Talk:10050 Cielo Drive

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject California (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Pronunciation of Cielo[edit]

What is the usual LA/local pronunciation of Cielo? (In Italian it means sky and is pronounced Che-Loh). Format (talk) 07:57, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

See-ELLE-oh. It means sky in Spanish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.175.115.252 (talk) 06:14, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Dead link[edit]

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 21:14, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Twin survivor?[edit]

It would be informative to know whether the original "twin" house at 10048 still exists. 141.158.64.161 (talk) 11:47, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. 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 proposal was moved. --BDD (talk) 23:23, 21 April 2014 (UTC)

10050 Cielo Drive (Los Angeles)10050 Cielo Drive – Unnecessary parenthetical disambiguation. The target name is already a redirect to the article and it is unlikely that anyone would be looking for Wikipedia articles about 10050 Cielo Drive locations in other places. BarrelProof (talk) 22:15, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

  • Oppose – the article seems to be more about the house than the address. Can't a more suitable title be found? Dicklyon (talk) 03:44, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Support move for WP:CONCISENESS, because there doesn't seem to be any other 10050 Cielo Drive. Unfortunately, the article has to be about the address, because the notable mansion that used to be there is no longer, even though "Manson family murders mansion" would be a splashier title if the original mansion was still standing. - WPGA2345 - 21:49, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Where is the guideline that says we can't title an article for its topic if the topic has been physically destroyed? Manson family murders mansion seems a lot more sensible than giving its address. Dicklyon (talk) 00:50, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
I'd be open to something like Site of the Polanski-Tate murders. That seems a bit less sensationalistic than Manson family murders mansion. But the simple address still seems adequate to me. After all, there were other things that happened there besides the murders. —BarrelProof (talk) 01:29, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Or Tate murder site would be OK, too; Polanski wasn't murdered. It's OK to mention other things that happened at the site, of course, but the notability that makes worth an article is from it being a murder site, not for having a certain address. Or maybe I should make an article 2617 Mesilla Hills Dr.. Dicklyon (talk) 04:08, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
Oh – please accept apologies and forgive my ignorance. Yes, it shouldn't be "Polanski-Tate murders" if Polanski wasn't murdered. No argument on what makes it sufficiently noteworthy for Wikipedia. —BarrelProof (talk) 05:03, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.

What still exists?[edit]

There is a definite error about what still exists. The telephone pole is not the original and is not even in the same location. I believe it's even on the opposite of the driveway. Reportedly a small amount of the original structure did remain in order get around some permit requirements. By keeping some of the old structure, it was classified as a renovation or addition rather than new construction. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.113.24.6 (talk) 22:25, 16 October 2014 (UTC)