| This talk page is for discussing the San Andreas in GTA III Era article.
This includes commenting on the article, questioning whether it is correct, or adding suggestions for improvements
Questions about GTA games, not about the wiki page itself, should be asked at Community:Questions.Remember to always add your signature to the end of your comments/replies using four tildes:
What do folks think of renaming this article State of San Andreas? We could then change San Andreas in GTA 1 to City of San Andreas. The current names seem a little cumbersome to me. Thoughts? EganioTalk 03:56, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
- That could work! I'm the one that suggested making it like this when this page was just called San Andreas and there was the other article for San Andreas in GTA 1. The reason I suggested like this is because that's how the other cities are set out. eg. Liberty City in GTA 1, Liberty City in GTA III/Liberty City Stories, Liberty City in GTA IV, Vice City in GTA 1, Vice City in GTA Vice City. What does everyone else think about Eganio's proposal? Biggest GTA Fan EverTalk 08:30, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
- I didn't like the idea at first, because it doesn't follow the standard rule of naming things with their real name, and the preference for keeping names short. However I think it does a good job of explaining what the page is about - "San Andreas" is still confusing (no matter how often you explain the difference). I also think City and State is a good distinction, but it needs to be made massively clear what the difference is (with a disambig). Go for it. Gboyers talk 14:37, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- Well, I too was apprehensive at first, owing to a presumed disruption in naming consistency. However, given that all other locations in GTA games that have reappeared are invariably cities in all their iterations, I thought this case warranted special consideration, since one version is a city, while the other is an entire state. This provides us the opportunity of using shorter names to distinguish between the two. And my apologies to Biggest gta fan ever for stealing any of your thunder! Maybe I should read the old discussions more carefully! ;-) EganioTalk 18:05, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Why doesn't anyone mention the fact that there is a place in California called "San Andreas"? Seriously, it's a real town. Google "San Andreas Fault", if you don't believe me. MrNaku45 01:53, December 4, 2009
San Andreas State alignment for historical lineage
The City of San Andreas (with all its quarters), should be implemented into San Andreas State in a future GTA edition at a location may be south of San Fierro, further down the San Andreas State coastline. It should be renamed and it's previous bibliography in GTA1 revised from San Andreas City, to 1st City in San Andreas (the State). A suggestion would be to replace "F" with "TH" and rename the first city of SA, Thirst City SA [A conibation and capital of the State of San Andreas]. An alignment purely for historical continuation reasons. This would coherently bridge early editions with the later in GTA. No GTA map past or present should be destroyed or changed only (.a.) left alone, (.b.) enhanced (may be for fresh difficulty aspect), (.c.) expanded/advanced (with strict relative reference to map original), (.d.) added to, or all of the previous, eventually plugged into one unifying database. The Unified States of Americana [Ref No 65 on GTA V Wishlist/archive3]...said Prodigy "..let's get it right yeh". NIM 06:05, March 14, 2010 (UTC)
- Discussion of Naming this page
The above points and suggestions, however well-intentioned and even right-minded, aren't really relevant to the issue under discussion. Deciding on the legitimacy of calling this the State of San Andreas is the only thing in question. Anything else is referring to the speculations of a "wishlist". HoraceBroonRiddle 07:52, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
The previous paragraph is to do with article content. I don't care how many stripes you think you've got, I'll view it's continued removal as vandalism and a serious afront to myself. You deceive yourselves with your badges but all your commendations mean nothing outside this mediums walls. You dumb p**** f****. NIM 03:44, March 27, 2010 (UTC).
I didn't see any on the page, so I'll ask here. Is there ever any evidence of which city is the San Andreas state capitol? I don't recall any mention in the game, but what about elsewhere? Ghost Leader 01:44, July 10, 2010 (UTC)
I don't think it has a capitol, none of the cities in the game are based on capitols so there is probably nothing supporting the existence of a capitol city.--Thescarydude 17:01, July 10, 2010 (UTC)
I think it's Fort Carson with the red building in main street and the capitol city of the Nevada is Carson City GTAJJJ 15:53, July 29, 2010 (UTC)
wait wasn't san andreas a city in gta 1 why is it a state ingta san andreas
on the radio there is mention of the governors office, so there must be a capitol city
The State of San Andreas DOES exist in the GTA IV era
I was reading the Liberty Tree article about the Eunux controversy and at the end mentioned "a female plumber that was run out of a San Andreas town a year ago". Yes, it said "town", meaning that the State of San Andreas still exists. Kanzler31 20:59, 23 October 2010 (BST)
A number of years ago, this article was moved from San Andreas in GTA San Andreas to State of San Andreas, with San Andreas in GTA 1 being moved to City of San Andreas. Despite breaking consistency with the page titles of other locations at the time, the move was supported. The reasoning was because the other locations are all cities, so not much can be done to give them simpler titles, but as one rendition of San Andreas in a city, and the other is a state, they were able to be given simpler titles.
Since then however, the landscape has changed. The state of San Andreas now has two renditions; one appearing in GTA San Andreas, and the other (partially) appearing in GTA V. This means that it may be time to reconsider the titles (perhaps not immediately, but it's a good idea to start discussing this stuff). The way I see it, we have the following options:
- Move this page to San Andreas in GTA III Era - This is consistent with Liberty City in GTA III Era and Vice City in GTA III Era, and allows for the fact that San Andreas is a part of the GTA III Era's universe (not just one game), and covers any references to San Andreas in the other games. This title may not be as obvious, however, as the following:
- Move this page back to San Andreas in GTA San Andreas - Unlike Liberty City and Vice City, San Andreas only appears in one game in this era, so this title can be used without creating the confusion that it did with those cities. San Andreas in GTA San Andreas however, does seem like a clumsy name.
- Leave this page as State of San Andreas - This would be a a special case based on the fact that this rendition of the state of San Andreas is the only one to appear in it's entirety in a game. Basically, if this option is chosen, then this article wins due to prominence. Obviously, any necessary links would be added to the top of the page for disambiguation.
With options one and two, we would also need to decide what to do with City of San Andreas. Would that be moved back to San Andreas in GTA 1 for consistency with the rest of the San Andreas articles? Both of these options would also see State of San Andreas redirected back to the main disambiguation page for San Andreas.
With any of these three options, we could then create San Andreas in GTA V for any references to the surroundings of Los Santos in GTA V (when needed that is, in the meantime it may be redirected to Los Santos in GTA V). That article would be created at that title, and would not be moved to San Andreas in GTA V Era until the announcement of further games in the GTA V Era.
- I would say go with your first option. That would make the most sense and be consistant with the rest of the Wiki if it was "San Andreas in GTA III Era". That would be clean and neat. I'm personally for that. Grand Theft AJ (talk) 22:56, 13 March 2012 (UTC)
- I agree that option one or two is best. Although splitting the different renditions by city and state made sense in 2008, it no longer makes sense with GTA V. I understand the argument that people will make based on prominence - Most people searching for the GTA V location will search for Los Santos, leaving a search for San Andreas as primarily the GTA San Andreas rendition. However, those people will be searching for San Andreas, not State of San Andreas, and will end up on a disambiguation page anyway. So now, I honestly believe that leaving this article here would cause more confusion than San Andreas in GTA III Era. JFletcherTalk (formerly User:Biggest gta fan ever) 01:20, 16 March 2012 (UTC)