Talk:Mount Baldy Ski Lifts

NPOV

I'll admit it, I am employed by baldy. I have tried to present the resort with as much of a NPOV as possible, but due to my personal biases from love for the mountain, I am concerned that I may have overcompensated somewhat and perhaps given the mountain a bad face. I want to present the resort as competitive while still discussing its flaws. If anyone has any advice, or just wants to express whether or not I succeeded, I'd appreciate it. Shaggorama 00:40, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

• Honestly, you didn't do that good of a job making this NPOV. Including things like exclaimation points and the like makes the article seem more like an advertisement and less like an encyclopedia entry.

If you want to criticize a particular author's work, check the history for their particular edits. If you investigate, you will see that my contribution contains no exclamation points, and what I consider to be an even balance between the pros and cons of the mountain. Sorry to clutter the talk page with this, but I don't appreciate unfair accusations. -Shaggorama 04:54, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

I would like to know specifically which parts of this article "read like an advertisement." It seems to me as a skier who has skied Mt.Baldy (as well as many other California and Nevada ski areas) to be quite objective. The discussion of annual snowfall, in particular, is brutally honest. Mt. Baldy Ski Lifts has barely been open at all during the ongoing drought the past few years. But the last time El Niño brought some big storms through, there was some great skiing. I would consider adding a comment to the effect that although Mt. Baldy Ski Lifts has some snowmaking capability and made a great deal about their new pond capacity a few years back, they rarely make enough snow to compensate for a lack of natural snow, unlike other Southern California ski areas. No storms = no skiing at Mt. Baldy. Other than that, I can't see anything to change to make the article less promotional. Perhaps changes have already been made since that "advertisement" flag appeared. -Biggerbuzz (talk) 06:58, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Article name

Somehow this does not appear to be the name of the ski area. Seems that the name is Mt. Baldy. I could see moving this to Mt. Baldy (ski area). Vegaswikian 08:14, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

That'd probably a better name. -Willmcw 08:57, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Although it is a pretty goofy name, I can almost assure you the proper name for the resort is "Mt. Baldy Ski Lifts." Although "M. Baldy" may be a better name, I'm pretty sure it is just a nickname for the resort, since it is the only resort on the mountain, and the full name (if I was right) is just kinda lame. The website does refer to the resort almost exclusively as "Mt. Baldy," which seems to disagree with me. I'll investigate with the resort office as soon as I have an opportunity.Shaggorama 11:16, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

quick initial research: The heading of the employment page is "MtBaldy Ski Lifts Job Opportunities," the application refers to the corporation as "Mt. Baldy Ski Lifts, Inc.," and heading on the return address for the app is "Mt Baldy Ski Lifts." Shaggorama 11:19, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

The signs on the approach to this ski area indeed read "Mt. Baldy Ski Lifts," and that is the official name, although local skiers like myself usually just call it "Mt. Baldy" or even "Baldy." Here is a link to their website: http://winter.mtbaldyskilifts.com/Mountain/about.php As you can see from the URL and the page footer, it really is "Mt. Baldy Ski Lifts." I think the name may date back to a time when skiers were more aware that the ski operation was actually a guest of the National Forest where it was located, so that it made sense to think of the lifts as separate from the mountain. Changing the article name would only create confusion with the OTHER Mt. Baldy ski area in British Columbia. Biggerbuzz 06:39, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Fire

I think it would be appropriate to have information in this article (maybe just a sentence or paragraph) about the fire that burned down the old lodge. If I knew much about it I'd write some, but I only know that it occurred and have seen some of the pictures in the lodge. Would anyone like to do this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anxiety35 (talk • contribs) 03:56, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

"Majority" of Mt. Baldy faces North?

• The majority of the ski area is north-facing, including the Thunder Mountain area as well as the majority of the steep Chair 1 terrain down to the base area and parking lot. The Chair 4 portion of the resort faces west and south, however, resulting in frequent spring conditions and corn snow.

I had edited this article to say majority "south facing" rather than "north facing" but had it changed back. Upon further inspection using Google Earth, it appears that the "left" mountain portion of the ski resort (Chair 4, including devil's backbone rd) faces almost directly South, the runs along devil's backbone rd connecting the east side with the west side of the resort faces southwest, and the runs Chair 3 services (right/east side of the resort) contains four main slopes in the mountain used for skiing. From left-to-right (if one were standing from The Notch looking toward the new reservoir), these slopes would go: southwest-facing (then valley), north-facing (then peak), southwest-facing (then valley), then the main north-facing slope. Additionally, Chair 1 does service runs when the snow is good enough and this long strip of the mountain is southwest facing.

Now, the last "main" north-facing slope is large and is the last to melt during the season. However, the side of the resort Chair 4 services that's south-facing definitely appears roughly the same size as the total of the two north-facing plains. If one were to add in the southwest facing plains of Chair 1 (runs to the parking lot) and Chair 3, I would contend that the "weak majority" of Mt Baldy's ski areas are southern-facing.

However, I believe better changes to this article would be to briefly describe the resort as something like: "multi-faceted, with portions of the overall ski area South or Southwest-facing and other portions North-facing".

- 99.58.10.68 (talk) 07:26, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your explanatory note. I'm sure you understand why random changes tend to get reverted. I've pasted the current text above for reference. I don't have a resort map nor time at the moment to find one online and try to correlate it with Google Earth. If you're sure of your information, I'll take your word for it. It looks like your main disagreement with the current text is over the aspect of the runs off of Chair 1, and hence the total of how many runs go in which directions. Please use your best information and correct the text as needed. If we can cite a source, all the better. We don't actually need to say which direction is the majority - maybe it'd be best to leave that out entirely and just describe the individual slopes.   Will Beback  talk  07:48, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Maybe I was hasty about making the original single word change as the resort really is multi-directional/multi-faceted and not simply built into one side of a giant mountain. I also hadn't realized how much to the north Chair 3 slopes really faced (I apologize for not doing my research first). As far as Chair 1 goes, I was only considering the steep part starting next to The Notch and the valley to the bottom, not the less-traveled tree runs around the valley that could face south or north directions. However, my discrepancy was more in Chair 4 side vs. Chair 3 side and how much of the ski area is northern vs. southern. Overall, I think not labeling the ski resort as either one or the other is more appropriate. 99.58.10.68 (talk) 08:06, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for giving it your careful consideration. You're obviously quite familiar with the place. Good work.   Will Beback  talk  21:24, 17 September 2010 (UTC)