Talk:Frisco

This disambiguation page is within the scope of WikiProject Disambiguation, an attempt to structure and organize all disambiguation pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project or contribute to the discussion.DisambiguationWikipedia:WikiProject DisambiguationTemplate:WikiProject DisambiguationDisambiguation articles

What does "San Francisco" have to do with Frisco? Yeom0609 21:24, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Frisco" is a nickname that people not from San Francisco occasionally use to refer to San Francisco. The locals find it, at best, stupid, at worst, offensive. But... It's still a commonly used nickname. Wikipedia is not censored. - Richfife 04:31, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can anyone think of text that better describes the situation than "nickname" while still being succinct? Perhaps controversial nickname? Ben Atkin (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:31, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You could write an entire (possibly even justifiable) article on the relationship between San Franciscans and the term "Frisco". My current observation is that expressing dislike for the term is a newbie shibboleth. The first words out of most tour guide's mouths are "Don't call it Frisco. People will know you're not from around here." I doubt anyone has used the term "Frisco" unironically in 50 years. Using it is generally viewed as an junior high school level attempt at intentional provocation, not a mistake. Yes, my views have evolved in the last 5 years. - Richfife (talk) 16:47, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is incontrovertible that the "Frisco" nickname for San Francisco is controversial, and that there is significant objection to this nickname by locals. This is plainly evident from the edits to this article, as well as the entirety of the discussions on this talk page. - Lun Esex (talk) 05:39, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The question of whether it should be used or not goes on the San Francisco page if anywhere. Disambiguation pages are not articles. I don't have a problem with a section in San Francisco (or possibly an entire article) about the history of the term. - Richfife (talk) 14:05, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with Richfife. There are lots of statements about many of the topics on this page that are "incontrovertibly" true but still don't belong on a disambiguation page. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 14:26, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Richfife reverted my insertion of the word "nickname." What is the problem? It IS a nickname isn't it? In this dab page it is useful to indicate it as nickname, otherwise there is no clear connection of "Frisco" and "San Francisco" since it's not just a shortening to "Francisco." A "nickname" gives the logical connection for what appears an unrelated word. We can also perhaps use the term "somewhat controversial nickname" instead, since I'm not aware that it is REALLY controversial other than I've heard some locals don't like the term, but however back in the early history of the city, apparently it was very commonly used. The "somewhat controversial nickname" text can be a link to an article about this nickname if someone's intersted to write it, or as a subsection of San Francisco history/name section. Mistakefinder (talk) 17:50, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A survey of similar DAB pages finds Windy_City, Big_Apple_(disambiguation) and Blighty (disambiguation) (and not doubt thousands more if I had the time). I'm nervous about this being a launching pad for more "Frisco Sux" trolls, but I guess it's the right thing. Will revert the revert. - Richfife (talk) 20:03, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

JHunterJ reverted similar language here. They may want to weigh in. - Richfife (talk) 20:34, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't an article, so the information about "sometimes referred to by a nickname that not everyone feels is correct and some even find stupid and/or offensive" or similar language isn't needed here. If "Frisco" can refer to San Francisco, then the dab entry is needed and there's no reason not to use the standard format "San Francisco or Frisco, a ...". If "Frisco" can't refer to San Francisco, then the dab entry isn't needed. The article itself can delve as deeply as the editors there want into the whys and wherefores (and why nots) of the nickname. -- JHunterJ (talk) 18:39, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 26 December 2020[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved (non-admin closure) BegbertBiggs (talk) 13:10, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Frisco → Frisco (disambiguation) – IMO San Francisco is the primary topic, so Frisco should redirect there. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:28, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed there's a Frisco, CA redirect too. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:32, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes because that's unambiguous unlike unqualified "Frisco" similar to the fact that there is a Newcastle, Tyne and Wear redirect. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:31, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - too obscure to be a primary redirect because its highly unlikely to be a searched-for term relating to San Francisco. Anyone searching for it is more likely looking for another topic. Adds no functional value for either editors or readers. OP's justification as "IMO (in my opinion)" is not a valid rationale supportable by WP:TITLES policy - we dont go by editor opinions, but on the needs of readers or editors demonstrated by evidence. -- Netoholic @ 07:45, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as above In ictu oculi (talk) 13:29, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Google mainly returns Frisco (rapper) and there are a number of other topics called "Frisco" alone, I don't think "San Francisco" is likely enough in an encyclopedia. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:06, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
comment you need to show more evidence than just you opinion per wp:NOR —blindlynx (talk) 18:15, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose While an obviously well known city, there is no real evidence this is a dominating nickname. Frisco, Texas, which isn't a nickname, has a rather large population. Nohomersryan (talk) 00:53, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. It's possible it isn't even the primary topic among American cities, because of Frisco, Texas. O.N.R. ^(talk) 04:10, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above.--Ortizesp (talk) 19:19, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Frisco, Texas is large enough that the nickname (hated in San Francisco) is not the primary topic. power~enwiki (π, ν) 05:27, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.