Template talk:Inland Empire

Name Change

Let me explain. Lets use your example House (See: User_talk:Torritorri#Inland_Empire_Template). First of all the Template:Los Angeles metropolitan area uses it's core city as a name. The official name of the "Inland Empire" is Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario. Now if we take those core cities, RS & SB it would be Template:Riverside-San Bernardino metropolitan area. After all the Template:Los Angeles metropolitan area would be Template:Southland metropolitan area if we went by regional names, which you use on the template by using Inland Empire. SoCal L.A. (talk) 00:18, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Before you do things that might get you into trouble, you should do some reading: Wikipedia:Article titles#Common name. Thats all I got to say. House1090 (talk) 05:48, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for caring about my safety. I have read that article previous times. The knowledge is already known. I moved it to a precise (RS-SB metro), but not to precise name (Riv-SB-Ont metro). The name is common but not informal (Inland Empire metro). The name is common enough to most people, which means that they know what it is about, for people outside of the general vicinity of Southern California. The term Inland Empire seems to be more recognizable to people from the region as opposed to those out of it. For instance, i never knew it was called the Inland Empire and i grew up in San Diego. I knew the area as Riverside. Anyways back to my point, it is correct, since the Inland Empire metropolitan area doesn't exist. It is a name that applies to a region. The government does not recognize it as the Inland Empire metropolitan area. Perhaps this justifies my move? SoCal L.A. (talk) 23:27, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Inland Empire is well more common than Riverside-San Bernardino. See, for example [www.inlandempire.us]

For a local perhaps, but again, I moved it to a precise (RS-SB metro) but not to precise name (RV-SB-ON metro). The name is common but not informal (Inland Empire metro). The name is common enough to most people, which means that they know what it is about, for people outside of the general vicinity of Southern California. The term Inland Empire seems to be more recognizable to people from the region as opposed to those out of it. For instance, i never knew it was called the Inland Empire and i grew up in San Diego. I knew the area as Riverside. Anyways back to my point, it is correct, since the Inland Empire metropolitan area doesn't exist. It is a name that applies to a region. The government does not recognize it as the Inland Empire metropolitan area. Just wanted to make sure you didn't miss that ;). SoCal L.A. (talk) 23:46, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Also, the article itself doesn't use the term "Inland Empire metropolitan area". SoCal L.A. (talk) 00:03, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

You don't seem to get the point, the area is called "Inland Empire", its like trying to change the the name of the IE article and the IE portal to Riverside-San Bernardino. House1090 (talk) 00:06, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Quite the contrary. You don't seem to get the point. First of all, the IE page isn't called the Inland Empire metropolitan area, as that would be incorrect. Again,

I corrected the name of the page so that it is now correct. I moved it to a precise (RS-SB metro) but not to precise name (RV-SB-ON metro). The name is common but not informal (Inland Empire metro). Anyways back to my point, it is correct, since the Inland Empire metropolitan area doesn't exist. The government does not recognize it as the Inland Empire metropolitan area.

Correct names for the area would be, Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario metropolitan area, or just using it's core cities, Riverside-San Bernardino metropolitan area. The term Inland Empire refers to the region not the metropolitan area. This template could also be called Inland Empire urbanized region. I have already used my Southland example. SoCal L.A. (talk) 00:22, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Have you not taken a look to the list of cities on the IE website? Apparently no you have not. You should really, really do some research before you go and change templates and what not. House1090 (talk) 00:25, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Just tell me, does this information not apply or is false?

• The Inland Empire metropolitan area doesn't exist nor is the official name for the Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario metropolitan area
• The core cities of the metropolitan area are Riverside and San Bernardino which would make it suitable to shorten the name to Riverside-San Bernardino metropolitan area
• The government does not recognize it as the Inland Empire metropolitan area

I'm sure the cities recognize being part of or in the Inland Empire, but do they recognize being part of or in the Inland Empire metropolitan area or the Riverside-San Bernardino(-Ontario) metropolitan area? SoCal L.A. (talk) 00:37, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Also the website, says Inland Empire region, not Inland Empire metropolitan area. So the template could be named Inland Empire region as Torritorri had it before you reverted her (assuming the user is a girl, if not my apologies). SoCal L.A. (talk) 00:40, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay, the Inland Empire is a nickname, just like Chicagoland, there fore its appropriate to to use Inland Empire metropolitan area, if not use Inland Empire. I have not put this on a move request as I am waiting to see if you can convince me of keeping it this way, and I am what to see what others think. House1090 (talk) 00:41, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Why is it appropriate to use a nickname? No other metropolitan area templates use a nickname, but they use the name of the core city(s). Again the Inland Empire doesn't exist. I am going to revert myself since i moved it wrongly without having consensus, but this discussion will still continue. However the only suitable names for this template are...

• Inland Empire Region
• Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario metropolitan area
• Riverside-San Bernardino metropolitan area

Also the templates for Chicago (Chicagoland) and Los Angeles (Southland), don't use the "nicknames" when naming the metropolitan area, the use Chicago metropolitan area and Los Angeles metropolitan area as opposed to Chicagoland metropolitan area and Southland metropolitan area. SoCal L.A. (talk) 00:48, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Nevermind, i guess i can't revert a move. However it would be wise to not request a move until a consensus is reached so we don't have to have the page moved multiple times. SoCal L.A. (talk) 00:52, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

We'll see what happens. I don't think you should of moved the template but just changed the name on the template. If you would of discussed it here we would not be in this situation. House1090 (talk) 00:58, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Wow, i think I've actually gotten to you :D, Since you aren't retaliating how it should be Inland Empire metropolitan area. Next however, i assume you will blame me for moving it and try to request a block. However i still believe we would be having this same conversation since the title of the template page is the same as the disputed name of the template. SoCal L.A. (talk) 01:03, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Once again, I mainly concur with House on this, as "Inland Empire" is the WP:COMMONNAME for the region, although for the sake of convenience the name of the template should probably be shortened to the name of the main article: "Inland Empire (California)". In any case, I further agree with House that a proposal should have been made before moving the template. Amerique^dialectics 02:03, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with the template being called Inland Empire (California). However though the Inland Empire is a common name, it is also a nickname. So the options could be...

• Inland Empire Region
• Inland Empire (California)
• Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario metropolitan area
• Riverside-San Bernardino metropolitan area

I don't care which one, just as long as it's one of those. Again sorry for the move, that was bad on my part. SoCal L.A. (talk) 02:09, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

All right, well I would recommend starting a WP:RFC to develop a broader consensus on this. I see what you are saying about standardizing these articles with other metropolitan area articles, though... perhaps the time has come to consider moving or merging both the GLA and IE articles and nav templates to "____ metropolitan area" namespaces, although I have resisted this in the past because it was never brought up and discussed properly. Amerique^dialectics 02:38, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

If not I rather have it simply Inland Empire. PS: If most users agree to the current version, I might be fine with it. House1090 (talk) 02:39, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't think a merge between GLA and IE articles would be needed, pass, or has even suggested. House1090 (talk) 02:51, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Amerique what is your plan or thoughts? I feel interested and perhaps it is the thing to do. SoCal L.A. (talk) 04:53, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

I talked briefly about the idea here: [1]. It is the kind of thing that only makes sense to do if there is broad consensus for moving Greater Los Angeles Area, Los Angeles Metropolitan Area and Inland Empire (California) to whatever the specific "____ metropolitan area" namespace would be. However, there are enough references to hold the GLA and IE at their current titles per WP:COMMONNAME, so I personally don't think these moves are necessary. Amerique^dialectics 18:55, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Move request

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 22:22, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

---

Template:Riverside-San Bernardino metropolitan area → Template:Inland Empire (California) — Per above discussion, especially Wikipedia:Article titles#Common names, and for consistency with article name. Probably better to move template in line with article name, as any sources related to naming will be in the Inland Empire (California) article, and not in this navigation template. If further moves are needed the same general conventions will likely apply and to rename the article, nav template, and category as a group. -Optigan13 (talk) 04:42, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Support until there is some broad consensus for moving the respective article to a different namespace. Amerique^dialectics 18:55, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Support The reason why is Wikipedia:Article titles#Common names. House1090 (talk) 22:35, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Support It is the correct name for the template (Inland Empire metropolitan area was not) as well as the most common (Riverside-San Bernardino metropolitan area isn't as common). SoCal L.A. (talk) 23:25, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Oppose i think it is better to refer the area by its metropolitan name rather than its informal name75.28.109.63 (talk) 00:25, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Oppose currently it is fine.makes sense. the high desert and the cochella valley are not considered as part of the inland area. Javiern (talk) 00:50, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Oppose i'm from Barstow and i have never heard the San Bernardino valley being referred as the inland empire. leave it as is75.30.126.95 (talk) 01:00, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Support per WP:COMMONNAME. --TorriTorri^{(Talk to me!)} 03:46, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Jurupa Valley

Should the former CDPs/unincorporated communities of Rubidoux, Pedley, Glen Avon and Mira Loma be removed from the template, since they now make up the incorporated city of Jurupa Valley (100,000+ population)? --Pf1127

cities 200k+

moreno valley and fontana, along with Riverside and San Bernardino are over 200k. should be in their own section 2603:8000:5000:E9D2:1015:A480:7F77:AD53 (talk) 09:34, 30 July 2023 (UTC)