Talk:San Francisco/Haight-Fillmore

District needed in title?
Shouldn't this article just be called San Francisco/Haight-Fillmore ? -- (WT-en) DanielC 08:15, 9 March 2006 (EST)

Haight divided into two districts
Because they are two districts: historically, geographically, and by character. They both have a wealth of places to see, do, eat, and drink that can easily fill up two pages. Dividing each subsection into upper & lower as in the previous version is awkward as visitors will most likely focus on one half of the street or the other at a time. The new pages are:

San Francisco/Haight-Fillmore District

San Francisco/Haight-Ashbury District


 * First I would like to thank you for the work you are doing in the San Francisco Districts. Second, I think the point the DanielC was making above is both of the names have "District" on the end and he is questioning if that is needed. The shorter name would seem to be preferable. Again, thanks for the work on these articles. -- (WT-en) Tom Holland (xltel) 08:54, 9 March 2006 (EST)

555 Haight
Someone added some negative commentary with reference to the Sleep entry for 555 Haight. Reviewing their reference, it appears that the establishment has no permit to operate, so I deleted it entirely. -- (WT-en) Colin 18:53, 10 August 2006 (EDT)