Talk:East Oakland, Oakland, California

New Chinatown

"New Chinatown" as described in your East Oakland article, is not any sort of official, accepted, or accurate name to describe a district or neighborhood here, in District 2, in Oakland.

I have lived here for 29 years, in the "Lower San Antonio", "Greater Grand Lake", "Clinton Park", "Brooklyn tract".... all of these are the same approximate area, and all have some historic and verifiable basis for being called by these names.

"New Chinatown" was coined by some Chinese Realtors based in Oakland's Chinatown, approximately five years ago. A sign appeared one day on International Blvd. (formerly E.14th St.) at 5th Ave. saying, "Welcome to New Chinatown". The sign was immediately removed. The merchants on that strip, a mix of Chinese, Vietnamese, Korean, Laotian, African American, Caucasian, Hispanic, one German, had gotten together and voted to form "Eastlake Merchants Association". Eastlake had become a popular term to unify and describe the area immediately east of Lake Merritt. This was a way to define the general area and include the Brooklyn, Clinton etc. neighborhoods under one umbrella. This neighborhood is at the nexus of several, and has the smaller "Clinton Park" designation, within greater "Brooklyn", and then "San Antonio" and "Lower San Antonio". "Eastlake" is admitedly a modern consensus reached name... however there was a process in arriving at this name.. a group of established merchants representing the diverse nature of the area voted and came up with this "Eastlake" name, and it has been generally well received. Everyone I have talked to admits "Eastlake" is not a historic name. Some choose to call the area, "San Antonio, Brooklyn, Clinton Park".

As the owner of La Estrellita Restaurant (a well loved establishment in the area for over thirty years) said: "I live in the Fruitvale, and you don't hear anyone there (in this overwhemingly Hispanic district) trying to change the name to "New Tijuana" or "El Barrio"..

This district 2, in Oakland, has been noted by the City as being the most ethnically diverse in the city. I inquired about the "New Chinatown" label about two years ago, when I saw several Chinatown based realtors using this name, and the Council office said, "we aren't hearing it being call New Chinatown, and don't see it as an issue".

The use of the name "New Chinatown" suggests at worst "steering", by realtors with a biased investment, and at best, simple, general ignorance by others.

The local realtor's board should be putting some effort into clarifying names of districts and neighborhoods, as they have a responsibility to insure accuracy. There was some effort put into this, and I will follow up on this. Apparently, there is a lot of "room" to get names put in the Multiple Listing Service for neighborhood designations, (as lobbied by realtors), so this brings up another interesting issue, which may lead to answers as to why "New Chinatown" has become OK for some to use.

I have no objection to a neighborhood or district's entitlement to call itself what it wants to after some sort of large scale community process with accountabilty and legitimate process. The mere idea that an increase in population of one ethnic group and the people who would benefit financially from this increase would justify a name change to an neighborhood is objectional, offensive, and disturbing to me.

I am of Irish descent. If I were to bring all my friends and relatives from Ireland and create a little enclave, could I go ahead and advertise us in the Multiple Listing Service and Newspaper AND in MAPS such as on Wikipedia etc.. as "New Dublin", or "Little Ireland". I surely think Fruitvale could make a case that it is ripe for being changed to "New Guadalajara"; and frankly I could make more of a case that the influx of Hispanics there would justify that name change, more than the Chinese influx here in Brooklyn, Eastlake, Clinton Park, Lower San Antonio.

Thank you.

Ellen Lynch

East Oakland after WWII

It is my understanding that West Oakland is what was predominately Black during and after WWII, with many areas of East Oakland remaining predominately white into the 1960s. Neanderthalprimadonna 02:04, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Merge of Jingletown, USA

If we do merge the article, where exactly would we put the information? Should we rework the article to include something small about each Neighbourhood?--JUDE ^talk 19:10, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I was just completing the merge suggestion for another editor. I had actually recommended that the article Jingletown, USA be deleted as it it unreferenced, and there is nothing about the neighborhood that makes it any different then a million other neighborhoods, but here are my suggestions.

* If merge - move the neighborhood section to the end of the article and perhaps give a short paragraph about each. I see that a number (but not all) of the neighborhoods have short articles with similar problems, you may want to bring them in also and redirect the articles to here.

* If no merge - Consider if you believe that Wikipedia should have an article about this (or these) neighborhood(s) and what it would take to make appropriate for Wikipedia.

Signed Jeepday (talk) 02:30, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree with both of your suggestions. I vote merge IF the other neighbourhood articles are merged here and each of them gets a small portion of the article at the end. I vote delete entirely if the other neighbourhoods do not get a small portion. You're exactly right. The article was only created because of the reference to the neighbourhood in the Green Day song, which isn't significant enough for an article to itself.--JUDE ^talk 03:47, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I have placed {{Mergeto|East Oakland, Oakland, California|date=May 2007}} on all the neighborhood articles listed (at least I don't think I missed any). Lets see what happens over the next few days. Jeepday (talk) 04:06, 8 May 2007 (UTC)