Talk:San Diego, California
I agree. This also fixes things for us South-Orange-County-ers.
The San Diego graticule should be 32, -117. However, this poses a problem as almost all of this graticule lies in the ocean or in mexico. One suggestion for fixing this issue is to offset the graticule by .5 in both latitude and longitude (i.e. 32.5, -116.5) so that more territory in the US is accessible, while still leaving the possibility of Mexican venues. On the other hand, we could just keep it pure and expect to find few in any people at the mexican or pelagic venues which would predominate.
Another possible solution is to wrap over into the next graticule east when the location falls in the ocean and then wrap over to the two graticules north of those two when the location falls south of the border as seen in the illustration to the right.
--Cahlroisse 05:12, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure "wrap" is the right word. It's simple: you can just choose to visit the hash for a neighboring graticule! Or not! (Me)
- Choosing a neighboring graticule seems like the most sensible solution to me as well. Somnivore 21:16, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
- yes that should work perfectly, only one graticule will be closest to san diego from the four neighboring graticules and should provide quite a nice area for meetups. see ya there saturday at 4pm!
- Curley 17:05, 09 June 2008 (UTC)
2012 Revisions
Can we remove the stuff on the front page about alternate strategies since it is resolved? Stephen Cerruti 02:44, 26 April 2012 (EDT)
Can we remove notable date entries without expeditions? If they were notable then wouldn't they be documented? Stephen Cerruti 02:44, 26 April 2012 (EDT)
I agree, this should be placed on the main page for san diego. I feel more people would see it and show up. Curley 11:03, 30 May 2012 (EDT)
- Curley -- er, what should be on the main page, and what page is that? JesseW 13:56, 30 May 2012 (EDT)
graticule page cleanup
I've been going through the wiki graticule-by-graticule updating and cleaning up the graticule pages. This is the first graticule I've hit where both a)There are local geohashers who have been updating the page recently, and b)more than a couple of expedition pages are not linked from the graticule page. I note that there has been previous discussion about cleaning up the 'notable dates' section on the page. Might I suggest cutting the notable dates section down to just those expeditions which were notable in some way (first attempt, first success, particluarly noteworthy location, large number of attendees, etc.), and a separate section which just lists all documented expeditions (possibly excluding planning-only pages)? I'm more than happy to do the work, but I'd like input from the geohashers who have actually been maintaining this page up until now. --Eldin (talk) 17:48, 30 July 2013 (EDT)
- I made some suggestions regarding cleaning up this page over a year ago. Those suggestions should be implemented. I also recommend that you look at how the Santa Ana graticule page is arranged. It's not perfect, but I like that the expeditions are all automatically updated. Notable events should contain ribbons. (If I were to make a change on Santa Ana I would move notable events first and then expeditions and eventually just keep the first (n) expeditions with an entire list on a separate page.) Any changes you want to make are fine with me. Stephen Cerruti (talk) 18:44, 30 July 2013 (EDT)
