Talk:San Luis Obispo, California/Archive 1

Archive 1

Bubble Gum Alley

—Bubblegum Alley? I thought it was called Chewing Gum Alley. Harvestdancer 22:59, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Growing up in SLO (1985 - 1999) it was always called Bubble Gum Alley. Try a search for "Bubble Gum Alley". There are many sites documenting it.

Robert Holden

---

It was definately "Bubble Gum Alley". One side of the Alley is getting torn down for a new building, but the new owners will apparently still allow bubblegum on the new wall. (Grew up near SLO, 1979-1991).

Gigglesworth 00:19, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

---

I agree! "Bubble Gum Alley" is the name. It is referred to as such in a number of guide books as well. I walked down it in June 2006 and it's still covered in gum.

Kim Snyder

---

Most definitely Bubble Gum Alley! I can remember smelling it before seeing it. It was always a hit with us kids and I've left many pieces of chewed gum on its walls.

SLOgirl (Born and raised in SLO).

SLOgirl 21:01, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

---

I've lived in SLO for over 20 years off and on (1976-1994, 1998, 2000, 2003-now) and have never heard it called anything other than Bubble Gum Alley

Matt Lyon

---

It must be "Bubble Gum Alley" as it was referred to as such in a NBC Dateline episode!

Rich Ferguson

Inappropriate Tone

The "Local Government" section contains many clichés and generally sloppy sentences, but my personal favorite is the last sentence in the "Education" section: "It is certainly a good education for our youth." This is really bad. I'll do some reworking if I have time later. Bvanderveen 20:07, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

---

The whole Mardi Gras section is extremely exaggerated. There was no extensive "crime and mobbing" EVER in SLO. All that happened was that, starting around 2002 or 2003, Mardi Gras weekend partying started getting bigger and more outsiders came to town. In 2004 a few parties got too big and police broke up a couple of them, forcing a crowd of college students onto the street -- the students and police clashed, and it's still debated over who started it. Police claim college students initiated it by throwing things at them, while students say police began shooting random crowd members with beanbag bullets. This was a one-time incident that was probably the worst SLO had seen in decades -- San Luis is actually very quaint and friendly, and I resent that this wikipedia piece on SLO makes the town seem like a place roaming with students looking for trouble when the only trouble we ever had was one night in 2004!

Erica

---

accually, i am not a partier, but i HAVE attended every mardigras for 10 years with the exception of last year, and i have seen the fights, i am even friends with a girl who had to be taken to the hospital cause she was trampled under a croud of drunks in the middle if a brawl

while i wouldnt really use the word riots, i would definitly say that they were getting pretty bad, and its prolly for the best that they put a damper on the event

gogocharlie

---

I agree that this section needs some help. I was a "victim" in the Poly Royal riots (my car was severly damaged, although I was not participating in any of the parties or even on the street at the time). The town is generally very quiet, thus these incidents are a big deal. I grew up in SLO and even attended Cal Poly for 4 years. I can't remember anything bigger than the Poly Royal riots (I missed the Mardi Gras one as that happened after I left town). Still, such a big section on these isolated incidents does not do the town justice! I think the write-up needs to focus more on the great events and activities the area has to offer - not the few bad things that have happened over the years.

SLOgirl SLOgirl 21:09, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

---

Alright, i tried fixing the tourism and local government section by switching them around and cleaning up some of the informal and just general crappy sentences.

er. yeah.

russ2120

SLO abbreviation

Speaking of tone, can we excise SLO from the article? I've always felt it was very informal, verging on slang, and certainly not appropriate for a Wikipedia article. If anything, I think the short form name of the town should be simply San Luis, which most people from the area understand. --Anþony 23:20, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

---

Keep SLO! I was born and raised there and we have always affectionately called the town "SLO". It may be informal, but any native (SLOCALOCAL - for those that remember those bumper stickers) will know what it is. "San Luis" is also a nickname for the city, but mostly for those outside of SLO. SLO Town, SLO Life... It's all part of the town's identity.

SLOgirl (unfortunately, now living in Texas).

SLOgirl 21:01, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

That's my whole point: it belongs on a bumper sticker, not in an encyclopedia. Surely, it deserves mention but it shouldn't be used in the body of the article. I did a little bit of research and it would appear that the Tribune agrees with me: check out this article, which uses SLO only to save space in the subheading and once in a quotation. Every other reference to the city in the paper's voice is San Luis Obispo. I propose we adopt the Tribune's standard and stick to San Luis Obispo. If spelling out the name becomes repetitive or tedious, use "the city" or something similar. -Anþony 23:54, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I can see your point that it's more of an affectionate nickname than encyclopedic material. But, I do feel that at least an acknowledgement should be made that the town is referred to by various sources as either "SLO" or "San Luis" even if not referenced as such in the main body of the articles. I confess that I am neither a journalist nor a writer, but I am very attached to my birthplace, and to me it will always be "SLO"... SLOgirl 01:56, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

I was born and raised in San Luis Obispo, and my family has been in the County since the 1930s.

Using SLO to refer to San Luis Obispo is akin to using Madonna Mountain to refer to San Luis Mountain (Oh yeah, I know, the "correct" name is Cerro San Luis, but no one says that!). It's been my experience that only people who aren't local, or have been in San Luis (this is what locals use) only a short time, use SLO without cringing. So I'm really surprised SLOgirl, as a local, uses SLO. I think the SLO reference began in the late 80s, but I'm not certain. It's definitely not a reference that was used while I was growing up in late sixties to early eighties. I would guess that SLOgirl was probably born in the 80s. Language is dynamic and so we all have to accept that references and nicknames will change. Sadly, this silly name has been adopted. It always sounded to me that some "brilliant" marketing mind came up with the SLO reference in order to sell bumper stickers or further attact tourists. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by KristinC (talk • contribs) 02:18, September 23, 2006.

I've heard locals use "SLO Town", but rarely just "SLO (slow.)" In college, a roommate from L.A. mentioned "slow" and it took me a sec to figure out what he was talking about. Just cuz it's a pet peeve of mine ;) when I was a kid, Madonna Mountain was the hill the Inn is on. The Trib shifted it to San Luis Mountain/Mt. San Luis/Cerro San Luis over its road bulldozing and for some reason it stuck. I don't hear it used much these days for either hill.--Berol 20:47, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Keep in mind that this is not an issue of 'correct' versus 'local', but rather tone of the article. Locals use SLO as an abbreviation in the same way that people abbreviate New York City to NYC, or how some urban areas will be referred to affectionatly by locals using the airport code. This extends beyond the town itself -- locals don't call it "San Luis County" but "SLO County". That said, it *is* an informal abbreviation and probably violates the 'encyclopedic' tone the article is supposed to have. Do keep in mind though, that 'San Luis' is just as informal, though it may not sound like it.

--Matt Lyon, SLO local of 20+ years

Abbreviations are not unusual, and SLO is no exception. I find it petty that there is any argument over tone because of the use of an abbreviation and the pronunciation of that abbreviation. If Los Angeles can be "LA", there is no argument here. And if the Tribune uses SLO for abbreviations, why not save the author a few extra keystrokes? (not that the tribune is known for its journalistic integrity, like glossing over the whole Sharon Graves thing)

--Justin Link, SLO resident for 5 years while attending the only real Cal Poly (that would make sense to my fellow college students)

Major work needed

This article is terrible. Who wrote this crap? Its horribly slanted with major violations of NPOV. If I really cared, I would work on it. But I don't. OH WELL. 71.9.58.46 23:45, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

I concur. The Local Government section sounds like somebody writing an email home about San Luis after being there for a week. More facts, less shit. A dead giveway is when you see more than 2 sentences go by without links of any sort, because you can't link to crap like "a really great place." Also, farmers market is mentioned in two different sections. --dthx1138 3:50 PM, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the first anonymous comment. That was very helpful. I will have to disagree, however. I thought the article took a very neutral point of view, especially when dealing with Mardi Gras and other tense subjects between college and city.

-- Justin Link 21:31, 31 October 2006

Well, Justin, did you ever think of the fact that the article was edited between the time that comment was written and when you posted your comment? Check the dates and the archives before you say such things. 24.205.255.51 07:02, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Dream

I've never been to SLO. But last night I dreamt I had to go there on the subway from Los Angeles. When I woke up I remembered that LA's subway system doesn't actually go anywhere, and it occurred to me that I didn't even have a very good idea of where SLO is. So I came here to the Wikipedia article to see where it is, and lo and behold there was no location map. So I made one and added it. So now the next time someone who's never been there dreams of it, they can look at this article and found out where the place is. —Angr 14:46, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Transportation

I know that San Luis Obispo has an airport, however I do not know anything about it. However, I would like to know. It would be nice if someone qualified added this information to the article, as well as other information about the city's transportation system

Thought I'd step in and add a bit. Thanks for pointing out this spot where I could contribute. :) JABPP 08:31, 12 November 2006 (UTC)JABPP08:31, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Photo at top of page isn't what one would call "iconic"

A possible replacement for the main picture.

The original main picture.

It's a nice photo of rain, but it's sunny 95% of the time in SLO. Cerro San Luis, the most recognizable bit of the landscape, is also omitted (would be just to the right in that image).

66.215.119.189 00:45, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

How about this picture, taken Saturday last week?
—Leif Arne Storset 04:12, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Photo of the Jennifer St. bridge also poor

People: a photo showing half of a nice sculpture next to a tangle of rusted steel is not a pleasant photo.

66.215.119.189 00:49, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Frank Lloyd Wright

Actually, it's not a dentist's office. It's a doctor's office.

-Walterjid

Agreed. I know it's a doctor's office, pretty sure it's a cardiologist. I'll change it to doctor until the next time I drive by, and then add more specific information.

-Rico 06:23, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Fire Department

I'm not sure that the article really needs 10 paragraphs on the fire department. Is the city's fire department somehow unusual or different from any other similarly sized city? If not, I don't think it needs mentioned at all; and if so, it needs to be explained - with references - why it's unusual. Either way, I don't think we need this amount of information on the various bits of equipment used - and it's all unsourced, too. Unless a compelling reason can be found, I'm planning to just remove the entire section. Wibbble 00:34, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Unsourced entries like this are often unsourced because the information isn't notable. I suggest it be substantially reduced. ·:·Will Beback ·:· 00:47, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I think it is reasonable to have an entry of one or two sentences on the fire department for a given city or more if it is for some reason notable. I haven't read the entry, but if there is a useful token of information in there about the general size or history of the department, I think that could be salvaged. Obviously it is wrong the way it is now. Basar 04:16, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

There's detailed information on various station houses, but nothing to suggest that it's out of the ordinary, and nothing on any history. It just seems like a lot of cruft on a non-notable part of the city, to be honest. Wibbble 09:35, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree, I think it is reasonably to have an entry on the fire department. However, I did notice that there were not any sources cited. If someone could find sources and show substantial reason why there should be a section on the fire department then I see no reason why it can't be trimmed down a bit instead of being removed. Mattl2001 04:45, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I think it's reasonable only if the fire department is somehow notable - that is, there's something unique or unusual about it. What's there at the moment doesn't suggest that there's anything special about the SLO fire department that merits inclusion. Wibbble 09:35, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I deleted the section and replaced it with one, sourced sentence. Is this a reasonable solution? Basar 17:40, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Looks good to me. ·:·Will Beback ·:· 20:57, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm happy with it. Wibbble 21:25, 22 May 2007 (UTC)