Talk:Oakland, California/Archive 1

message: At the beginning of the article we say the Bay Area is the 5th largest MSA in America.  The Bay Area page says it's the 6th largest MSA.  The MSA page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_metropolitan_areas) shows the Bay Area as 12th.  
Sibley park has a great view of the bay at night if it isn't too cloudy? Isn't this opinion? I can't really think of a good way to reword this without any weasel words. --65.16.61.35 22:28, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

message: :Hooray for the number of murders it has every year?
::New Orleans. Richmond. Atlanta. St. Louis. Birmingham. Detroit. Baltimore. Washington, DC. I don't think anyone would claim that the murder rate is the outstanding feature of any one of these cities.  And yet they all have murder rates higher than that of Oakland.  Oakland is a beautiful and diverse city, a brilliant stronghold of arts and culture.  I'll stand by the previous anonymous commenter and repeat "Hooray for Oakland."
:::-Andy M. 07:03, 6 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, good eye, ffirehorse.  I always skip right over the demographic paragraphs.  That sentence is kinda funny, but definitely inappropriate. (I won't say "be bold") --Andy M. 07:54, 24 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hooray for Oakland. 

message: I have noticed a trend away from using aerial photos for cities. Although I think the aerial views are nice, I have added a new photo that shows the Oakland skyline. This is a nice 'postcard' shot of the city and maybe others will think this is the best cover photo for the Oakland article.  However, my main issue is that the vast majority of Oakland consists of 2-3 story apartment buildings.  I live in Oakland and maybe visit downtown only a few times a year.  In other words a photo of downtown is actually quite unrepresentative of what "Oakland" is.  But at the very least I do think this skyline photo provices a little bit more of the character of the city than what is provided by an aerial photo.  I would be interested to know other people's opinions. Konky2000
:I think it's a good idea to replace the other picture like you did... although that was a nice pic of downtown, as you imply, that is not necesarily the focus of our fine city. However, I strongly disagree with your assertion that Oakland is mostly made of apartment buildings, but that really is neither here nor there. When I lived outside of oakland, my most fond view memories were of looking down over the city from the hills (especially the fire area, now too built up really provide the same views) and and the view accross lake merritt. I'll try to post one of my 6778346298734 photos from those views, if people would like...Reggaedelgado 21:24, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that would be a great idea. --Hottentot 20:36, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe it was wrong to use the word Apartment buildings.  It is true that south of Park Avenue Oakland is mostly made up of single family homes. I would still wager that most of Oakland's population lives in multi-family dwellings, but it doesn't really matter.  Either way, the high-rise skyline of Oakland is not representative of what Oakland is all about, yet I think it still might be necessary to highlight.  My dream picture would include downtown's high-rises, small apartment buildings, large areas of single family homes, and a glimpse of the SF Bay in the background.  I have found a place I believe might have the best view of Oakland.  It would be from the roof of one of a couple of apartment buildings near the corner of Vermont and Prince St.  There is enough of an elevation that one can get a good view, but at the same time it isn't so high that the detail is lost in the buildings. Konky2000 06:53, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Knock yourself out, man. Sounds like a good idea. I recently had my computer & camera stolen (what city are we writing about?), so I'm digging through my archives of photos (sort of) looking for the promised pictures. Oh, and trip not about the apartments thing, but when I drive through our city I see mostly houses...although certainly many are multi-family! I just don't want the millions of people reading this talk page to suddenly have their beautific image of oakland ruined...Reggaedelgado 07:15, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oakland Photo 

message: I agree with above comments that crime is unfairly portrayed as the dominant image in Oakland.  As mentioned earlier, many cities with far worse crime are glowingly discussed with crime relegated to a paragraph in mid-article rather than confronting the reader in the introduction.  Thus, I moved the discussion on crime to mid-article as is done for every other city in Wikipedia and provided updated statistics.
GC
I removed the phrase "and are usually gang on gang and/or drug related" from the crime section because there is no reference two support it and the following two references may contradict it:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/01/20/MNGP3NM6D91.DTL
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/09/13/MNG7FL4KQU1.DTL
Although it appears that drugs and gangs are at the root of many shootings, the phrase I deleted may imply that most murders are committed against gang members or drug dealers, which is not supported by any evidence I have seen.
--Honestshrubber 19:29, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Crime section reworked 

message: In the "1960s & 1970s" section of History, I began to feel that we were getting off-topic upon mention of the "highly syncopated 16th-pulse" that is a characteristic of East Bay Grease funk.  May I suggest moving that whole discussion to a dedicated page...by somebody who knows something about funk?
Ardnopes 08:37, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Funky 

message: okay, after this minor editing war, we should have a discussion on what valid nicknames for oakland are.  Oaktown is, i believe, completely valid.  biggity biggity o i have heard many times.  but "bump city"?!  what is this from?  i've never heard of bump city before.
Sparsefarce 17:26, 23 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I did not either, until I did a search.  It's from the book - Bump City, Winners and Losers in Oakland  by John Krich, photos by Dorothea Lange .  Also the music band Tower of Power had an album about Bump City. This Oakland based band has a website http://www.bumpcity.com or http://www.towerofpower.com/  The Seattle group Doctorfunk http://www.doctorfunk.com/index.html has a song Livin' in Bump City: a tribute to Tower of Power; lyrics at http://www.doctorfunk.com/lyrics/livininbumpcity.pdf#search='bump%20city%20oakland'  Petersam 00:43, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

text: A google search for "Bump City", as well as for "Bump City"+"Oakland", really doesn't reveal anything. I don't think it's significant. Furthermore, we don't want the nickname field of the infobox to get cluttered with a long list of 3+ nicknames for any city because some nut insists on adding things like the area code and the airport code to it, calling them nicknames. One or two nicknames is really all that should be there. Three or more is pushing the boundary. Dr. Cash 17:38, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

text: Bump city is Oakland's nickname from the 70's, still in use by many who predate the "oaktown" era. I re-added it because it is actually in occasional use (certainly it is of historical significance) when I saw that "biggity biggity O" was there. "Biggity Biggity O" is (as its cumbersome nature suggests) used more as a filler in rap lyrics than in general parlance, in actual use "the town" and "the O" are far more popular than "biggity biggity O" ever was, but are not really oakland-specific enough to merit being listed, I think. I do agree, however, that only a couple should be listed. As afr as "510" goes, it does not specifically refer to Oakland but to the entire east bay. OAK is used, but since it is also the airport code, I think it could be safely ommitted.Reggaedelgado 21:12, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: So, someone changed it again, adding "o-Town" (orlando's rip off of our name). They put the comment "those weeren't true" to their edit, which I find confusing at best. Clearly he didn't read the talk page. Then again, I reverted it to what I thought we decided, but clearly I didn't read this page either. Reggaedelgado 06:14, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: From the Too Short lyrics: "City of Dope, I call it Oak.  Can't go broke - selling coke..."  On a similar note, a friend of mine with a little crack cocaine problem refers to the city as "Cokeland."  --AStanhope 03:15, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

text: O-Town/Otown is very very common (in the present).71.142.91.34 22:15, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Here is a lot, why don't we explain the various minor, out of use and historic nicknames in a portion of the article where we may add in some context instead of cluttering up a small line in the infobox?71.142.91.34 22:15, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Welcome to the slow burn that is Wikipedia. This is not the website where you'll find the latest street terms on established classic pages like ones for cities. No 'Oakydoke' in the nickname stack? No problem. The Oakydoke fans will just have to start establishing it in popular culture so it can be referenced. Binksternet 22:39, 11 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nicknames 

message: The nightlife section is messy. I removed one part that seemed ridiculous and irrelevant. I don't like how there is a list of various clubs and there locations, but I'm too lazy to change it. Any ideas? Mipchunk 06:25, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why is it here at all? The WikiProject Cities guidelines don't mention nightlife, and it doesn't seem to be covered in other cities. Names and addresses of every bar in downtown Oakland is definitely a bit much. I'm taking out the addresses, and I'll leave it up to someone else to make the decision whether to kill the whole section. Lagringa 10:41, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nightlife? 

message: I did some reorganizing here on the bulleted lists. There's no reason we can't fit these neighborhoods into a few major groupings. I took out a few of neighborhoods as well. A neighborhood association does not a neighborhood make! "Piedmont Pines" is the name of an association that is in the heart of Montclair. "Parkway" is an imaginary gay neighborhood. "Uptown" is a planned development project, not a neighborhood. "Lakeside Apartments District" is referred to as "downtown" or "Lake Merritt" and does not appear to be in use independent of this website. I suspect that there are a few others that were recently invented by either neighborhood associations or real estate developers and are only known to a handful of people. Lagringa 14:50, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There used to be a seperate section for hills neighborhoods which can't be considered part of East Oakland; it was Lagringa who combined it with North Oakland.  The main problems I see with having a seperate Oakland Hills region are that people won't agree on whether certain neighborhoods are in the hills or not, and the issue of places like Claremont, which is clearly in North Oakland and also at least partially in the hills.  Do we end up listing individual neighborhoods in two or three regions? Nogood 22:27, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There's a map of Oakland's neighborhoods at the Oakland Museum website (it's in the external links section), but they divide East Oakland into 4, and divide the hills into three areas. I'll post the map from "Rehab Right", which seems to match what I've seen and heard elsewhere better than the museum's map. Argyriou 23:43, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neighborhoods 

message: I've changed the lat/long location to a location with many fewer significant figures. It's ridiculous to locate to tenths of a second of arc a city whose land area spans more than 11 minutes north-south and more than 13 minutes east-west. Unless someone can tell me that the location given was the geographic center of Oakland, or comes up with coordinates for the center or City Hall, they should stay more approximate, and only use minutes-of-arc precision. Argyriou 19:59, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Geography 

message: The Stein quote actually has nothing to do with Oakland, Calif. as Stein was born in Pittsburgh and her statement, which is found in Everybody's Autobiography, references the Oakland (Pittsburgh) neighborhood. However, I am going to refrain on changing the article until I can actually pull a copy of the source work and get some context. Ellsworth 15:14, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not true. The entry is correct as it is. There are plenty of sources out there that confirm this. Your explanation isn't very plausible considering she is not from the Oakland neighborhood of Pittsburgh and left Pittsburgh when she was very young. She spent most of her formative years in Oakland, CA. Lagringa 07:16, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Still haven't found the source I was looking for so it looks like you're right. Ellsworth 19:42, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

text:  Lagringa, could you add a citation for this?  I believe you but it would be nice to have something more verifiable there. --thither 07:22, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Gertrude Stein]] 

message: Where is the economy section?--Old Guard 02:00, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Economy 

message: I'm removing some of the climate info (average yearly temperatures) because it is wrong. The numbers are clearly too low. I couldn't find the exact numbers, so I am not replacing it. I hope the climate chart I created is sufficient. Lagringa 18:57, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's more interesting and useful than an annual mean, anyway.  Good improvement.  ENeville 15:26, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Climate 

message: I have just reverted an edit by an anon who changed the part of the lead sentence that says Oakland is the eighth-largest city in California to say that it was the third-largest city. I reverted the edit because the source cited for the "eighth-largest" claim includes a list that clearly shows Oakland is the eighth-largest city in California by population. --Tkynerd 04:49, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  My population-related revert 

message: Hey everybody. I'm the student of Moscow State University (Department of foreign countries), Russia, and i'm on my graduation work at present. This sience work is dedicated to american cities revitalization and redevelopment. Also it is tightly connected with Oakland. The main target is to learn the ways of revitalization in Oakland, Pittsburgh, Baltimore etc. 
So, dear Oaklanders or someone who interests in it, could you please describe me the way of redevelopment in your city? The main point for me is to know all about measurement that were made. When exactly did it begin? What were the steps to revitalize the city? Was the downtown take down and rebuild? Were the citizens settled apart? I'll appreciate very much for any detailed information.
Any kind of information would be very valuable for me! Thank you. Simon Freydlin Freydlins 18:28, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Oakland revitalization investigation 

message: Under the Attractions sections both Redwood and Sibley Parks are listed. While I too think of these as being in Oakland, they are not. Both are on the Oakland border at Skyline Blvd and are located entirely in Contra Costa County. They should be removed.
(The Sibley link should be to the existing page of Sibley Volcanic Regional Preserve, but I figure why fix it if it is going to be removed.)
--Fizbin 20:23, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed. I'll add a section about the EBRPD Parks that border on Oakland.--Fizbin 18:48, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  Stand corrected on location. There are two EBRPD parks in Oakland, and five that are on its eastern border. While the bulk of the land of all five are not in Oakland, enough for a mailing address on Skyline Dr. or Redwood Rd. does exist. I've modified the Attractions sections based on this info.--Fizbin 19:18, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  East Bay Regional Parks in Oakland 

message: Somebody should make an article for North Oakland(no, not pittsburg)Mahmud II 01:32, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why don't you make it =) ? Just type in North Oakland, Oakland, California (that is the standard for neighborhood titles hood,city,state) and if the article does not exist click create article and go for it! BE BOLD71.142.91.34 23:21, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article for North Oakland 

message: The history section of this article reads like a propaganda pamphlet for the Black Panthers. I am very aware of the racial tensions that have plagued this city over the past 50 years, but the writing in this portion is oozing with anti-white racism. It sounds like it was written by Huey Newton. And none of these claims are backed up by verifiable sources, or any sources for that matter. This is not acceptable editing for wikipedia. 71.109.136.107 16:13, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am disputing the neutrality of this article, particularly in the 1960's-1970's portion of the History section. It cleary was not written using NPOV. 71.109.119.207 17:01, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

text: The poverty and segregation which had developed in Oakland in the postwar years had helped increase the crime rate. The civil rights movement had yet to make its mark. Consequently, tensions rose quickly between the Oakland police and members of the black community. Inspired by the activism of both the national civil rights movement and the students at the University of California in Berkeley, Huey Newton and Bobby Seale organized the Black Panther Party for Self-Defense.
The paragraph basically says that poverty and segregation are problems here in Oakland. Tension rose and Huey Newton organized the Black Panther. So how is this portion sounds POV? And how does it sound anti-white racism? Please enlighten me. Chris! my talk 18:56, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree; I've taken the tag off, as you haven't made a compelling case for bias here. Please provide more details. +ILike2BeAnonymous 19:17, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV violations & unverifiable claims in the history section 

message: The problems of writing by committee. Here is the first paragraph:
"The poverty and segregation which had developed in Oakland in the postwar years had helped increase the crime rate. The civil rights movement had yet to make its mark. Consequently, tensions rose quickly between the Oakland police and members of the black community and the students at the University of California in Berkeley, Huey Newton and Bobby Seale organized the Black Panther Party."
I have no idea what this means. Nor do I know enough about the history of this time to fix it. But it is, particulalry the last sentence, pathetic. --Fizbin 18:59, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  1960s section 

message: From websearched that I have done it seems to be a legitmate nickname and now that I know what it means I have seen many people with hip-hop/urban styled "The Town" jerseys and shirts in Oakland and around the Bay Area. It seems to make sense to call Oakland "The Town" in contrast with "The City" or San Francisco. Oakland is the gateway to the suburbs and is the first "town" you go through on your way out to most locations except the peninsula or marin. Is there anywhere were you can request help with a reference?CholgatalK! 20:55, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: its not really ambigious, san francisco isnt called "the town" neither is new york, many cities that begin with an o or p are called otown/ptown that doesnt mean its not their nickname just because its a commonly used nickname, such is main street, JFK High School, or Springfield, State, USACholgatalK! 04:47, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: im actually starting to like it, SF is the city Oakland is the town, hey nonamous, he likes it!CholgatalK! 04:47, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

text: As a nickname, "the town" (for any city, not just Oakland) is just slightly less bogus than the construct "the <fill in telephone area code here>", which says basically nothing about the place. This shouldn't be in the list of nicknames. +ILike2BeAnonymous 02:02, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: its not at all bogus that doesnt make any sense to me, berkeley isnt called the town, the truth is most places are not called the town, and the fact that many places may share that nickname doesnt make the town a common unique nickname of oakland independant of other uses. well if oakland were called the 510 by many people it should be included but as far as i know its not, i have heard people refer to the east bay as the 92510 a combination of 510 and 925 sharing the 5 kinda by analagoy with 90210 it seems to me. but lets find a source huh? =)CholgatalK! 04:47, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: 92510 is the East Bay Express' cutesy nickname for their blog. Nobody else uses it, at least not yet. "East Bay" is much easier to say, sounds better, and is pig-latin for "Beast". Argyriou (talk) 19:04, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

text: No disrespect intended for Davey D, but I don't think so. +ILike2BeAnonymous 02:45, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

text: I'm convinced, the songs are great sources because they provide a unique source for current slang that hasnt yet made it into the mainstreem written sources but is reliable enough! awesome eaeCholgatalK! 18:41, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Who says they "is" reliable? That's quite disputable. +ILike2BeAnonymous 21:12, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Those sources are good enough for me, the East Bay Express is probably the best source as it is a local paper who would know the proper nicknames, they sources are also many so they are not just a fluke or a one time quote of an uncommon nickname from just say one click they pervasive, lets go with it. thanks for looking into it and taking me seriously eae! =)CholgatalK! 21:42, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As can be seen in many places here, "good enough" for you (Cholga) is a far cry from good enough for the encyclopedia. Your standards are a lot lower than those which need to be applied here. Just because you like something ("The Town" and "O-town" for nicknames, low-quality irrelevant photos on the Richmond Medical Center article, making an article out of the August earthquake, etc., etc.) doesn't mean it's notable or worthy of inclusion here. +ILike2BeAnonymous 23:39, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

text: but all articles include the city's nicknames, so we cant make an exception here for oakland, the citybox templates have room for the motto and nicknames for any city and consesus has decided in favor of inclusion of nicknames so your rationale is a non sequitor. the matter of fact is that the town is now well references and should be included.CholgatalK! 03:01, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

text: I was notified; was that the admin that your sockpuppet wrote to? +ILike2BeAnonymous 00:11, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The listen and do not remove content against the wishes of the majority its not helpful and will only cause you stress, revert wars are pointless it will be in the history and if you continue to remove it it will continue to be restored. Well you are making a checkuser search so you tell me how that works out, apparantly I am now Chris, Cholga, Fizbin, "CrazyLark", and everyone else that disagrees with you.CholgatalK! 00:50, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Could we try and find a source for "the town"? 

message: This article says Oakland is the only city to have teams in three professional sports.  I do believe LA has teams in baseball (Dodgers), basketball (Lakers and Clippers), and hockey (Kings).  Should this just be reworded t indicate that it is the only city with teams in just those three particular sports (baseball, football, and basketball)? Thegov2k2 19:45, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, because if what you say is true (and I don't dispute it, just have no interest in that subject so don't know), then you should omit all mention of "only city to ...", as it's too trivial to mention in an encyclopedia. +ILike2BeAnonymous 00:14, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think it is too trivial at all, triple wammies are uncommon, the Bay Area for instance is the only area with Hockey/Baseball/Football/Baseball all in one metropolitan area. LA doesn't really count since it has two basketball teams, the triple wammy refers to three differant sports in one city, although the A's will be moving to Fremont but they'll be known as the Oakland Atheltics of Fremont I think. In that case LA does have 3 teams if you count the LA Angels of Anaheim.CholgatalK! 00:57, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

text: It's a pretty silly factoid to even state.  Who cares?  LA had four sports for a long time, when the Raiders and Rams were there.  And Oakland had just the two while the Raiders were in LA.  And if/when the Raiders move again, or if/when LA gets another football team, this factoid will once again be false.  I say take it out altogether. eae 01:26, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps we can use this as a guideline here: if it takes longer to explain the "fact" than to give the fact itself ("Oakland is the only city with three professional sports teams where those teams happen to be baseball, football and basketball teams ..."), then it ain't worth wasting space over. +ILike2BeAnonymous 01:53, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Unquestionably at present, Oakland is NOT the only city with teams in three sports; LA has that too.  The whole fact should be removed. eae 03:39, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Which three sports are those?CholgatalK! 04:05, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

text: It should be included its not like its just thrown in there, its part of an allready necessary sentance and read better and is more interesting to say that Oakland is the only city with 3 sports teams in california. LA does not have three differant sports teams. They have two basketball teams and a baseball team, no football or hockey, oakland has baseball, football, and hockey.CholgatalK! 04:05, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sports 

message: Agree. I've heard and used Oaktown many times. I live in Oakland. Binksternet 03:27, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As per above, could you please supply sources here? Shouldn't be a problem if it's as "well-sourced" as you say. +ILike2BeAnonymous 04:14, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nickname: Oaktown 

message: Disagree. Nobody I know uses this term... but then, it's a big city. ;^)   Binksternet 03:28, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think you are missing the point, this discussion's purpose is only to establish if the sources for o-town as a nickname for Oakland are reliable, that's all. It doesn't matter if you've never heard it. Would you consider The Oakland Tribune, the East Bay Express, and Lonely Planet to be good sources?CholgatalK! 06:28, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: According to whom does it not have anything to do with Oakland? What is your source? Or is that your opinion? Lot's of nicknames are repeated, that is not reason to exlude them from every city or person that shares a nickname.CholgatalK! 08:23, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nickname: O-town 

message: Disagree, but very vaguely.  Same reason as O-Town, except for <original research> a gut feeling that "The O" is not nearly as ubiquitous and might very well be unique, however if there are sources supporting this, then I'll agree. eae 07:27, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've heard "the O".  It's not a joke.  It's not unclear either, though it does seem somewhat generic in the same way as "O-town" is. eae 23:05, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

text: I did not add it as a joke, I have heard it used and thought for that reason is deserved to be discussed since the others were. They call orange county "the OC" oakland just happens to be one word, does anyone have a source?CholgatalK! 08:25, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nickname: The O 

message: Disagree.  It was only in use for a short time, and had no lasting power.  Nobody uses it today, so it's not notable. eae 07:25, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nickname: Bump City 

message: *I have heard this one too.CholgatalK! 08:51, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nickname: The Bright Side Of The Bay 

message: *Someone added this one recently, I have never heard it but added to avoid controversy.CholgatalK! 08:51, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nickname: City Of Dope 

message: How about calling a truce to the current sniping campaign over these nicknames, and agreeing to something like what's proposed in the section below, namely:
*Only put "Oaktown" in the city info box, as this is the only nickname with solid evidence backing it up
*Put the other two contested nicknames (O-Town and The Town) somewhere else in the article, in a section on nicknames, a section on popular culture (less good), or somewhere else.
What do you all say? +ILike2BeAnonymous 17:24, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes to proposed compromise. Binksternet 18:00, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes The proposal seems reasonable. Chris! my talk 19:56, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Yes Petersam 07:58, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

text: 'Absolutly not How can you compromise with facts? Most cities include 3, 4 or 5 nicknames whether they are current or not. San Francisco for example includes Baghdad By The Bay, very uncommon. It isn't the (singular) nickname field it is the nickname(s) field. And accepting this "compromise" would be accepting your statement that only Oaktown has sources that is not true. O-town is backed by the Oakland Tribune, East Bay Express, Oakland Raiders News Service, and Lonely Planet; The Town is backed up by the East Bay Express. I don't think a section on nicknames is necessary, nicknamed don't need to be worked into articles unless they are not a play on the city's name. The section nicknames belong in has allready been established and it is the nickname field in the info box. A nickname that is not a play on the city's name without any additions might deserve a sentance or two to give context, or have an article unto itself if the city article is too long. But lets remember this whole discussion's purpose is to stop fighting over nicknames and find sources for any nicknames that want to go in the nickname field. Oaktown, O-town, and The Town all meet this measure.CholgatalK! 08:36, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

text: What about a rotation of nicknames on a regular basis? eae 06:54, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope. Extremely bad idea. How about if someone writes a prospective section ("Nicknames", or maybe under some other title) and puts it here for evaluation? +ILike2BeAnonymous 17:15, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

text: No - I disagree with the implication that Oaktown is more deserving than the others of being in the info box.  There should be no nickname parameter at all, or it should list all sourced nicknames.  Oaktown + "Nicknames" section isn't a compromise, it's a concession.  No nicknames at all except those in the body of the article - that's a compromise. eae 07:31, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That's OK by me: I'm certainly not attached to having any of these names in the info box. Now let's see if you can convince others of this here. +ILike2BeAnonymous 16:58, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Well it doesn't matter if you two don't want or like nicknames in the box, consensus has been established for having that parameter in the box on the article for that template, and if there are nicknames which are properly cited they should be included there. If you don't want them in the box, you have to go to the box's article and argue there to get it removed from the box and every single city article that uses the box which i doubt you will suceed in doing so. Having them in the box keeps it simple.CholgatalK! 02:27, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Once again, I challenge you to show us just where "consensus has been established for having [the nickname] parameter in the box on the article". I see no such consensus. I think you're making this up as you go along. (And keep in mind that there are plenty of cities that use that infobox which don't have any nicknames listed. It's not like it's a required parameter or anything.) +ILike2BeAnonymous 03:37, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

text: I like eae's suggestion to just have a section explaining any sourced nicknames and getting rid of the parameter in the info box.  The field is misused with most cities, and certainly Oakland.  It should be reserved for extremely well-known nicknames, like "The Big Apple" for New York which is recognized globally.  Other, local nicknames deserve a section in the article.  None of Oakland's nicknames are well-known outside the region, so why not dump the category in the info box and include an interesting section on the variety of local nicknames?  -Taranah 05:32, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

text: I think we should either remove them all or keep them all.  Since I generally favor inclusion of valuable information, I think we should keep them all.  See Petersam's post about Detroit, Michigan, a featured article with four nicknames; inclusion does not necessarily detract from the quality of an article.  This is why I think the best suggestion thus far is to remove them all from the infobox and place them in a section of their own.  If they are placed within the article, they can shed light on the origin and meaning of each nickname.  It would be a good addition to the article; people who are unfamiliar with certain nicknames can read up on them.  It is fine to simply list them, but it might be better to explain their inclusion.  Debating on a talk page doesn't help the article itself, nor the readers of it.  Hopefully we can wrap this discussion up soon so we can devote our energies to other things. Paul Haymon 04:20, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Support nicknames section. It's about 7 for nicknames in article and 1 with concerns about removing nickname in infobox.  Might move it as a subsection under Arts and Culture as there is already a paragraph about other titles for Oakland by the rap and hip hop culture.  It would be before the "There's no there there"  famous quote about Oakland. Petersam 04:18, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

text: I just copyedited and return Cholga's expansion of 13:00, 9 Sept which might have been missed when all his edits were reverted.  Very nice expansion Cholga! Petersam 05:04, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Just moved Nicknames to Arts and Culture. changed infobox Nicknames comment to:  See Arts and Culture - "Nicknames" subsection below; names have been moved from here to there; just before "There's no there there".  (LOL)  Petersam 05:24, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: <span style="font-size:x-large; color:red;"><b>Compromise?</b></span>

message: San Jose is the largest city in the SF Bay Area, population wise, and is an obvious "See also" section link.  I have restored it.  Georgewilliamherbert 21:02, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: But how does that make it relevant for inclusion here? Just being another large city in the area doesn't make it germane. I've taken it out again. +ILike2BeAnonymous 00:22, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Agree with keeping it out, plus it and other related articles are already included in the orange infoboxes at the bottom of article. Petersam 00:44, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

text: George, if you want San Jose in the article you could add a section describing commuter patterns. Many Oaklanders work in Silicon Valley. Binksternet 00:54, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: So what? Many Oaklanders work lots of places in the Bay Area (and even in the Central Valley). +ILike2BeAnonymous 01:05, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: IL2BA, If George wants to mention San Jose in a heading that references Oaklanders who commute, then I'm sure he'll be researching the percentage of how many Oaklanders are involved in the Silicon Valley commute versus the other lots of places commutes. I don't worry about weasel words in a friendly Talk Page suggestion to a fellow Wikipedian. Binksternet 03:55, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Restored see also for San Jose 

message: Houston, Texas is a recent WP:FA which uses only 1 official nickname "Space City" in its infobox and includes other nicknames in its Culture section - Other nicknames include "H-Town," "Screwston," "The Big Heart," "Bayou City," "Clutch City," "Hustletown," and "Magnolia City."  Oakland doesn't seem to have an official nickname so maybe the nicknames can go into the culture section. To see a list of other FA cities, go to Wikipedia:WikiProject_Cities#Progress and click on FA. Petersam 00:36, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I just wish that those other editors who are now arguing so furiously above over, for gawd's sakes, a couple of nicknames, would read this. An idea worth considering, says I. +ILike2BeAnonymous 03:45, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I already did. Chris! my talk 19:58, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I think that's a bad idea, why should we imitate the Houston article which is pretty much alone as most articles just list them in the space provided for nicknames, and IL2BA if you think its so trivial to argue over a few nicknames, why not turn the cheeks, its seems as if it doesn't make that big a differance to person for which it is not a big deal anyhow.CholgatalK! 21:49, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: See section below...Houston is not alone; 7 out of the 14 Featured city articles have written something about nicknames in their article or a separate nickname article and 2 out of 4 additional city articles listed below have also mentioned nicknames in their articles; which makes it 9 out of 18 or 50% with nicknames in the article as well as the infobox.  Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/Guidelines  for nicknames are Nickname: Include from 1-3 informal nicknames (e.g. "The Big Apple", "River City"). So both could be done, especially if there are more than 3 nicknames.  See Nicknames of Houston as related to its subculture and groups nicknames (not to making a separate article) or look at Seattle's article; it could be mentioned in the Oakland article, for example, that the little known Oakland nicknames are related to hip hop/rap subculture and include additional information as needed?  Petersam 04:38, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Featured Article cities and nicknames 

message: Detroit, Michigan
Nickname: Motor City, Motown, Rock City, The D
...the city's two familiar nicknames, Motor City and Motown.[3][4] Other nicknames emerged in the twentieth century, including Rock City, Arsenal of Democracy (during World War II), The D, D-Town, Hockeytown, and The 3-1-3 (its area code).[5]
Orlando, Florida
Nickname: The City Beautiful, O-Town, 407
Petersam 08:19, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Other city articles

message: Rooting around on the web in search of information on Oakland neighborhoods, I've found what looks to be an authoritative source for neighborhoods: this page maintained by the Oakland Museum of California. Check it out; to use it, click on an area of interest, which will zoom into a smaller block of neighborhoods. Moving around will show the neighborhoods in this block (assuming you have Javascript enabled, I suppose). It's a very nicely done page.
I suggest we use this as our guide to which neighborhoods are really neighborhoods here. I haven't been able to find any other resources which have as complete a list as this one. We can use this to complete the list of neighborhoods here, and to eliminate those spurious articles (such the one on the "rolling 100s") which are in the realm of hip-hop and other subculture lore.
Anyone want to go through this and create these articles? I've been creating stub articles, simply listing the boundaries of the neighborhood. Oh, by the way: the maps don't show the boundaries exactly; you'll need a street map to figure those out. Not difficult, though. +ILike2BeAnonymous 01:51, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well, I was wrong about that last bit. You can view a map of the block of neighborhoods by hovering over the block until the "View street map" balloon appears. Click on that and a map will open in a new window, showing the neighborhood boundaries clearly marked. +ILike2BeAnonymous 01:55, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

text: Good; then you agree that it's a reliable source for neighborhoods in Oakland? I can only find a few entries in their list that I might take exception to; all the others seem correct. Still wondering if anyone wants to go through this and create stubs for all these places. +ILike2BeAnonymous 01:10, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I will try to create those stubs later when I have time. Chris! my talk 02:46, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Found: reliable source for Oakland neighborhoods 

message: If you dont like the use of the quote function in citations, I think time would be better served lobbying for rule changes in Wikipedia:Cite rather than deleting the quote funtion from references. They are there to be used. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 00:15, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Using quote function is not necessary. Please at least explain why you want it. Don't just tell people to go change the rule. For your information, I have a suspicion that you are using IP addresses to bypass the 3RR rule. I will initiate a checkuser if I see another ip reverting. Chris! ct 00:21, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quote function in citation 

message: I'm not understanding why this link is an issue. It's an official city program. Binksternet 19:16, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Oakland, like most cities, has lots of "official" programs. I don't see how that particular one is relevant to this general interest article. If this one belongs, how about their graffitti-abatement program? the anti-sideshow program? the Port of Oakland's expansion program? See where this is going? We have to draw the line somewhere, don't we? Otherwise, this just becomes a catch-all, a dumping ground for random pieces of information, which is a tendency that needs to be guarded against everywhere in this project, if you take a look around you. +ILike2BeAnonymous 19:24, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough. I've taken a look at some other city pages and most don't have a collection of links to their city programs. Also, Oakland's CORE program can be reached through the city's official website which is already listed in external links. I'll remove the CORE listing. Binksternet 14:20, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  CORE program external link 

message: There are several ways to define neighborhoods in Oakland. Realtors use maps that simplify (see Metro Rent's map) and gloss over certain hard-sell areas; police safety and crime stats maps use simplify as well but not in the same way (see Urban Strategies 2005 homicides map) while the city planning office uses maps with smaller areas named and defined such as the one developed by Fern Tiger Associates in 1982, available here, which unexpectedly calls the northeastern hill section of Oakland "NorthWest Hills". The way this article divides neighborhoods doesn't conform to any of the above methods; I wonder how the division was reached for this article. North Oakland (as defined here) includes the hills east of Piedmont. Most would call that Claremont/Montclair or Northeast Hills, and all would agree that reported violent crime and racial composition differ dramatically between the hilly sections and the flatter sections. I propose to split North Oakland neighborhood into at least two sections: North Oakland and Northeast Oakland. Such a split would affect the North Oakland, Oakland, California article, too. Binksternet (talk) 22:49, 23 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There is no such thing as "Northeast Oakland". The list should have the hills as a separate entity from North Oakland, East Oakland, Downtown/Lake Merritt, West Oakland.  The north hills have much more in common with the south hills than either do with their respective flatland areas. Argyriou (talk) 16:06, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's true that Oaklanders don't use the phrases "Northeast Hills" or Northeast Oakland" in normal conversation, though those phrases exist in documents about crime statistics and home sales. Perhaps you would agree to "Oakland Hills" as the other neighborhood. Binksternet (talk) 16:19, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, the Oakland Hills, Oakland, California page is up. Other pages have been/still need adjusting. Binksternet (talk) 19:07, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There's no "Oakland Hills" either, apart from the common misuse of the name with respect to a geologic feature.  The districts that overlap the hills are already named.  For the most part, the really hilly section of Oakland encompasses Montclair.  I don't understand why the articles on these districts aren't sufficient.  Why is it necessary to concoct intermediate articles grouping them together?  And if the relevant dichotomy is "hills v. flatlands", why not an "Oakland Flatlands" article?  It all seems excessive, repetitive, and unnecessary.  The groupings here in this article ought to be the limit. Tmangray (talk) 23:09, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

text: Part of the problem lies in the designation of the larger parts of Oakland as "neighborhoods" when they are actually simply geographic sections (hence the use of modifiers such as "East", "West", "North", etc.), except possibly in the case of West Oakland.  Even most of the neighborhoods are in practice referred to as "districts", as in "Montclair District" or "Fruitvale District".  I don't know of any historically-named part of Oakland that is known as a "neighborhood", but perhaps there are some. Tmangray (talk) 00:02, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: We must be careful not to concoct ahistorical names for parts of Oakland, simply because we wish to group neighborhoods by geography.  If we must group, then we must also make sure to notify the reader that our grouping names are not (unless they are) historic local names in common usage.  For example, obviously, "Northeast Hills" is not a common usage.  Nonetheless, with the simple addition of the word "section" or "area" (and no capitalization if used in the text since it is not a proper name) it might be just fine as a grouping header on this page.  It would not, however, merit a separate article. Tmangray (talk) 00:25, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  North Oakland neighborhood split 

message: Why are Chauncey Wendell Bailey &  your_Black_Muslim_Bakery  not mentioned in the articles of  Oakland,  Santa_Barbara,_California?
 hopiakuta  Please do  sign  your  signature  on your  message.  %7e%7e   Thank You. - 00:45, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[ Chauncey_Wendell_Bailey ]] 

message: I propose that we remove the entire "nicknames" section and any mention of them in the article.
To those who protest that this is too severe an excision of material, I'd like to point out that the current paragraph, consisting of 3 sentences, has 4 "citation needed" tags and no references whatsoever. This makes that part of the article an eyesore and a weak spot. Imagine coming across this article on some other site, with its content scraped from Wikipedia, and seeing all those red flags in the text.
To paraphrase another aphorism, if you can't say anything notable and verifiable about something, better to say nothing at all. There has been plenty of time for editors to supply valid references for these statements. The article can live without this bit of trivia. +ILike2BeAnonymous (talk) 18:49, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The nicknames are absurd, I live in Oakland and I've never heard of those nicknames before. Verifiability has not been made at all, except for maybe that last sentence in the section, so the whole section can justifiably be deleted. WinterSpw (talk) 22:14, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nicknames revisited 

message: The section in the main article, "Notable People from Oakland," this has only one person listed.  Isn't it a bit redundant as there is already a more inclusive list linked at the bottom?Sausagebucket (talk) 19:32, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The whole section needed to go, so I deleted it. There's no use in having some kind of short version of the list placed within the city article. It would soon be the source of many additions, reversions and friction, and would tend to grow nearly as large as the List of people from Oakland, California. Binksternet (talk) 03:41, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notable people from Oakland vs. List of people from Oakland, California 

message: WHy did they say that Oakland is the 4th most beautiful city in the USA? I'm am going to remove it, but first i will ask if I should or not. SO should I? Sidobagga (talk) 03:48, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's definitely POV!  Good catch.  Eeblet (talk) 11:29, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  4th most beautiful city