Jump to content

Talk:South Pasadena, California

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

(null header)

[edit]

"However opponents say that neglects to consider the fact that the entire region is already well overrun with cars, trucks and buses, and that the addition of the 710 extension will do little, if any, to correct that. Caltrans admits that the extension would be just as congested as, or even more congested than, any other freeway in the region from its opening day forward."--putting aside the pervasive weasely-ness, this doesn't even pass the smell test; anybody with awareness of the basic facts, some of them admitted to in this article, e.g. how many times the Feds have been dragged in and the constant lobbying of Sacramento by every other city in eastern L.A. County, would find it suspicious for a purportedly honest and accurate account of why this dispute is perpetually stalled (in S. Pas's favor) -- Housewares 17:02, 1 December 2007 (UTC) -- I changed it such that it is not so much of an advertisement on the 710 part, but I honestly know nothing about that issue. Danbornekde (talk) 17:37, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

S.P.U.S.D high grades? From what I can conclude, La Cañada and San Marino have higher test scores? --Fpo 02:59, Apr 20, 2005 (UTC)

  • In March 2005, controversy spreaded when South Pasadena Unified School District Superintendent Rob Arias reassigned four school administrators, which was against district policy. The school board accepted the reassignments, leading to a walkout of students at South Pasadena High School and angering many South Pasadena residents. The reassignments were secretly made, in which school board members met in a closed session to reassign the administrators, in violation of the Brown Act. A few weeks later, the school board reversed their decisions after numerous emails sent to board members and weeks of pressure from residents and parents. The board admitted that it was against district policy for a superintendent to reassign employees. After reversing their decisions, one member called for Arias' resignation. He did so a few weeks later. He leaves the South Pasadena Unified School district after nine months as Superintendent of Schools.

Is this material really of importance to South Pasadena? The Arias matter seems like a closed issue of little ongoing relevance. Any thoughts? -Willmcw 05:48, July 25, 2005 (UTC)

When discussing academics, we have to look at the school's performance at a much broader scale. SPUSD has high API numbers as well as decent averages on standardized tests such as the SAT I. Comparing this district with La Cañada or San Marino is like trying to make distinctions amongst several fine restaurants. All three are superb public school systems relative to what California as a whole has to offer to its students. In an article on a site as widely read as Wikipedia, that's the kind of perspective articles should be written from.Alexhlau I also agree with Willmcw that the Arias case is old news and is not really relevant to what's currently going on in South Pas...

In regards to South Pas APIs, the South Pasadena demographics are different from those of San Marino and La Canada. South Pasadena has a substantial number of condominiums as well as rental properties. A large number of its inhabitants are lower middle class/working class. San Marino by contrast is all single family detached housing with substantially more wealthy inhabitants. Such economic distinctions in regards to class diversity are not corrected for in the API.

Incorporation

[edit]

I have read, in a book on architecture in LA County, that Pasadena and South Pasadena were incorporated separately because one was wet (allowed alcoholic beverages to be sold) and the other was dry (sales prohibited). Can anyone point to more direct sources on this? Thanks.

Under the "Demographics" heading, it says "Johnny Chen was considered the fastest Asian runner in the San Gabriel Valley." It seems really random.. and is it really necessary to put that? lol


I'd like to see a citation on the claim that South Pasadena residents call their town "Mayberry". South Pasadena is my home town and I lived there from 1966-1987 and NEVER heard any South Pasadenan refer to it that way. Spidra 18:15, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How about everybody(the Pasadena Star-News included) referring to your city as "SoPas", just like the perceived contention that the City of Moreno Valley HATES being nicknamed "MoVal" by the Riverside County Press-Enterprise(and just about everybody else in the state)?...Baldwin91006 16:52, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]


I agree with Spidra, I want to know the citation for "Mayberry" as I've never heard anyone call South Pasadena that, joking or not. South Pasadena is my home town and I've lived here since I was born in 1986. --Chankayun (talk) 02:00, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have heard the term used before. I think I have seen it referenced in a newspaper article too. With a little work, some one should be able to find a reference.--CSvBibra (talk) 02:06, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[[1]] I found one reference in Sunset Magazine without any effort.--CSvBibra (talk) 02:10, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As a south pasadena resident, I've never heard it called Mayberry. We call it SoPas amoung people who know the city but if you said Mayberry to anyone in the town they would have no idea of the connection to the city — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.85.39.6 (talk) 04:24, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]


The Mayberry reference was mostly used before the mid-1990s when the change in demographics made the city no longer like Mayberry. The last such reference I saw was on a Facebook page run by nostalgic former residents. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:C4AF:4719:D189:327:D8C9:9DED (talk) 12:23, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Seal south pasadena ca.jpg

[edit]

Image:Seal south pasadena ca.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 18:45, 24 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merger ?

[edit]

Is merger banner at article's top serious ? or vandalism ? or ? This is an independent city, not a district within Pasadena.---Look2See1 t a l k → 04:36, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ignorance? Lack of research?Let's get this template remove! DocOfSoc (talk) 20:44, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Domain Change

[edit]

South Pasadena recently changed their domain to http://www.southpasadenaca.gov/, some of the references will be missing and we need help to change them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Visioninternetdev (talk • contribs) 17:09, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blacklisted Links Found on the Main Page

[edit]

Cyberbot II has detected that page contains external links that have either been globally or locally blacklisted. Links tend to be blacklisted because they have a history of being spammed, or are highly innappropriate for Wikipedia. This, however, doesn't necessarily mean it's spam, or not a good link. If the link is a good link, you may wish to request whitelisting by going to the request page for whitelisting. If you feel the link being caught by the blacklist is a false positive, or no longer needed on the blacklist, you may request the regex be removed or altered at the blacklist request page. If the link is blacklisted globally and you feel the above applies you may request to whitelist it using the before mentioned request page, or request it's removal, or alteration, at the request page on meta. When requesting whitelisting, be sure to supply the link to be whitelisted and wrap the link in nowiki tags. The whitelisting process can take its time so once a request has been filled out, you may set the invisible parameter on the tag to true. Please be aware that the bot will replace removed tags, and will remove misplaced tags regularly.

Below is a list of links that were found on the main page:

  • http://southpas.wikicities.com
    Triggered by \bwikicities\.com\b on the global blacklist

If you would like me to provide more information on the talk page, contact User:Cyberpower678 and ask him to program me with more info.

From your friendly hard working bot.—cyberbot II NotifyOnline 15:41, 8 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on South Pasadena, 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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 12:25, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on South Pasadena, California. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:43, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinate error

[edit]

{{geodata-check}}

The following coordinate fixes are needed for


—47.200.23.100 (talk) 00:23, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You haven't explained what you think is erroneous, and the coordinates of South Pasadena given in the article match those given in the GNIS entry cited as a reference for them. If you still think that there is an error, you'll need to give a clear explanation of what it is, preferably with a better reference that the GNIS. Deor (talk) 18:24, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:South_Pasadena,_California&oldid=1212287763"