Talk:Sacramento, California/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

UC Davis

Maybe we should add UC Davis in the "education" subcategory. It's only 15 miles west of downtown and Davis is considered a city of the metropolitan area. Just a thought...

A good idea, but a couple of problems: 1. It's not in Sacramento. 2. It's not in Sacramento County, 3.It's not even connected to Sacramento proper, or even West Sacramento (a river and flood-plain seperate the two.Rsm99833 22:17, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Not so fast. UC Davis Graduate School of Management (GSM) is located in downtown Sacramento on One Capital Mall. The UC Davis GSM is where working profressional (part-time) MBA students, from UC Davis, complete their MBA. There are over 300 part-time MBA students enrolled in the program. The part-time program is ranked in the top-20 and is well known for its small class size, world class faculty, and involvement in the business community. (Mark O.)

http://www.gsm.ucdavis.edu/visitors_center/directions_to_OCM.htm

Those particlular branches, I see nothing wrong with listing them. However, the question was asked about UC Davis main campus. Basically, if it's in the city limits, go ahead an list it.Rsm99833 15:07, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay. Great. I'm a 3rd year MBA student at UCD and it's an excellent program. (Mark O.)

In addition to the UC Davis Graduate School of Management, the UC Davis Medical Center as well as the UC Davis M.I.N.D. (Medical Investigation of Neurodevelopmental Disorders)Institute are located in the city of Sacramento. The M.I.N.D Institute is considered one of the elite facilities in the field of autism and other developmental disorders. One note, West Sacramento is not located in Sac County either (Yolo, same as Davis). Not sure if it is considered Sac proper though...


Text about Sacramento Public Library

I removed the following text because it is not about either Sacramento or Sacramento County (entries that would be defined in Wikipedia). But it is about the Sacramento public Library. A link would suffice. Of course if someone has a good reason to keep this, then lets hear that reason. maveric149

The Sacramento Public Library's Sacramento Room maintain a comprehensive collection of materials documenting Sacramento City and Sacramento County history and life. It includes city directories and telephone books, as well as the Sacramento periodical collection which consists of newspapers, magazines and newsletters published in Sacramento and about Sacramento people, businesses, organizations, places, events and history.

I had put that text in, only because the Sacramento article is necessarily incomplete, and a reliable pointer to a centralized repository of historical information about Sacramento would be useful to those who need to get more information than we can supply.
Balanone

That's good. Now it at the top of /Talk so that others may use it to gather more information. maveric149

Was Sacramento first named New Helvetia?

I find reference on http://www.usacitiesonline.com/cacountysacramento.htm#statistics that Captain Sutter first named Sacramento "New Helvetia, a haven for his Swiss Countrymen." Can this be verified?


That's not entirely true. His name for what we call Sutter's Fort was New Helvitia -- which is considered to be early settlement of the Sacramento area and not the establishment of the city itself (which was accomplished by John Sutter Jr). Sutters Fort was unfortunetely overrun by gold seekers who were unconcered about Sutters ideas about a utopian farming community. As a result of river-borne commerce, the city grew a couple of miles west of the fort and very quickly surpassed it in importance. maveric149

Former mayors

The addition of the list of past mayors is great! However, I think it might be overkill to have full fledge stand-alone wiki articles on all of them. Don't get me wrong, anyone is welcome to try, but I am not so masochistic -- and I don't know how valid such additions to wikipedia would be seen by othr wikipedians (if every city article had this, we would quickly have rediculously long lists for mayor John_Doe). What I suggest is this: Each mayor should have their own subpage directly off of the Sacramento article (instead of their own, stand alone page on the wiki itself). For example, instead of having the link on Sacramento/Mayors go to Heather_Fargo, why not have it link to Sacramento/Heather_Fargo? maveric149

I have no strong feelings about this. I was originally thinking of leaving the wiki links off, and just let people add them if/when they actually create pages concerning any of those people.

Balanone

Article name

Since there are several cities with the name "Sacramento" in the world, and Wikipedia has the unofficial convention of demarcating cities as city, state (USA) and city, country outside the US, I was wondering if we should do the same with "Sacramento". The entry "Sacramento" could then serve as a jumping-off point to the various "Sacramento's" around the world. I am the original author of this entry, and it seems to be the most logical thing to do -- even though Sacramento, California is obviously the most famous "Sacramento" in the world (a check of Google might indicate to some that there is the only "Sacramento" in the world). But even so, renaming does seem to be the best thing to do. What do you think fellow Wikipedians? maveric149

Makes sense to me. Balanone.

I changed my mind. The other Sacramento's are not nearly as well known as this one. The article will stay at Sacramento, California with Sacramento redirecting there. Links to the other Sacramento's are provided at the bottom of the article. --maveric149

External link: suckramento.com

Although I personally enjoy this site, is it really appropriate for a wiki entry for the city of Sacramento?Seems like it would be more appropriate in an article about "Sacramento Culture", under a Sacramento catagory, akin to articles under catagories in Category:Los Angeles and Category:San Francisco.
--scupper 01:03, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Section: History/Summary/creation of Sacramento History article

Should a Sacramento Catagory be created and a Sacramento History article created using the contributions in the History section, then replace the content with a smaller summary of the city's history for the Sacramento, California article?
--scupper 01:13, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Based on my experience with Los Angeles, I would recommend waiting as long as you can before splitting sections into separate articles. Rather than a promotion, it can be more like an exile. On the matter of a "Category:Sacramento, California" category, the Category:Sacramento County, California serves as a catchall now and contains many items that could be moved to a city-specific category, for example Sacramento Bee. So it is probably worthwhile top make a city category. -Willmcw 01:40, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Serial killers

Since a lot of worthies have been (justifiably) shifted to list pages, maybe Dorothea Puente doesn't quite rate the front-page treatment. Regretably, she's also in the Sac killer company of Richard Chase, Gerald and Charlene Gallego, Ted Kaczynski, the "East Area rapist," Morris Solomon, Eric Royce Leonard, and Nikolay Soltys, among others. Squib 21:38, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Is Sacramento really the oldest incorporated city in CA?

This page makes that claim; however Sacramento was incorporated on February 27, 1850. San Francisco was incorporated nine days earlier, on February 18, 1850.
--GraemeMcRae 06:58, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

SF County was created February 18 by the legislature. SF County government got going on 04/01, then just days later on 04/05 the legislature passed an incorporation act for the city. The city charter passed on 04/15 so that's considered the date of record for San Francisco, and Mayor Geary was sworn in on 05/01. The city and county were merged into their current structure years later in 1856. ([1] [2]) — RandallJones 18:54, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Oh, that's good to know. I'll go and fix the date in my list of cities in California. Just to be clear: the date of incorporation of the city of San Francisco is 4/15/1850, right?

--GraemeMcRae 19:09, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

That's the date they use on the official SF web site.— RandallJones 00:20, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

I can find a reference to the "person holes" tidbit, so I'm calling bullpucky on that. Richfife 13:44, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

What does, "Sacramento became a state of the United States in December 1848" mean? Was Sacramento really a state?

Image:Sacramentodowntown.jpg has been listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:Sacramentodowntown.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Amtrak

I'm skeptical about the claim that "Amtrak is the most popular ground transportation choice in the City of Sacramento." Is there a reference for this statistic? Rolofft

I've removed it. It's also ambiguous; any such statements should provide at least a little context, and at least a definition of "most popular." Demi T/C 23:30, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Sutter's Fort

The article states, "The oldest part of the town besides Sutter's Fort is Old Sacramento [...]". I don't remember where I heard this, but I think that the current Sutter's Fort site is a replica. I could check it out if no one else here knows for sure. Jobarts-Talk 06:18, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Sutter's Fort is at the original location. It is mostly reconstructed, however. The original fort lay empty and abandoned for many decades. The reconstruction made use of what was still there. Daphodyl 18:50, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

External Link "Sacramento Pictures"

The external link labeled "Sacramento Pictures" is to a personal blog with a few photos of Sacramento. Is this an appropriate external link?--scupper 17:54, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

I'd have to say no. Scrub it. Rsm99833 18:00, 18 June 2006 (UTC)


Survey on proposal to make U.S. city naming guidelines consistent with others countries

There is a survey in progress at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (settlements) to determine if there is consensus on a proposed change to the U.S. city naming conventions to be consistent with other countries, in particular Canada. --Serge 05:45, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

However the proposal would allow U.S. cities to be inconsistent with the vast majority of other U.S. cities and towns, which (with a few exceptions) all use the "city, state" convention. -Will Beback 23:39, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

good town

kzz* 23:26, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Population 2.5 million?

This article states Sac is an area of 2.5 million. Being as that the 2005 estimate of the Sacramento–Arden-Arcade–Roseville CA MSA is 2,042,283 and the CSA or combined statistical area which takes in more counties is Sacramento–Arden-Arcade–Truckee CA–NV 2,187,694, an extremely broad definition of the metro. How do you get to 2.5? Its important to be accurate here, Sacramento is big and growing fast but 2.5 million is rediculous. Im changing it to 2.2 million adjusting for growth in the last year. You have to understand that once you get a certain distance away from a place, it stops being that place and that if you go by such broad definitions other places would be much larger also.

Yolo county perhaps? Nmpls 00:36, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Famous alumni

You know I have faith in these guys, however....

"St. Francis H.S. Famous alumni includes A.J. (Alexandra Jayne) Stewart (finalist in cycle 7 of America's Next Top Model). Graduated in 2004."

"Famous alumni include Greg Ramsey(renown bachelor) and Fred Castano(future writer for The New York Times)"

Sacramento Flood Risk

I'm considering drafting a part on the flood risk and history of Sacramento, under the Geo and Climate section. Anyone have any objections, or want to help? --Sacdelicious 06:47, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Reordered page to keep conversations flowed in order from top (first comment) to bottom (most recent). Ronbo76 06:56, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
You may wish to read:

Timeline on Sacramento history - another good source

  • Timeline - While already listed as a root source/reference, this timeline delineates many historical firsts for city and state history. Ronbo76 17:33, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

The lost frontier

I would like to see a change to the name of this subsection. I've changed it twice now to First Nation but without a dialog, so I'll start one here.

What was lost? A frontier? How? I guess this does not make sense as a title. Here is some more background.

In trying to resolve this issue, I previously posted this to the talk:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America but did not have much success.

  • Style regarding U.S. history subsections
I have an interest in understanding what to name the subsections for geographic areas that I am editing history sections of. For instance, for some geographic areas there will be three subsections: pre european, european arrival, and recent history. My question is to find some heading that is agreed upon that is a better discription than "pre eureopean." I gave the first section the title of "First Nation," but in reading around I have discovered that "first nation" is a term used for Canadians not current day U.S. lands. So.
The place was what it was - and was not considered "pre eureopean" by the people who lived there in that time. How can it be pre something they never heard of? I don't like a title that says "pre" anything. Many place's history sections have a pre-some-date or pre-some-hisorical-reference-person's-name and this referencing really bothers me. Also, often the native population has had a population increase and is now a part of daily life in the area. They didn't just go away.
Is there a standard already? Thanks!--al95521 05:44, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
I think the term "Pre-Contact" is most common, but if you don't want to use that, First Nation and American-Indian are too general to be very helpful. You might try figuring out exactly which people lived there, and use their name for the section. I'm not totally clear on your question though, so maybe a more specific example would help? - TheMightyQuill 07:19, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
--al95521 15:23, 31 January 2007 (UTC)As a newer editor I thought I should stick close to home and that is northern California.

So what do we do now?

I would suggest two things. First, play in the sandbox and write an article that you might to expand into an article. Then, write it.
Changing section headers without announcement is never a good idea. Even with discussion on a talkpage, you probably will not reach consensus. This article has been around for awhile and proven editors have left the way it now for that same period. My second recommendation would be to find a stub article in Northern California that needs expansion. You can find them at the WP:CAL project page. Once you have the knack of taking a stub article, two or three to start status, you will begin to appreciate what other editors have done. Ronbo76 05:47, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Well the truth is that I HAVE written a bunch. I believe I know what I'm writing about. I AM a "proven editor", as you say. Read my contrubution list. Most of what I write sticks. This is an issue about cultural sensitivity not about whether or not I am a good writer or have a "knack". Lost Fontier is not an acurate statement nor is it culturally sensitive to a culture of peoples that inhabited a land that was invaded by a new people. So sorry that I didn't get my point across. I guess being direct is better. So. I'm announcing the change. There you have it. I think the new heading I will try will be Indigeonus culture', rather than First nation. I will be happy to dialog, but we're looking at admin help soon.--al95521 04:34, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Demographic Information

Is there a way to find demographic information on Sacramento's neighborhoods. I'm trying to start neighborhood pages--very incomplete so far and the articles that are started are VERY basic but this would add some interesting info about diversity, etc (if it is even kept track of??) Alamar2001 04:17, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Contact KCRA Channel 3 or check their website. I know they have some demogrphics. If not try The Sac PD or Chamber of Commerce or even Sac City Hall.--Amadscientist 20:10, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
There might be some informaton on the Sacramento Council of Governments website: http://www.sacog.org/ --DevinCook 04:48, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


climate

seems that some of data on the climate section is a little inacturate according to this http://www.wrh.noaa.gov/wrh/techMemos/272.pdf

i would think the nws would be quite a bit more accurate then the source currently being sited.

~Why does the climate section speculate that summer 2007 is going to be —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.164.223.36 (talk) 05:02, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

What is the source for the 19.9 inch figure? It's linked back to a travel page from the weather channel. From there the trail of evidence isn't apparent.

Spindiggity says, http://www.cnrfc.noaa.gov/awipsProducts/RNOWRKCLI.php isn't the NWS, and that I should look at the fine print. I guess the header of National Weather Service, the link from www.weather.gov, the listing at the bottom "in the fine print" Webmaster US Dept of Commerce National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration National Weather Service California-Nevada River Forecast Center 3310 El Camino Avenue, Room 227 Sacramento, CA 95821-6373, Tel: (916) 979-3056 and the USA.gov seal, threw me off.

What kind of monkeyshine are you folks trying to pull here? If there is a more authoritative website for Sacramento climate then the office of the National Weather Service on El Camino Avenue, in a building I helped construct, then show it to me. Why don't we give them a call? Now where is the complaint form? I want to file a grievance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.86.226.37 (talk) 23:24, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I got the name wrong. It's not Spindiggity, it's Killiondude. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.86.226.37 (talk) 23:42, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

If the info in the info box below isn't in agreement with the NWS then it behooves you to correct it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.86.226.37 (talk) 23:47, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Take a breather. The second link you posted wasn't the NWS--that's why I said what I did. I'll fix the page with some of the info from the NWS. Killiondude (talk) 23:53, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
My apologies. I didn't look at the changes carefully enough. But we're all human, so there really was no need for you to get so upset. I changed the annual average rainfall to reflect the NWS page. I'll change the other thing back to what you added too (we don't have a source for that fact, so I'll trust the site you used). Killiondude (talk) 00:24, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about the snippyness. I'm in a better mood now. Here this should help with the info box. 89.9 mm = 3.54 in (Feb) 71.1 mm = 2.80 in (Mar) 25.9 mm = 1.02 in (Apr) 13.4 mm = 0.53 in (May) 5.08 mm = 0.20 in (Jun) 1.27 mm = 0.05 in (Jul) 1.52 mm = 0.06 in (Aug) 9.14 mm = 0.36 in (Sep) 22.6 mm = 0.89 in (Oct) 55.6 mm = 2.19 in (Nov) 62.2 mm = 2.45 in (Dec) 97.5 mm = 3.84 in (Jan) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.86.226.21 (talk) 02:28, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Arts section

If you would like, Amadscientist, we could make a whole article for Arts in Sacramento, California or Culture in Sacramento, California. Do you think that's a good idea? I think culture would be more standard and we could get sports and notable people out of that section. Basar 23:12, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Just saw this today. Uhm....to be honest, there certainly is enough there for it. However I would want to look at other city pages to see how else it has been done. I like the idea, but would still want something noted on the main page. What do you think?--Amadscientist 09:18, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Ya, I think what you already have on the main page should stay, and it could simply be expanded on in its own page, that is, if you want to expand it. My three favorite city articles, San Francisco, Boston, and New York City all have a similar setup. Basar 09:33, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I have started a subpage in my sandbox to work on for Arts in Sacramento, California. I will decide on a finished page title as I work on it. It may very well end up as a culture page.--Amadscientist 00:59, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

And I never got around to it. Maybe someday.--Amadscientist (talk) 00:59, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Is this right?

"In the early 1990s, Mayor Joe Serna attempted to lure the Los Angeles Raiders football team to Sacramento, selling $50 million cents in bonds as earnest money."

50 million cents? or dollars?

sorry, forgot to sign above comment Лёха Фурсов: Sacrublood 16:44, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

City picture

What keeps happening? Everytime somebody puts a good picture of Sacramento on the page, it keeps going back to the current and crappy one. I don't have a good picture of Sacramento, but somebody really needs to put a better one up. This one serves the city no justice. Soy Milk Jim (talk) 07:31, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

What does everyone think of this?


Xde13 02:51, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I think it's a cool picture, but I don't feel like it captures what Sacramento really looks like. I want all the buildings and stuff in there. I know it seems like I'm complaining about this and not providing any pictures of my own, but all mine suck and I don't live in Sacramento so it's hard to get pictures of it. I realize you (Xde 13) have provided a lot of good pictures for Sacramento and I thank you for that. But I just feel like we can get a really good one that really shows what the city looks like. Until then, I'll continue trying to get a good picture whenever I go to Sacramento, which really isn't that often though. Soy Milk Jim (talk) 06:40, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

List of radio stations in Sacramento up for deletion

If anyone is interested, this list is up for deletion, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of radio stations in Sacramento. DHowell (talk) 22:02, 10 March 2008 (UTC)


Source?

"The City of Sacramento expends considerable effort to keep state agencies from moving outside the city limits." Could this be referenced or somehow verified? I live in the Sacramento metro area and I didn't know this... doesn't mean its not true, but all the same.Killiondude (talk) 07:07, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

It's been in the article a while, added by an anon in December 2005.[3][4] The rest of the edit seems factual and neutral, but we should still try to find a source for it. I'd imagine the Sacramento Bee might have coverage of such an effort. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 08:25, 18 July 2008 (UTC)
I found this, but it was a one time event. I've been looking for other instances of the city making deals to keep state agencies in, but so far I have come up short. I'll continue my search though. Killiondude (talk) 01:24, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Panorama of Sacramento

I'll leave this here for consideration. I don't know exactly how it should fit into the article, but I think this panorama turned out quite well. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 03:08, 17 October 2008 (UTC) 

  Fantastic picture. Soy Milk Jim (talk) 04:52, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. :) I would like to see it used in the article... is there a good place to stick it? ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 05:07, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

You could also post it on Downtown Sacramento. It would go great there seeing how it is a picture of Downtown. Nice job by the way. Killiondude (talk) 06:18, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

I added it to that article. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 16:57, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

To JC - is this your photo? I would like to be able to use this panoramic photo of Sacramento on a website - is that possible? Is there a higher resolution or larger image available? V.F Vfarr (talk) 23:51, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

You might wanna leave a note on his talk page to let him know you're using it, but in short he released it under a Creative Commons 3.0 license. Which means other people can use it, "under the conditions that you appropriately attribute it". Attribute it to him. You can see the full size photo at this link. Killiondude (talk) 00:19, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
yeah, the full size is at that link. I have an uncropped version of the picture - but it really did need to be cropped. You can use my image if you use the following credit line somewhere near it: "© Justin Smith / Wikimedia Commons, CC-By-SA-3.0" - Linking to the page where the image is from is also appreciated: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Sacramento_Skyline_(cropped).jpg. I appreciate the interest. :) Where do you plan on using it? ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 01:04, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
I love the image but is it possible to try the full version like we see in similar articles, without the scroll bar? To see the full sky line.--Amadscientist (talk) 00:54, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Copyright violation of image

A close look at the link used on this page shows that someone has violated the applicable copyright of the registere Wikicommons member who holds a lisence of Sharealike 3.0.

The image was uploaded to Wikipedia in violation of policy, and copyright by publishing it on Wiki as a Public Domain image. I am replacing the image with a direct link to the wikimedia commons upload page as should have been done and will tag the other image for speedy deletion.--Amadscientist (talk) 00:59, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

The editor has fixed the license but the image was very large for the page even with a high resolution setting on my screen was difficult to view without scrolling.--Amadscientist (talk) 00:55, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Nicknames - Perhaps Excessive?

Quick question: is the nickname section of the article's header excessive. Currently, for the city's nicknames, it lists: River City, Sac, Sac-Town, Almond Capital of the World, Big Tomato, Camellia City, City of Trees, Sacto, Sactown, Sacramental, Sacratomato. I have never heard the nicknames "Sacramental" or "Camellia City". "Almond Capital of the World" is more of a title than a nickname. Should we scale down this list? -DevinCook (talk) 10:33, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Its been scaled down many a time. I've had it on my watchlist for awhile now, and whenever somebody scales it down, another comes in and adds the "nicknames" back to it. I'll fix it again, but it is a semi-ridiculous cycle. - Killiondude (talk) 19:14, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Ah. ...I'm still fond of Sacratomato though. :) Thank you for your help. -DevinCook (talk) 19:21, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
They all need sources... but it's not really worth the fight. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 01:08, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

UFO

See http://www.news10.net/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=50924&provider=top - UFO spotted by people, local media. Powerzilla (talk) 17:24, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

That's.... interesting. Killiondude (talk) 17:34, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
There is a video link in this source. Powerzilla (talk) 17:56, 24 November 2008 (UTC)
It could be like what happened in Stephenville, Texas all over again. Powerzilla (talk) 18:07, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

South Sacramento

Okay. Discussion time. Parkway-South Sacramento, California isn't in the list of unincorporated places, so I'm going to add it. But this got me thinking about the area of Parkway. The article states that Parkway is in Area Two of the city. According to this map from the City of Sacramento, Parkway seems to be in city limits, while the Census Bureau says Parkway-South Sacramento is a Census-designated place.

Is a portion of Parkway in city limits while another is the CDP? Common sense tells me that Parkway can't (entirely) be both in the city limits while a CDP. Should it be listed both as in Area Two and in the Unincorporated Areas?

For now I'm going to add a section to the Unincorporated Areas titled South Sacramento. I'll link it to the Parkway-South Sac wiki article, but for now I'm only going to include info about South Sac primarily from here. Killiondude (talk) 07:00, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Music

I feel like Jackie Greene should be mentioned, as he is a local musician who played on Conan 'O Brian and tours with the remaining Grateful Dead. I added Agent Ribbons for popular alt band, although the presently listed ones (bidwel, etc) aren't really that popular or payed attention to outside of Sacramento. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.26.165.144 (talk) 05:59, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Jackie Greene is already listed on the page for that kind of trivia. See Sacramento entertainers. -----J.S (T/C/WRE) 18:26, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Looking for researcher

Hi. I'm looking for a dedicated researcher who lives in Sacramento, and who would be willing to spend some time in the Sacramento public library researching through old microfish of the Sacramento Bee from 1974-1980. You can reach me through my talk. —Dixie Brown (talk) 22:02, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Remnants of Downtown Sacramento's Chinatown

This section includes important historical information regarding the city's heritage, but more sources are needed. I've started to work on the phrasing and grammar, which does need some work, but more importantly, help is needed to provide more sourcing to assist contributors expanding this section, rather than reverting it. Those familiar with the area know that immigration during the mining boom and building of the railroads is an important aspect of the Central Valley's history. Steveozone (talk) 04:46, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Infobox Image

I like the new image. However, is it possible to find or get a similar image that included the Tower Bridge? It would represent the city much better that way. Something like the panarama but in a regular landscape size.--Amadscientist (talk) 01:04, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Griffin5Talk/Contributions

Some day I'd like to get back up on the Ziggurat and take another picture with a wide-angle lens and my much nicer camera then I had previously. If I do, I swear I'll donate it to wikipedia. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 18:44, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Can't we find a better picture of the city?

I mean, there are tree branches in the way. Here are some good ones: http://www.city-data.com/forum/sacramento/545694-picture-thread-2.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.121.67.202 (talk) 03:27, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

City Motto

"Untamed City" seems like a rather odd translation of "urbs indomita" - I'm pretty sure "Indomitable City" would be a more accurate version. (If evidence is needed, see this book's note on it. I took the liberty of changing it - if anyone has an issue with it, feel free to change it back.

69.62.157.12 (talk) 04:48, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Bethlehem as a Sister City

The city of Bethlehem is located in the West Bank. The city of Sacramento officially recognizes the city as being in Palestine and not Israel. I made the appropriate corrections on May 24th, 2011. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.123.234.111 (talk) 19:13, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Title should be Sacramento

I guess the title of this article should be Sacramento, not Sacramento, California. Because Sacramento is a redirect to this page, anyways. Just like Seattle doesn't have the title Seattle, Washington, it's simply Seattle. Both are capitals of a US state, and the most well known things for that name. Ark25 (talk) 18:04, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

City, State is a very common naming scheme. I wonder what the MoS says on this topic? ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 22:40, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
There has been some kind of change. Bigger well-known cities like New York are now being named as indicated. Remember a couple of years ago when it had to be City, State, US? I think city, state is better. ----moreno oso (talk) 22:49, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
I don't recall ever having "City, State, US", but "City, State" is the standard for all US cities except those which the AP style guide say can be referred to just as "City". I don't see a good reason for violating the naming convention.   Will Beback  talk  22:55, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Is there any written Wikipedia naming convention for US cities titles? I can't find any, please help me find it. Ark25 (talk) 18:04, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

WP:NC:CITY. --Born2cycle (talk) 00:06, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

While it is true that the naming conventions for U.S. cities currently state that most U.S. cities should be at [[city, state]] regardless of whether they need to be disambiguated, this approach to disambiguate regardless of need seems to be falling out of favor with other naming guidelines like those for ships and royalty, especially when a single name of the topic is obvious and available (does not conflict with other uses). That seems to the case for this article and I, for one, would support a move to Sacramento. Perhaps other unambiguous state capital cities like Boise, Baton Rouge and Tallahassee should be moved too? See Category:State_capitals_in_the_United_States for the complete list of all U.S. state capitals (not all are unique or primary use like Sacramento is). --Born2cycle (talk) 00:29, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply, Born2cycle. When I started this topic I didn't knew about the naming convention, but now I do and I agree with it. Not sure what makes Detroit, Honolulu, Houston, Indianapolis, etc. to be exceptions but I imagine it's about their size and possibly also their fame. However, as I am not an US citizen and I never lived in US, still, for me Sacramento its quite famous (and also Palo Alto and a few others I think), because its name is mentioned all the time in the IT newspapers. But I must say I'm not realy entitled to make a judgement about the naming convention as a US citizen can be. Also Baton Rouge is famous to me too, the others not - Boise and Thallahassee, It's probably a subjective decision what cities make the exception and therefore it can always be challenged - and doing that doesn't really seem to be productive. So I don't want to insist. Just remember this: from an outsider point of view, Sacramento and Baton Rouge are quite famous. Thanks —  Ark25  (talk) 15:58, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
I understand. Because fame relative to other uses of the same term is a factor to be considered in cases where there is more than one use for a name, fame is sometimes mistakenly taken to be a a general naming criteria. It is not. In general, when the most commonly used name for a subject is unique, that's the name of the subject, regardless of how famous that subject may or may not be. See WP:TITLE. The guideline for U.S. cities currently contradicts this, and it's one of the few remaining guidelines that do. --Born2cycle (talk) 16:16, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Anon IP revert followed closely by a regular editor

Earlier this afternoon an anon IP made an unsourced edit of a non-notable band, Trash Talk (band), to this article. That was reverted by me and very quickly followed by a regular editor at 21:21 with a source. I followed the anon IP to the band's article which is very poorly sourced. Request another editor take a look at today's post. It is not necessary for this band to be posted to the article as they do not contribute materially either to the article or the city itself. ----moreno oso (talk) 22:09, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Weather reporting station

We have two choices of weather reporting stations for Sacramento: California State University, which is closer to the centre of downtown, and Sacramento Int'l Airport. Since Sacramento is one of the last major US city articles where the climate data is not to the nearest 0.1 ℉, I am going to use the airport data for now. The table needs updating anyway. It is perhaps unchecked IP-induced fabrication that does not match the source. --HXL 何献龙 12:50, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

I patched up the weather box template a few days ago to add all available data from the NOAA source given to the table. I double checked that it is factual. Ks0stm (T•C•G) 02:24, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

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: No consensus. Jafeluv (talk) 11:10, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Sacramento, California → Sacramento — "Sacramento" already redirects here. Why not just simply call the page "Sacramento" instead of "Sacramento, California"? Just like Detroit, Minneapolis, and Milwaukee don't include the name of the state because they're so well-known, so should Sacramento. It would greatly enhance our readers' Wikipedia experience by simplifying. --Krauseaj

I think those are titled as such because that's what the AP Stylebook has titled them. Killiondude (talk) 00:21, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support The limitation about only AP cities not requiring disambiguation is in dispute and apparently no longer has consensus support. I suggest we focus on the merits of this particular move with respect to the relevant policy and guidelines, especially WP:TITLE, WP:COMMONNAME and WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. It seems like this proposal is consistent with that (proposed title is more concise than current title; current title is more precise than necessary but proposed title is not), so I support. --Born2cycle (talk) 00:51, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Support, it seems reasonable given the policy and seeing as it would just be reversing the Sacramento → Sacramento, California redirect. Just as a note we would also have to re-orient Sacramento, CA to Sacramento so that it's not a double redirect. Ks0stm (T•C•G) 01:15, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Furthering my reasoning, this is (at least to me...correct me if I'm wrong) the most well known instance of the name "Sacramento", and has Sacramento redirecting to it. If that page is redirecting to it and not Sacramento (disambiguation), I see no reason not to move the article to that title. If "Sacramento" redirected to the disambiguation page, I would oppose this move, but given circumstances, I support it. Ks0stm (T•C•G) 09:23, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose - WP:PLACE calls for U.S. cities to be titled "City, State" unless the AP Stylebook says that a state disambiguator is not required. This is not the case with Sacramento. Dough4872 02:15, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
    • That guideline is in dispute and apparently no longer has consensus support. --Born2cycle (talk) 08:31, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
      • According to one poll in which you've been extremely active.   Will Beback  talk  09:04, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
        • You might also mention that Born2cycle is the one who decided to tag the guideline as "in dispute".--MelanieN (talk) 17:36, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
          • But it is in dispute - about half of the participants think it should be scrapped. Do you, Will and Melanie, actually think it does have consensus? john k (talk) 15:40, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose - There are quite a few cities/towns named Sacramento. If anything, more Wiki articles need to follow wp:place better. The Los Angeles page, for instance. -DevinCook (talk) 02:21, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
    • Read all of WP:PLACE. The U.S. is one of the few (only?) countries left that still disambiguate even when unnecessary, but even that guideline/convention is in limbo right now. --Born2cycle (talk) 08:31, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
      • The United State is a collection of states. While a city name within a state might be unique, this is not the case Union-wide. This is, no doubt, also the case with other unions such as the EU. Likewise, the designator is not only helpful, it is respectful. -DevinCook (talk) 11:17, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The current name is consistent with the naming convention for US cities.   Will Beback  talk  09:04, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose As several others noted, the name "Sacramento, California" is how the current guidelines for U.S. cities say it should be listed. Those guidelines are currently under discussion at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names), but unless and until consensus is reached there to list cities such as Sacramento without the state, this move should not be made. --MelanieN (talk) 17:25, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I live in this area, and I think it is important that "California" be included in the entry (esp. with a religious name like this). I also see no benefit to the typical user for going through with this proposal. Jack B108 (talk) 19:25, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose: The name is in line with current U.S. Cities guidelines. --Monterey Bay (talk) 02:48, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support Unqualified name already redirects here so effectively the shorter target name is already occupied by the article. --Polaron | Talk 07:06, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose per guideline at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names) which works fine. --Doncram (talk) 14:47, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose There is an extensive debate at WT:Naming conventions (geographic names) over just what the guideline should be. Therefore, I think there should be a moratorium on all place name moves until we come to some sort of resolution or detente on the current convention.DCmacnut<> 15:27, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support - obviously a primary topic. I don't understand the argument that we need to reach consensus before we can deal with individual articles. Since obviously there is not consensus on the policy page and will not be, that is simply a recipe for never moving any of them. john k (talk) 15:40, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose per US cities guidelines. It is not unequivocally ambiguous (river, valley, etc) and there is no reason to add any more blasted exceptions to a patchwork quilt of a guideline. AgneCheese/Wine 00:24, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose I live near Sacramento, California and am quite happy to know that it is Sacramento, California that the article is about and not something else. Readers can have no doubt from the name of the article what it is they might want to read about and not waste time if they want to read about something else named Sacramento. This renaming effort is a waste of time for all involved here. Hmains (talk) 05:18, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
    • Interesting. Do you think there is a reason we don't try to provide a similar service to our readers for the vast majority of articles in WP? I mean, why aren't small towns (not to mention major cities like Sacramento) in Germany, England, Ireland, etc. disambiguated with additional information? Why is Plymouth not at Plymouth, England, for example? Why is James Stewart not at James Stewart (actor) (there are many more other uses of James Stewart than there are of Sacramento)? Why is Dolores Claiborne not at Dolores Claiborne (novel)? Regardless of what those reasons might be for not adding more precision to these titles to help readers know that it is the topic they seek that the article is about, why should those reasons to not add the extra precision not apply to articles about U.S. cities? Why should U.S. cities be an exception to the rule to not add additional precision like ", State" unless it is needed for disambiguation? Or are you saying that this use of Sacramento is not the primary use in the English language? --Born2cycle (talk) 06:47, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Support WP:PLACE and the U.S. Cities guidelines obviously don't prevent Denver, New York City, Atlanta, Honolulu, Salt Lake City. These are capitals, and there is no mistake about what Sacramento is being referred to: the capital of California. Int21h (talk) 08:06, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
    • Those cities are specifically addressed in the guidelines. Sacramento is not. Powers T 20:04, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Deb (talk) 13:16, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Oppose; there is no consensus to overturn the long-standing precedent. Powers T 20:04, 1 January 2011 (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.

Oh, Come On Guys

The main use of the name "Sacramento" refers to the U.S. state. The comments about U.S. state naming conventions are therefore nullified in light of other major examples like Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York City, among others. Even Brooklyn doesn't have its state of New York trailing it in the article name. What on Earth is wrong with just moving this page to Sacramento and putting the notice at the top of that page linking to the disambiguation instead? This makes absolutely no sense! CycloneGU (talk) 18:34, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

We just had a formal discussion on this last month. Can you at least let it rest for a few more weeks? Jack B108 (talk) 23:49, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
Yes, I can see that above this. I just think it's a silly result given Salt Lake City, the 127th most populated city in the U.S., is considered eligible to violate the "City, State" rule and Memphis (the 19th and obvious to me) and others including this one, the 38th, are not. (I ignored Phoenix since that can also be a mythical being and is probably the main use for that name, so Phoenix, Arizona is necessary for that one.) But yes, I was about to make a move request earlier and saw the one above, so backed out of it and am waiting. CycloneGU (talk) 01:19, 18 February 2011 (UTC)


a request was made to change the name via speedy deletion of the redirect. I have declined to do so, as I see the discussion on it here was closed as non-consensus. I would regard further such attempts as disruptive. DGG ( talk ) 19:48, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

I Street Bridge?

I don't think that the picture labeled "I Street Bridge" is the I Street Bridge. I think that it is the Tower Bridge. Can anyone confirm that the picture/information is correct?Toyz1988 (talk) 16:23, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

You're quite right (the I Street Bridge is rather ugly and old). I reverted an IP or some other newbie recently when they tried to change the filename to a redlink on this article. I understand now that they were trying to reveal that the picture wasn't what it was as labeled. I've moved the file on Commons and changed the image description page as well. Should be sorted now. Killiondude (talk) 07:07, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, I doubt that I could have done all that myself.Toyz1988 (talk) 18:12, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Jedediah Smith

I believe mentioning Jedediah Smith's California explorations would be appropriate for this article. Cmguy777 (talk) 22:12, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

He was in the news recently because the school named after him is considering ditching the connection to him for his bad acts. Same here? CampKohler (talk) 05:12, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Aerospace Museum of California

Why doesn't the museum section mention the Aerospace Museum of California? CampKohler (talk) 05:12, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps because it's not within Sacramento? -skew-t (talk) 08:41, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Bethlehem, Israel?

The "sister cities" claims that Bethlehem is part of Israel. Bethlehem is in the central West Bank; not even official Israeli policy claims it as part of their national territory. To do so is highly POV. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.248.189.169 (talk) 04:15, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

I reverted without looking to see what Bethlehem's status is. This backs up what you're saying so your change is fine. My apologies for not looking more carefully. Killiondude (talk) 23:52, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

unnecessary cheering for the Sacramento Bee

makes wikipedia look bad because it shows the usual leftist slant. embarrassing. 107.43.42.62 (talk) 08:15, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

That is true of most larger cities in the USA, but the cheerleading was a bit much.Milspecsim (talk) 23:41, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

mega bus schedule

does anybody know if the bus actually goes to Sacramento and what the schedule is? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.198.65.35 (talk) 17:15, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Would recommend checking Megabus website for that. -skew-t (talk) 08:41, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

No Airport Information?

Nothing is listed for the airport...Milspecsim (talk) 23:40, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

There is a mention in the transportation section. Feel free to expand it. -skew-t (talk) 08:41, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Local government structure

This article says there are 15 city council districts, but that there are only eight city council members. Huh? 99.63.160.171 (talk) 01:29, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

Merging excessive notable people articles

The three articles: List of Sacramento writers, List of Sacramento sports figures, and List of Sacramento entertainers are excessive, especially when New York and San Francisco only have one article (List of people from New York City and List of people from San Francisco). The three articles have been merged into one article, List of people from Sacramento.

If someone could help clean it up and organize it for accuracy with properly cited sources, that'd be appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cheezesatzu (talk • contribs) 19:41, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Drexel University in the Introduction?

I challenge the inclusion of Drexel University into the introduction of the city of Sacramento on Wikipedia. This entity is not an historical aspect of the city, nor is it a foundational economic, cultural, social, physical or religious base of the city. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:9:7B80:125:5558:5413:52BF:7A94 (talk) 08:37, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

oyc.yale.edu/

Bold text — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:C:A380:763:24A7:6341:F652:2212 (talk) 01:47, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Structure

Hi. I'm going through all the US Cities (as per List of United States cities by population) in an effort to provide some uniformity in structure. Anyone have an issue with me restructuring this article as per Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/US Guideline. I won't be changing any content, merely the order. Occasionally, I will also move a picture just to clean up spacing issues. I've already gone through the top 20 or so on the above list, if you'd like to see how they turned out. Thoughts? Onel5969 (talk) 16:03, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Move? (11 January 2015)

The discussion can be found at Talk:Sacramento (disambiguation). -- Calidum 00:12, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

"Sack-My-Tomatoes"

"Sack-My-Tomagtoes" is a well-known nickname for Sacramento, which I've personally heard used well over a hundred times, while residing in Northern California (since the late 1970s/early 80s), from many people across a broad spectrum of lifestyles (its true, I hadn't yet found a documented, evidentiary source for this municipal nickname, but most of the other nicknames are presently unsourced as well, and I'd only added it earlier today). When I added this nickname to the article, it was swiftly reverted. I'm not sure why it was reverted - perhaps someone thought it was overly whimsical, or perhaps derogatory in some manner? I'm not sure. But what I do know is that I added it to the article in all sincerity ie., it IS what Northern Californians (and maybe people from Southern California too...I'm not sure), among those who don't reside in Sacramento, actually call the place (whereas, in my experience, people who do reside in Sacramento, or who used to, tend to utilize the nickname "Sacto," which also appears in the article). So I will look for an evidentiary source for the term, but in the meantime, I believe I shall revert the reversion, because I am quite convinced it is a real, common-usage municipal nickname that does belong in the article. KevinOKeeffe (talk) 23:45, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

While not having as many years as you do, I've lived in the area my entire life and have never heard it referred to as such. That coupled with the derogatory nature inspired a "swift reversion" as you put it. I still don't like it there, but since the others currently aren't sourced, I suppose this is what we're left with. Killiondude (talk) 23:51, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
I did find a source for the very similar "Sack o' Tomatoes" in Sacramento (magazine).
Regarding claims made in a Wikipedia article (such as the claim that Sack-My-Tomagtoes is a well-known nickname) the burden of proof is on those who wish to add (or re-add) them. No matter how real something is, if no reliable sources confirm it, it can be removed without prior discussion. In practice, unverifiable claims live for years in articles, but that does not invalidate the policy or the goal. If you're unclear on this, please review Wikipedia:Verifiability.—Stepheng3 (talk) 17:28, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Pulitzer Prize winning newspaper columnist Herb Caen wrote for the San Francisco Chronicle for nearly 60 years. He was born in Sacramento, and was fond of calling it "sack o tomatoes". He discussed this in his 1953 book "Don't Call it Frisco", a title referrring to another city nickname. I read Caen's column almost every day from 1972 until his death, and he told the "sack o tomatoes" joke many times over the years. Here's a mention. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:16, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
I'd accept a Herb Caen column citation for verification of the city's nickname.—Stepheng3 (talk) 03:26, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Timeline of Sacramento, California

What is missing from the recently created city timeline article? Please add relevant content. Contributions welcome. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 16:12, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 6 external links on Sacramento, California. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:26, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sacramento,_California/Archive_1&oldid=1211459668"