Talk:Cal Poly

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

The official position of the two universities[edit]

According to Cal Poly's identity guidelines, "Cal Poly SLO" or anything similar is improper. San Luis Obispo is not a part of the name of the university. Officially, Cal Poly by itself unambiguously refers to California Polytechnic State University, which happens to be in San Luis Obispo.

On the other hand, Cal Poly Pomona's identity guidelines explicitly state that Pomona should always be included as a part of the name of California State Polytechnic University, Pomona. Though it may seem redundant to refer to the university as "California State Polytechnic University, Pomona in Pomona," it parallels the only clear and acceptable way to write "California Polytechnic State University in San Luis Obispo." -Anþony 09:08, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Popular Naming[edit]

While the official position of the universities may differ from common usage, those of us who attended these schools know the name Cal Poly SLO and Cal Poly Pomona are the names used to refer to the universities in common. Moreover, as a graduate of Cal Poly SLO, I know that the school is commonly refered to as Poly, and that it is nearly as common for a student thereof to refer to the school as SLO, or by connection SLO Town, that being students go to the SLO Town school. Hence, I got my BS degree at SLO.William R. Buckley 17:40, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, do remember that the naming of these schools has changed with governmental edict.William R. Buckley 17:40, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Finally, the notion of California State Polytechnic University, Pomona at Pomona is utter nonsense.William R. Buckley 17:40, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Cal Poly SLO", "SLO", "SLO-Town", etc. are all improper names for the university. Simply put, San Luis Obispo is not part of the university name. Although many may append SLO for detraction of confusion, the fact is you graduated from Cal Poly, not "SLO".

While the university seems to leave out the city in its public documents. The California State University site and a multitude of other places still call it the "California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo". Furthermore, I think it's been pointed out that an act of the California legislature is required to actually change the official name of the institution. So, until there is proof of that, attempting to justify such a name change is moot.
Furthermore, while it is true that Cal Poly SLO is adjacent to the city proper, so is Cal Poly Pomona (except for an odd chunk of the main campus and some re-designated farmland). California public universities are autonomously operated. Attempting to be pedantic about that really doesn't help anything as both institutions use SLO and Pomona as their mailing addresses. -- Switchfoot 17:25, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well then, how about the name change to CalState Hayward, which is now called CalState East Bay. The student body chose the name, and I do not believe you will be able to find legislation to have been passed to specifically approve the name change. William R. Buckley (talk) 17:26, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Some of the documents that I received from CalPoly upon my admission to the university include quite clearly upon their title page the name of the university as being California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. So, regardless of official dogma, even university officials of the time referred to the university as CPSUSLO, which by the way is how the university was then known within the Chancellors Office. Of course, at the time the universities as a whole were known as the California State University and Colleges system; CSUC (pronounced as sea-suck). Now, it is just the CSU. William R. Buckley 05:04, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Further, this back and forth series of changes from popular naming to official naming will get us nowhere. The article ought include details of the differences in naming and usage, otherwise we will see further bouncing off the walls of popular vs official naming. Specifically, we editors should come to a group concensus - enough information in the article will probably forestall the ping-ponging. William R. Buckley 05:17, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What exactly is being discussed here, and what do you think should be changed? This is a disambiguation page and simply needs to provide links to the two articles that a person may be trying to get to. Basar 05:54, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The answer to you question of what is being discussed is to be found in the various notes placed here on the talk page for the disambiguation page. Further, a review of the history of changes for the article will show that your change, mentioning that either school is known as Cal Poly, has been a point of contention in the past. Some editors have steadfastly held the position that only the SLO school is known as Cal Poly. Other editors, myself included, argue that the difference between popular naming and official naming ought to be included in the text of the disambiguation page. The fact that both positions have over time dominated the content of the disambiguation page points up the controversy. Frankly, my prior comments are quite clear; I do not understand how you could miss my point; I've already said what should be changed, which could easily be discerned from my prior statements, and from the historical record respecting versioning of the article. William R. Buckley 18:42, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, this is a disambiguation page, and it isn't supposed have any details concerning naming conventions. Whether or not one school is properly called Cal Poly or not, does not matter as long as you accept that a person might be referring to either school, mistakenly or not. Two links and the minimum text needed for differentiating the links is all that is needed on this kind of page. If you would like to add information about the proper naming conventions and their history, that information would gladly be accepted in the respective articles. You see, from my perspective, there isn't anything to argue about for this page since it should only serve to disambiguate the two pages. Basar 19:26, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This sounds all fine to me. The more important aspect of our discussion is to establish a core of position regarding the content of the page. Following explicit guidelines is apparently satisfied by the edit you made. It is important for you to know that this page has experienced a variety of discussion on the topic of naming. Now that established policies are exposed on the talk page, perhaps the level of page alteration will be minimised - no POV wars, or the like. Thanks for your participation. William R. Buckley 21:45, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keeping it simple[edit]

I removed the big chunk of historical info added in this version [1] to keep the disambiguation page in the traditional style [2]. I think the common or separate histories of the universities should be worked into the two articles instead of creating a mini third article here.Tyro 07:22, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of this disambiguation page[edit]

There should not be a disambiguation page for the two schools. According to Wikipedia, when two institutions share a similar or the same name, the disambiguation should be done in the articles themselves, not in a disambig page. "When only two articles share the same name, no disambiguation page is created. Disambiguation is done solely with top links (or hatnotes)." --http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Naming_conventions_%28schools%29#United_States. In addition, there really is no need for disambig. "Cal Poly" refers to a university in San Luis Obispo, CA, and "Cal Poly Pomona" refers to a university in Pomona, CA. Any thoughts? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.96.184.105 (talk • contribs) 06:16, July 31, 2007

Your argument is good; however, that page is only a proposed guideline, and whoever was writing it didn't know how to make correct wikilinks. Also, the proposed guideline does not mention what should then be done with a page like this. -- Basar (talk · contribs) 22:57, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In regard to this page, I think it should be removed. "Cal Poly" searches should go to the Cal Poly article, and Cal Poly Pomona seraches should go to CPP's article. Atop each page in both articles is a statement allowing redirection to the other university if the user mistakenly arrived at the site. What do you think?
I disagree. Both universities once had the same name. Evidentely, all the Cal Poly SLO or Cal Poly San Luis Obispo searches should go to the California Polytechnic State University article and all the Cal Poly Pomona searches go to the [[California State Polytechnic University, Pomona article. This is the use for all disambiguation pages!!! Besides I am from Southern California and most people in the Los Angeles area, Orange County, San Bernardino, Riverside, and even San Diego area think that Cal Poly is the university in Pomona, California. I don't know, I hope this doesn't lead to a heated debate over one little disambiguation =).-201.153.173.111 (talk) 01:59, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I still believe the disambig page should be removed. Cal Poly is offically in San Luis Obispo. Cal Poly Pomona officially rebukes the "Cal Poly" name without Pomona - in their own guidelines. They are separate universities. Having a disambig page because people may confuse Cal Poly Pomona with Cal Poly isn't logical - it would be like adding Caltech to the page because some people mix the names up.
From - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Disambiguation - on deciding whether or not to disambiguate

I’m in agreement on keeping the disambiguation page as both universities had the same name; it seems as the right function for the use of a disambiguation page.--DavidD4scnrt (talk) 06:52, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Both universities do not have the same name. One is Cal Poly, and one is Cal Poly Pomona. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.202.196.168 (talk) 18:24, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Clearly, you do not know the history of these two universities: at one time, they had one name. Indeed, the one university had two campuses. One could be matriculated at CalPoly, and take coursework at either campus; a single act of matriculation applied to both campuses, and the degree was from CalPoly, without designation of campus residence. William R. Buckley (talk) 05:48, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
actually it had three. the main campus, voorhis, and kellogg75.25.13.86 (talk) 04:38, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Even those who have edited this disambig. page have agreed that it is improper to call the Pomona university 'Cal Poly', and Cal Poly Pomona itself claims the use to be flat wrong. The idea that it would hurt someone's feelings to realise they are wrong in the way they refer to a campus is rather odd, and at any rate, the purpose of Wiki is to share knowledge, no? As mentioned before, a way to get around this page would be by adding redirects to the Cal Poly and Cal Poly Pomona pages, which has already been done as of today. SOo, I believe this page can be removed without any loss of accessibility or any increased confusion. Ostronomer (talk) 02:52, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deciding to disambiguate[edit]

Ask yourself: When readers enter a given term in the Wikipedia search box and pushes 'Go', what article would they most likely be expecting to view as a result? For example, when someone looks up Joker, would they expect to find information on comedians? On a card? On Batman's nemesis? On the hit song or album by The Steve Miller Band? When there is risk of confusion, there should be a way to take the reader from an ambiguous page and title/term to any of the reasonable possibilities for that term". To me it doesn't get any clearer than what I just quoted, but it'd be better if Administrators vote to resolve this matter. -201.153.173.111 (talk) 03:40, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that it may be possible for confusion, but I think a disambig page is overkill. Take a look at what Penn and Penn State did: instead of a disambig page, they just have a small blurb on the top of each page directing to the other school if that is what the user is looking for. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.202.196.168 (talk) 04:33, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah! Take a look at the Penn article. On top of the disambiguation page, both Penn and Penn State have small blurbs on top of their articles that redirect to one another which is exactly what the Cal Poly Universities do. To make a stronger case for the need of this disambiguation page, every year at the Rose Parade both universities put together ONE float with a sign on its side that reads "Cal Poly Universities", therefore recognizing the existence of two "Cal Poly" campuses.--Dabackgammonator (talk) 04:59, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
but seen to the public as one75.25.13.86 (talk) 04:40, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cal Poly at San Luis Obispo name[edit]

The manual of style for name usage at Cal Poly at San Luis Obispo lists "Cal Poly at San Luis Obispo" as well as "Cal Poly San Luis Obispo" (with the words San Luis Obispo in a smaller font) as less formal, yet recognized names for the university. There is no such confusion at Cal Poly Pomona since they, besides the lengthy California State Polytechnic University, Pomona name, only recognize Cal Poly Pomona as its "less formal" counterpart. So, in summary this is what occurs:

CSU campus in San Luis Obispo:

Formal names:

Other less formal, yet recognized name derivations that can be used are:

  • Cal Poly at San Luis Obispo
  • Cal Poly 'San Luis Obispo' ('small font')

CSU campus in Pomona:

Formal names:

  • California State Polytechnic University, Pomona

Other less formal, yet recognized name derivations that can be used are:

  • Cal Poly Pomona

Unless the Cal State system starts enforcing the CSU name convention upon all their campuses we will continue having these issues. Also important to understand are the implications of EDUCATION CODE SECTION 89000-89011 and how this affects both CSU campuses at Pomona and San Luis Obispo.--TheMexicanGentleman (talk) 17:11, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Format of the disambiguation page[edit]

Let's keep it simple:

"Cal Poly" may refer to:

Let's drop the "originally", "formally", "officially" and “by divine intervention” labels from the disambiguation page. --Marco Guzman, Jr (talk) 22:03, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not a chance. "Cal Poly" is Cal Poly's name; you don't get to rename it just because you don't like it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.202.205.242 (talk) 03:25, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just for fun[edit]

I know SLO editors would be please with something like this:

"Cal Poly" (also known as The Real Cal Poly, The Original Cal Poly, or Califronia Polytechnic Institute of Technology absolutely and without a doubt refers to:

for other historical universities that once had this glorious name see

  • CSU Pomona, a public university in Pomona and one among several other Cal States.

--Marco Guzman, Jr (talk) 22:15, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And what Pomona editors would love to see[edit]

"Cal Poly" absolutely refers to:

Come on! I say potato and you say potato =D --Marco Guzman, Jr (talk) 22:54, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's a matter of accuracy. If you don't like the fact that "Cal Poly" refers to Cal Poly, well, tough. I would have the same objections if you wanted to represent Cal Poly Pomona as Caltech. Beyond that, there is no such thing as a "Cal Poly University System."

Nicknames[edit]

The IP editor says "Cal Poly is literally the name of California Polytechnic State University." I don't disagree. The name, however, should be discussed on the article, not the dab page. According to Wikipedia's Manual of Style, "The description associated with a link should be kept to a minimum, just sufficient to allow the reader to find the correct link. In many cases, the title of the article alone will be sufficient and no additional description is necessary." The text of the dab page without the nicknames is more than enough to disambiguate, therefore the nicknames are unnecessary. --TorriTorri(Talk to me!) 01:35, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly disagree. It is inherently confusing and misleading to the user if we do not include the Cal Poly and Cal Poly Pomona namaes. It would be like changing the Caltech entry to a disambig page, and having it say that "Caltech may refer to: (1) California Institute of Technology, or (2) California State Polytechnic University, Pomona" simply because people sometimes misuse the name. Take a look at "Penn" with respect to Penn and Penn State.
As an aside, the language you quote even states that more is sometimes necessary ("in many cases" means that there are cases, such as Cal Poly or Penn, when more than just the article title is necessary).
There is a need to disambiguate because there are two campuses within the California State University that bear the name "Cal Poly" in one way or another. The university system itself decides to use "Cal Poly San Luis Obispo" and "Cal Poly Pomona" to identify one another (1) NOT just "Cal Poly" for either of the two. "Officially" is an ambiguous word itself because it requires context. Officially to whom? Apparently not to the California State University system since they don't refer to Cal Poly San Luis Obispo only as Cal Poly.--Marco Guzman, Jr (talk) 03:40, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Let's say a random reader wants to read about Cal Poly Pomona. For whatever reason, he/she types in "Cal Poly". Do you honestly assume our readers are so idiotic that they can't figure out that "California State Polytechnic University, Pomona" is Cal Poly Pomona? Likewise for Cal Poly in SLO. "a public university in San Luis Obispo, California" is pretty clear to me which one it is. As an aside, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid argument. And please, please sign your posts. --TorriTorri(Talk to me!) 04:10, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also, how is removing nicknames the same as creating an extraneous dab page? --TorriTorri(Talk to me!) 04:44, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Your hyprothetical doesn't capture the whole picture. If a user is looking for "Cal Poly," they should not be erroneously directed to Cal Poly Pomona because of a misleading disambig page. The elided names are helpful in disambig; removing them only serves a POV agenda in an attempt to boost Cal Poly Pomona by misrepresenting it as Cal Poly. I would have this same position if CPP was pretending to be Caltech.
Unless your reader doesn't know the two Cal Polys were once the same university before spiting up in 1966. Unless your reader doesn't live in the Los Angeles County, Pomona Valley, Orange County, California or Inland Empire where "Cal Poly" more often refers to the one in Pomona, California. So, should we change the name of the article Cal Poly Universities Rose Float to Cal Poly and Cal Poly Pomona Rose Float? --Marco Guzman, Jr (talk) 05:53, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]


I'm probably editing this wrong, si please forgive me for any mistakes in format. But I think the short names should stay and everyone should calm down.206.53.153.175 (talk) 08:18, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]





Your argument is again irrelevant; we aren't talking about a rose float, but rather a disambig page. As a side note: I used to live in southern California for several years--right near Cal Poly Pomona in fact (near the 57 and 10), and disagree with your contention that so-calers think of Cal Poly as Pomona. The fact is, the names being included help the diambig page; not using them would only add confusion.
Here are a few sources indicating the opposite, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 , 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25. Also, you violated the three-revert rule, but hey!, who cares right?. --Marco Guzman, Jr (talk) 07:39, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You're not grasping my argument here, but of course, I shouldn't expect much from a Pomona student. Cal Poly is the name of Cal Poly. Not including this is inherently misleading. Their inclusion merely helps the reader navigate.
And who are you exactly? I mean, if you are a true scholar the least you could do is tell us about yourself, you credentials. Attacking others behind the comfort of an IP is just acting like a coward don't you think? --Marco Guzman, Jr (talk) 13:29, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
How would not including the nicknames erroneously redirect a reader? --TorriTorri(Talk to me!) 08:40, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Let's take an example. Cal Poly athletics uses "Cal Poly Mustangs" as their team name, without reference to location. If someone came on Wikipedia to look up Cal Poly, this disambig page would be unclear as to where they are trying to go--without the shortened names. Back to my prior Caltech example: I've occasionally heard people incorrectly refer to CPP as Caltech. What if we made a disambig page for CPP and Caltech, and further didn't include the shortned names of the institutions? It would be misleading to the reader. Cal Poly is Cal Poly. Cal Poly Pomona is not.
By the way, I again refer you to the "Penn" entry. Entries like these help users navigate, and don't misrepresent the institutions. Another example: take a look at "Cornell." It leads to "Cornell University," although there is school also known as "Cornell College." The editors there didn't even waste their time with a disambig page, something that I think is also appropriate here. As Cal Poly is the actual name of Cal Poly, the entry should lead directly to the article page, with a hatnote for Cal Poly Pomona. Finally, using the common names helps the reader, given the common usage of the schools: calpoly.edu, calpoly.com, calpoly.net, calpoly.org, all go to Cal Poly. The athletic teams are "Cal Poly Mustangs" and "Cal Poly Pomona Broncos," respectively. Facebook refers to the schools as "Cal Poly" and "Cal Poly Pomona." Cal Poly predates Cal Poly Pomona for decades, and had been using the name well before Pomona. Cal Poly is the actual name of Cal Poly. Cal Poly Pomona explicitly rejects such usage for itself. Cal Poly has a significantly higher profile than Cal Poly Pomona--as reflected in every major university ranking available--and is thus probably much more likely to be the target of a search with the term "Cal Poly" than Cal Poly Pomona. Any of these are reason enough to keep the elided names in the disambig. Removal would only serve to confuse the reader.
Unless of course that reader stumbled upon the following article, "Cal Poly Broncos Win NCAA Men's Basketball Title". And as far as the rankings go, SLO might have an edge, but we still fight on!--Marco Guzman, Jr (talk) 11:08, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Marco...seriously, you do realize that basketball article refers to "Cal Poly Pomona" multiple times, right? The photo itself has a player in a "Cal Poly Pomona" jersey. It makes it quite clear that it isn't referring to the real Cal Poly (which plays Division I, unlike Pomona). As an aside, that little "ranking" you conjured up was...what some guy named Dr. Garry thinks? Seriously? Both US News & Forbes show Cal Poly crushing Cal Poly Pomona. You may have noticed above that I said "every major university ranking available," not every list some guy comes up with. Your list shows Pomona in the same breath as Washington University in St. Louis? Please. By the way--since you bring up Architecture rankings--Design Intelligence--the gold standard in architecture rankings--places Cal Poly 3rd, with Pomona a distant 15th. Comparing Pomona to Cal Poly would be laughable were it not so pathetic.
Hey another cool piece! Chair of the CSU Board of Trustees stating, "For more than sixty years, the two Cal Polys have collaborated on designing, building, and decorating a float entry in the Tournament of Roses Parade on New Year’s Day. Viewed by an international TV audience, this year’s float won the Bob Hope Humor Award."(1). Also, check out this video (at ~1:34) where the ref says, "Time-out Cal Poly Pomona". --Marco Guzman, Jr (talk) 13:10, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, it wouldn't be misleading. Yes, Cal Poly is Cal Poly and CPP is CPP, but the disambig page already makes that clear. One has the modifier (Pomona) and one doesn't. --TorriTorri(Talk to me!) 15:24, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Which is further evidence as to why the elided names should exist; "Pomona" is actually part of CPP's name.
In addition, the disambig page would not make that clear without the elided names. It would say "Cal Poly may refer to:" and then list the real Cal Poly with Cal Poly Pomona. That is inherently misleading. The elided names only make it more clear.
And what about the chair of the CSU Board of Trustees stating, "For more than sixty years, the two Cal Polys have collaborated on designing, building, and decorating a float entry in the Tournament of Roses Parade on New Year’s Day. Viewed by an international TV audience, this year’s float won the Bob Hope Humor Award."? No comment on that quote? It's from the Cal State website!--Marco Guzman, Jr (talk) 23:17, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hey check this out! Even SLO State has something similar in their "official" website! 1.--Marco Guzman, Jr (talk) 23:20, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My response to that is that it isn't relevant; it's a...rose float. The mere fact that Cal Poly gives a courtesy to Pomona on a rose float does not rename the university.
Actually your response IS relevant since you are the one arguing for the inclusion of the terms "Cal Poly" (the one in SLO) and "Cal Poly Pomona" to the disambiguation page itself. I'm claiming that they shouldn't because based on the information solely provided on the sources; I argue that a reader will go on Wikipedia, type "Cal Poly", and be mistakenly lead to believe that there is only one. There clearly isn't just one according to those two reputable sources. One of them being from Cal Poly San Luis Obispo's website!!!! --Marco Guzman, Jr (talk) 05:05, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Calm down, Guzman. The fact remains: Cal Poly is Cal Poly, CPP is CPP. I'm fine with having a disambig page, but omitting the elided names misleads the user (and I think you know it)
By the way, you are trying to read something into the sources that simply isn't there. The article doesn't speak to naming of the universities; to the contrary, the articles that do speak to the naming explicitly reject CPP as Cal Poly. You're trying to bootstrap a comment about a rose float to rename institutions.
Hey, do you want to talk down on me in a condescending manner? Do it in my face. How's that? --Marco Guzman, Jr (talk) 07:16, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In regards to your comment "omitting the elided names misleads the user (and I think you know it)" the same goes for the elided names Cal Poly SLO and Cal Poly San Luis Obispo... and I think you know it! --Marco Guzman, Jr (talk) 07:20, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ooo, how scary. I think I'll take my chances. As I stated, these are the names of the schools. Stop trying to rename them. If you wanted to go to Cal Poly, you should have studied harder in high school.

71.202.205.242 goes to.... La Verne![edit]

"If you wanted to go to Cal Poly [SLO], you should have studied harder in high school." ROFLMAO looks who's talking, an editor from La Verne provisionally-accredited law "school". Isn't that where rejects from REAL law schools like Hastings, Boalt, King or Gould end up? Now I get your bitterness, now I get it, lol. From now I'm going to call you La Verne. You know what forget about the Cal Polys you just made my day oh my God this is hilarious. So cool, see you around La Verne! --Marco Guzman, Jr (talk) 08:39, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Better hit up those books La Verne, 40% of those from La Verne "law school" are too dumb to pass the BAR examination! LOL! --Marco Guzman, Jr (talk) 08:54, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Ha! Whatever makes you feel better Guzman. You go to Cal Poly Pomona. 'Nuff said.


Oh, I'd rather go to Cal Poly Pomona than to La Verne that's for DAMN sure! See you around La Verne! --Marco Guzman, Jr (talk) 09:27, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sigh. Don't you think it's a bit sad where this has gotten to? I actually was just sitting here typing something pretty rude, and just stopped and thought about what I was doing. I think we're both missing the point here. Look, do you have any middle ground on the elided names? Maybe we could do an officially known as and commonly known as. Or a change in the intro sentence. Or give a brief explanation of the naming, like we do in the articles.
Upon reflection, yes, it has. Let's leave it as it is, chill out for a week or two, just focus on other stuff and then maybe some other editors will add to the discussion or finds an alternative that we might have overlooked. What do you say?--Marco Guzman, Jr (talk) 09:54, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers. ;-) And just for you....my first signed post. 71.202.205.242 (talk) 09:57, 2 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 13 February 2018[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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasuよ! 21:48, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cal Poly → Cal Poly (disambiguation) – California Polytechnic State University is the primary topic here. power~enwiki (π, ν) 06:34, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose this dab is stopping people being sent to the wrong California Polytechnic, there are two. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:23, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very weak support I don't see that a dab is necessary to stop the occasional person being sent to the wrong page, that's what hatnotes are for and the one said to be primary already has one. However I'm not supporting because the only evidence I see that California Polytechnic State University is the primary topic is that California Polytechnic State University has Cal Poly in the intro but California State Polytechnic University, Pomona only has Cal Poly Pomona. Nil Einne (talk) 12:32, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Pomona's article used to have "Cal Poly" in the lead not long ago and I have not replaced it to avoid edit warring with other editors.--Chlorineer (talk) 16:00, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Oppose The term "Cal Poly" is ambiguous, so it should not merely redirect to California Polytechnic State University. Some strong arguments for this have been made in the past including but not limited to:
    • [T]here is definitely a need to disambiguate between the two and I have added the missing link. But WP:2DABS is generally invoked on the basis that one subject is the "primary" subject and the other is the secondary, thus making a redirect to one and disambig to the other okay. California Polytechnic State University is probably the "bigger" college with more money and more land, but both have a student body of about the same size and an academic staff of about the same size too. The "community" likely looking for either institution would probably be about the same size I'm guessing. This would seem to be exactly the sort of exception that guideline refers to - "If there are only two topics to which a given title might refer, but neither one is the primary topic, or if both topics are obscure, then it is appropriate to have a disambiguation page at the base name". Both have references verifying the fact that each is referred to as "Cal Poly". With regard to the nomination, you could equally argue that traffic should be sent to California State Polytechnic University, Pomona which now includes a link to the other university. Stalwart111 11:47, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Both campuses are referred to as "Cal Poly"; both are large and notable; neither is primary. It would be arbitrary to use Cal Poly as a redirect to either of them. --MelanieN (talk) 19:43, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Even the LA Times had a funny take on this. --Chlorineer (talk) 16:35, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I would also like to share a comment made by a long-time editor which may shed a light on those who are not as familiar with the topic:

About the name "Cal Poly"
It seems that quite a few people outside the Pomona Valley are offended that people in the Pomona Valley refer to Cal Poly Pomona as "Cal Poly". Evidently their view is that the name "Cal Poly" "rightfully" belongs to California Polytechnic State University. There is some merit in the logic of that argument; Cal Poly Pomona officially disavows the name, and the San Luis Obispo university is calpoly.edu, and has trademarked "Cal Poly" for athletic wear.
Nevertheless, virtually all of Wikipedia policy supports the idea that Wikipedia is descriptive, not prescriptive. For many people in the Pomona Valley, "Cal Poly" unambiguously refers to Cal Poly Pomona; they refer to the other school as "Cal Poly SLO" or "Cal Poly San Luis Obispo". Technically, they are wrong. Officials at Cal Poly Pomona would be pleased if they'd stop. But (1) Wikipedia is not censored, and (2) these folks are not scalawags, low-lifes, and terrorists, they are neighbors. Many of them attend, or send their children. Some of them donate. It wouldn't be neighborly for Cal Poly Pomona to wave their error in their faces. And it wouldn't be NPOV of Wikipedia to suppress a common usage.

--Chlorineer (talk) 21:09, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC/WP:ASTONISH based on usage detailed by the nominator here. Wikipedia serves a worldwide readership. Delete the DAB page per WP:TWODABS; the hatnote at the top of the SLO page will guide readers to the other page if needed with no more clicks than is currently needed with the DAB page setup. —  AjaxSmack  17:29, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I respectfully disagree that there is a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC here based on the empirical evidence previously mentioned.--Chlorineer (talk) 17:55, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, as Chlorineer has amply demonstrated, there is no primary topic here. Yes perhaps the unqualified "Cal Poly" officially ought to refer to California Polytechnic State University, but that makes no difference here. Clearly (and for obvious reasons) California State Polytechnic University, Pomona is commonly and frequently referred to as "Cal Poly". So it would seem that just as many (if not more) of our readers will be looking for California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, when they type in "Cal Poly", so that's why the disambiguation page, is named "Cal Poly". Paul August ☎ 18:54, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Here, we have a 100% incorrect disambiguation page that is causing ambiguity. Cal Poly is literally the name of the college Cal Poly (see here). Cal Poly has never referred to Cal Poly Pomona since Cal Poly Pomona's inception in 1966. The Pomona campus was only called Cal Poly when that real estate was part of Cal Poly between 1949-1966. The term Cal Poly without a modifier is owned by Cal Poly (see here and here). As such, Cal Poly Pomona explicitly says to never refer to it as just Cal Poly (see here). As it currently stands, the page is an unambiguous trademark infringement putting Wikipedia at risk for secondary liability for trademark infringement. This is not something Wikipedia can have decided by a bunch of random dizzy Wikipedia users. Wikipedia might be able to avoid secondary liability for trademark infringement if the name of the page were changed to "Things with Cal Poly in the Name" or something like that. A recent summary of this rapidly expanded area of the law can be found here.--TDJankins (talk) 01:55, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Editor indefinitely blocked. --NeilN talk to me 03:37, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • For the record, a Wikipedia article title can not be a trademark infringement as a matter of law, because there is no trade engaged in under the name of the article title. We don't even have advertising on our pages. bd2412 T 19:19, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm striking through this comment. It's a false premise and got the editor indefinitely blocked. --Chlorineer (talk) 18:42, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak oppose. I find the evidence unsettled enough to warrant the separate DAB page. I am particularly influenced by 2 of the examples cited by Chlorineer. The Cal Poly Universities Rose Float demonstrates authorized use of "Cal Poly" to refer to the 2 schools together. (2) The Cal State style guide clearly asserts that the SLO school's approved long form and short form names both include the name of the town--most telling, the approved short form name is given as "Cal Poly San Luis Obispo", not "Cal Poly", which seems to be in direct contradiction to the preferred usages prescribed at the SLO branch's branding page. The amusing existence of this minor bureaucratic contradiction leads me to conclude that as a matter of common usage, the question of primary user remains unclear. But I will also take this opportunity to mention that this is a very technical question of Wikipedia-geekery that we're discussing, and whether we end up with a separate page or a series of headnotes, it will certainly not reflect any kind of disrespect for either institution. --Arxiloxos (talk) 00:17, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – anyone residing in Los Angeles and Orange counties and says "Cal Poly" is referring to the school in Pomona. CookieMonster755✉ 04:11, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Paul August. Hell, the existence of the Cal Poly Universities Rose Float -- note the plural -- should have driven the nail into the coffin of the "there's only one!" argument. --Calton | Talk 04:25, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
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 or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

There are two Cal Polys. A third one in the brewing.[edit]

Gavin Newsom California state governor states that there are two "Cal Polys" on May 14, 2021. Source. Archive. Just adding this here since it very much pertains to the discussion of this topic and may be a good reference for future discussion. --Chlorineer (talk) 18:54, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal[edit]

For the convenience of readers and editors alike, I would prefer to merge the handful of total related links from the short Cal Poly athletics, Cal Poly College of Architecture and Environmental Design, Cal Poly College of Engineering, and Cal Poly College of Environmental Design disambig pages, rather then deal with these separate pages. Otherwise, for example, a new separate Cal Poly College of Business may need to be created in the near future to disabiguate Cal Poly Pomona College of Business Administration and Cal Poly Orfalea College of Business. At the very least, Cal Poly College of Architecture and Environmental Design and Cal Poly College of Environmental Design basically duplicate each other. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (talk) 10:25, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'd disagree to having all those redirect here as the term "Cal Poly" mostly refers to the entire university for the respective campus (Arcata, Pomona or SLO). I'd agree that Cal Poly College of Business Administration needs to be created and for Cal Poly College of Architecture and Environmental Design and Cal Poly College of Environmental Design we could have one redirect to the other. Recently, Cal Poly Humboldt was added into the mix, so we may have to add them for the respective colleges they have. --Chlorineer (talk) 16:11, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Those with just two entries with different names should just be redirects.
There are already hatnotes on both to the other. I don't see any reason to include either on the Cal Poly dab page.
I'd support merging Cal Poly athletics. Sports teams are often known by school name--I'm not sure in this case if the location would typically be included. older ≠ wiser 16:19, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Agree on the redirects for the colleges of arch and env. design respectively. If we do include athletics here, however, I'd strongly recommend geographical identifiers on all of them as it'd be confusing for the reader not to. --Chlorineer (talk) 14:52, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm OK with the latest changes, and will remove the template from the top in a week unless there's any other problem with the page.--Chlorineer (talk) 20:41, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's been over 10 days, so I'll remove it now. Thanks. --Chlorineer (talk) 14:16, 15 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cal_Poly&oldid=1200525209"