone is welcome to place a "quality photo" on that page, as long as it is relative to the article. I have been trying different photos there, and exchanging them when the hits on a particular photo are poor. Have a problem with my work or me? Go to my talk page. No consensus is needed on a stub article, and that's what it was when I added the photos to it. I'll keep exchanging my photos, until I'm happy with the viewing numbers, or all of my photos have been replaced by other photographers or competent editors. Pocketthis (talk) 02:49, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

@Pocketthis: I don't have a problem (now that you removed your personal attack) with you, your photos or your work, as I said above I think you images are very nice, my concern is the frequency of adding and removing of images, regardless of who's doing it, I never said you removed other editors images. I merely suggest that lets pick some and stay with those, there's no reason to keep posting and removing. - FlightTime (open channel) 03:06, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Now that I think of it, why are you concerned with "Viewing rates" of your own images, that sounds a lot like using Wikipedia to promote, I'd be careful with stuff like that. Happy editing, - FlightTime (open channel) 03:19, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

• • No, you are mistaken. My job as a wiki photographer here, is to make sure that the photos that I place in any particular article, are those that are most interesting to the viewers. I tally that info daily by using the sites "page view analysis". When a photo is not getting hits in any particular article, I exchange it. That's what I do. That's what editors do here. We "edit". I will continue to "refresh" my photos, whenever the hits are low on a current photo, and I feel I may have a better replacement. As far as a "personal attack" being removed? OK, I'll put it back for you since it wasn't good enough they were removed, and you just had to mention them: "Your post concerning "Constant Photo Changes" here sounds pretty ignorant, since you are oblivious to the facts surrounding the article, and the photos". If an editor had a valid complaint about a photo of mine, I would eliminate it, or exchange it in a heartbeat.

To make you happy, I have eliminated the last photo I put on that page. As far as your edits are concerned today on the article in question: I am really not impressed. I think the page was better before you got there. Thanks for the compliments on my photos, and happy editing. Pocketthis (talk) 03:33, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

"Sunset over the Mojave" Photo Contribution

Peeping over a giant wooden fence, power-lines everywhere, and telephone poles to add some more wood, so we can see a tiny sunset taken with a 3.82mm cellphone lens. Now you know why I do what I do, and why I donate my time and effort to this site. Pocketthis (talk) 15:04, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on High Desert (California). 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/20150415040845/http://www.keyc.tv/story/19529832/octomom-and-14-kids-on-move-to-calif-high-desert to http://www.keyc.tv/story/19529832/octomom-and-14-kids-on-move-to-calif-high-desert

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 15:21, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Contradictory Temperatures of High vs. Low deserts

Right within this article, there is stated that the high desert temps typically are greater than low. (That's an incorrect statement, of course.) Then, on down the article, it is correctly stated that Low Desert has the hotter temps. I would try to make the changes, but given all the arguing that has gone on with this page, I am holding off. Maybe an established editor on the article would be better suited for the task? (Does such an inarguable bit of information need to be LOCKED DOWN???) 2600:1700:BF10:69D0:B518:AB5:C2F5:5F8B (talk) 12:29, 23 April 2023 (UTC)