Talk:San Marino, California

Naming

"The city was [NOT] named for the nearby estate of Henry E. Huntington,....], a claim that is prima facie nonsense.

See the San Marino website for the origin of the name:

"San Marino History

"The principal portions of San Marino were included in a Mexican Land Grant in 1830 to an Indian lady named Senora Victoria Reid, the widow of an Englishman. She named her Rancho, Huerta de Cuati. Prior to this grant , the area was part of the San Gabriel Mission (the "Old Mill" was the grist mill for the Mission), and before that was occupied by the Gabrielino Indians with their village located at what is now Huntington School.

"In 1852, Mrs. Reid deeded her Rancho to Don Benito Wilson. Later, Wilson deeded the main portion to J. de Barth Shorb, who named his Rancho after his grandfather's plantation in Maryland, which in turn had received its name from the Republic of San Marino, in Italy...."

http://www.ci.san-marino.ca.us/city/gen_info/history.html

The city website explains why the city seal echoes the seal of the Repubblica di San Marino.

Compare: http://www.ci.san-marino.ca.us/ With: http://www.sanmarinosite.com/

-- TForeman

Other private school

Isn't there another private school? Like Clairbourne or something like that?

that's near by but not in the city Kiwidude 07:34, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Kiwidude's right. Carver really shouldn't be in San Marion either, but the city expanded the boarders. If you look on a map, Carver just juts out. 69.108.93.41 (talk) 22:00, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

Licensing Commercial Vehicles

Anyone know what the deal is with so many taxicabs, repair trucks and other commercial vehicles throughout Los Angeles County having stickers on their bumpers saying licensed in San Marino? Far more San Marino licenses on these commercial vehicles than any other city, by my observation. Why is that? San Marino running a discount on licenses or something?

Yup. 99 cents a license, lol. JK. Note: I see a taxi about once a week in San Marino. All the cars are Mercedes, Porsches, Lams, Lexus', etc. No ugly cars that muck up the scene. =) Bragging, duh. 69.108.93.41 (talk) 22:00, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

The San Marino sticker on vehicles represents a business license issued by the City of San Marino. It's required when you are conducting business within the City. (Contractors, gardeners, taxicabs etc...) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.130.210.65 (talk) 18:01, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

San Marino is highly restrictive of commercial operations in the city. It is one of the few cities that requires commercial vehicles to have permits to work in the City. On the other side it is a lucrative place to operate. Saltysailor (talk) 05:45, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Disturbia

Disturbia was not filmed in San Marino. It was filmed in Whittier, CA...but Turner's house was filmed in South Pasadena. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.171.220.85 (talk) 22:23, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

USC Star library

http://digitallibrary.usc.edu/search/controller/collection/lastar-m1.html DocOfSoc (talk) 12:57, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Notable people

• moved from my talk page: San Marino

Hi, I noticed that you reverted a couple of my edits to the notable people section. I gather that you want to add a somewhat in-depth description to each person, and I understand that, but right now it is making the section seem cluttered and somewhat unreadable. Having a basic description of the person with the link to their page (should a reader want to find out more) should suffice and is typically the norm for a city's notable residents page. I also added a couple more people to the list and removed a couple that did not have their own articles. Just trying to clean it up a bit, hope you understand. Thanks! Gordonhigh (talk) 07:40, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi Gordon,

Please do not continue to "edit war". While it may be your personal opinion that the notable person section seems cluttered, I strongly disagree. I did ask politly in the summary that we discuss that issue here, before you reverted again. As a wikipedia reader, I prefer having info in one place rather that having to click on each link. Many, many cities have comprehensive "Notable persons" lists (some even have separate pages) and it seems to me, it is more indicative of the person's (that is editing) level of interest, whether it is a stark list or includes interesting and/or vital info. e.g. You keep removing the fact that Christine Craft is a talk show host, that happens to be the only venue in which I am familiar with her work and I am sure she would prefer to leave that in. Award winners want their awards listed, etc. To my knowledge there is no "norm" for a city's "notable residents" page; I checked about 20 cities and they vary greatly. As you have come very close to violating the 3RR Rule I am not going to revert at this time. As this is a rather minuscule issue, I don't quite understand your repeated reverts. There is a big difference between "clean up" and demolition. The Major issue with this list is that there are no citations. It would be far more productive to attempt to amicably meet in a "middle ground" and get this list cited. Thanks! — DocOfSoc • Talk • 10:15, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

I think notable residents should have a "short sentence" describing them. In other words, 4-8 words. Also, it takes two to edit war. tedder (talk) 15:15, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

From what I've seen in other cities, better say "phrase" than sentence. Any longer than that shifts the focus away from the city to the persons. Those persons don't make the city what it is. (Those in city government and businesses do, and they aren't notable by default.) HkCaGu (talk) 15:36, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Phrase works for me. I'm horrible at anything above 4th grade English. It should be enough to give a small amount of context, no more. Even if it isn't in a guideline/policy somewhere, there are enough "notable X" sections on the 'pedia to give a clear consensus. tedder (talk) 15:44, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

I totally agree with both HkCaGu and Tedder. Short phrases is what has been n the article and which I reverted once until Gordon changed it twice. Yes, Tedder, I believe a must have a tattoo somewhere that says " "It take two to edit war--signed Tedder" somewhere! Since that has been infinitely clear for some years, I stopped at the first hint of it evolving into an edit war! Thank you for your input. I will be glad to count the words in each "phrase" to conform to your (and mine) standards.) Thank you for your input. Namaste — DocOfSoc • Talk • 23:07, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Why does Gordonhigh call it a "somewhat in-depth description" a few phrases about a particular person's outstanding achievements in life? It is the people who chose to live in San Marino from its early years until now who gave and give the city its character, and to know a little something about the "best" of them is very informative about San Marino. So, reluctantly, I must strongly disagree with HkCaGu on this point. Also, there are business people here listed as notable. Plus, what is the merit in "dumbing down" small bits of technical data that can be easily skipped? Elfelix (talk) 21:33, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

How can well-written text can be called "cluttered": the 2010 text made sense, was easy to grasp, and was nicely laid-out with well-organized information. Other red herrings are offered as excuses for the sad elimination of pre-existing, quality text, e.g., "typically the norm", and "trying to clean it up a bit" (here, concise language about admirable achievement). Also, double-talk about "you want to add" (that is, add what was used to be there--but for recent deletes!) and "but right now" (when else?). Moreover, the above signature line of "Gordonhigh" appears fake! Elfelix (talk) 21:33, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Before the section started off with the earlier residents of note, dating back to the 19th century, with their life dates. This provided a very good look at who, early on, chose to live here, with regard to persons of substantial achievement, e.g., governors, generals, and noble prize winners. Now this interesting aspect has been demolished. Elfelix (talk) 21:33, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Elefelix: If you want to go back and find the historical interesting aspect, I think those people should be re-added. I don't have time to look right now but if you remind me on my talk page I will look later . Namaste... — DocOfSoc • Talk • 00:01, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:San Marino CAL.gif

A file that is used in this article, File:San Marino CAL.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Acather96 (talk) 20:29, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

And of course, in a perfect display of wikipedia idiocy, the guy above deleted it. It was the symbol for the city nimrod. Of course it was a free image and I know because I created it. But on wikipedia, the attitude is always to delete. Thats why WP is such a joke. Patrolled by the mentally ill, edited to the lowest common denominator. Congrats for making the article worse. Ain't wikipedia grand. lol. 216.178.108.236 (talk) 20:59, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Mayor Dennis Kneier Resigns

San Marino Mayor Dennis Kneier resigned a week and a half after video of him tossing a bag of dog feces on his neighbor's yard went viral. http://www.scpr.org/news/2014/06/17/44792/san-marino-mayor-resigns-after-being-caught-throwi/Ammobox (talk) 02:24, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

>>Hmm, we need to find a place to include a mayor throwing poop in San Marino. To be nice, I don't think this is worthy of a Controversy section. Perhaps, we can add a List of mayors of San Marino section. :) SWP13 (talk) 02:29, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Non-census household income and home prices in lead

I removed the following from the lead:

The city is one of the wealthiest places in the nation in terms of household income. By extension, with a median home price of $2,699,098, San Marino is one of the most expensive and exclusive communities in the United States."

My reasons for this are:

• A consensus of editors at WP:USCITIES have agreed that "The US Census should be the primary source of demographic data. If census estimates or other reliable sources of demographic data are included, the additional data should supplement – not replace – the most recent available data from the decennial census."
• "Median home price" is typically not added to the lead of a city article. Moreover, being #78 on the list is hardly notable.
• This RFC (concluded by User:Robert McClenon) reached a consensus regarding words like "wealthiest", "expensive" and "exclusive" in the lead of city articles. Magnolia677 (talk) 10:06, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

References

Here's my response:

• Regarding your first point, yes, the Census should be the primary source of data. Although Bloomberg is a good enough source, let's refer to the Census. The Census does not cover real estate prices. Therefore, I think information from Bloomberg and Berkshire Hathaway are reliable supplementary sources.
• I think that your dismissal of being #78 on a list of the wealthiest places in the United States is frankly, rather elitist. There are roughly 20,000 incorporated places in the US, and being at #78 places the city at the 1% of the 1%. Certainly nothing to turn your nose up at.
• Regarding your last point, I see no issue with describing affluent towns as such. The link you provided says that these adjectives can be arbitrary and that it is tough to reach consensus on what is wealthy and what is not. However, I think housing prices that quadruple the national average really leaves no question as to how wealthy this city is. When brokers spam "affluent" on community pages in a cheap attempt to boost prestige or price, yes, I agree there must be some consensus on affluence. In this case, the goal of Wikipedia first and foremost is to provide information, and I think in this case, the affluence and reputation of municipalities are key facts when it comes to learning about an area, neighborhood, or city. I feel there is no debate as to the wealth of this community. Further, just a quick scan of other wealthy towns like Winnetka, IL, Cherry Hills, CO, and Bernardsville, NJ reveals that all those pages have descriptions of the affluence of those towns as well. I do not see people removing these accurate and important descriptors from those community pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.184.60.14 (talk • contribs) 18:23, August 31, 2019 (UTC)

I see another IP has shown up to restore this without discussion. I agree with the removal by user:Magnolia677 for the reasons stated. Furthermore, the "by extension" is unsourced and appears to be OR or SYNTH. I will remove the material again. Meters (talk) 19:03, 7 October 2020 (UTC)

Not sure why I am being accused of the edit war when it is Magnolia that continues to do this. I made these original edits nearly a year ago and Magnolia continuously reverted them. I finally laid out my reasons in the post you see above, roughly a year ago. For a year there was no activity, until recently when Magnolia awoke from his hibernation and continued to remove my edits without any substantive reasoning. At this point in time, none of my above points have been directly addressed. Before you revert my edits again, please take the time to address my concerns. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.252.182.158 (talk) 02:51, 8 October 2020 (UTC)

I've already said that I agree with Magnolia's reasons, and I provided an additional reason, which you didn't address. Meters (talk) 04:26, 8 October 2020 (UTC)