Talk:Palace Hotel, San Francisco

Name "The Palace Hotel"
Just wanted to let you know that "The" is actually not part of the hotel's proper name, as the official website, which is linked on the page, shows. The name of the hotel is simply "Palace Hotel", not "The Palace Hotel". Jamesluckard (talk) 06:02, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Not correct. See, for instance, the large lighted sign reading THE PALACE HOTEL in the infobox image that has been on the hotel's roof for decades as well as the many original images and documents in my extensive on-line history of The Palace Hotel of San Francisco located at ThePalaceHotel.org. Centpacrr (talk) 09:02, November 16, 2014 (UTC)


 * *NOTE: Above transferred from my talk page. Centpacrr (talk) 09:21, 16 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Yes, but we're not talking about the hotel's name in the past. The official name of the hotel today does not use the definite article "The", that is all that matters. Look at the hotel's linked official website, or the linked Starwood corporate website. As for the lighted sign, it was installed many decades ago and said "SHERATON PALACE", one word above the other. When the Sheraton name was dropped a few years back, instead of leaving the upper line of the sign blank (as happened with the sign at the former Sheraton Town House here in Los Angeles), they simply took the "T", the "H" and the "E" from the word "SHERATON" and spelled out "THE" instead. The name on the sign is not what should be used as the hotel's current chosen official name. Also, I checked out your website, which is really cool, and I give you great credit for putting it together. However at least half of the historical items there also call the hotel just "Palace Hotel" - even the 1922 rate card right here in the gallery on this Wikipedia page uses that name. Regardless, however, the Wikipedia page should use the current name - the one on all current promotional materials (brochures, website, etc), which is Palace Hotel.Jamesluckard (talk) 09:32, 16 November 2014 (UTC)


 * While I understand the basis of your argument, I do not agree with its logic. It is clear that as an institution, The Palace Hotel has used multiple styles of its name over the years in various applications, i.e., "The Palace Hotel" for such as key fobs, hollow ware, air mail covers, baggage labels, picture post cards, souvenirs menus, stationary, and signage, while in some other instances the hotel (and others) have employed the contracted form "Palace Hotel". That, however, does not make the shortened form the "official" or full name of the hotel. Proposing that its shortened name should be substituted for the full name is akin to saying when the US government marks things "United States of America" such as it does on the sides of Air Force One, for instance, that constitutes the full name of the country which is, of course, actually "The United State of America", the way it appears on all our currency. No WP editor would ever suggest that "The" is not an integral part of the full official name of the country.. The same should apply to The Palace Hotel and any other similar entity on WP. While in some instances the hotel may use a contracted form its name such as "Palace Hotel" or "The Palace", the encyclopedicly correct approach on WP or any other reference work is to recognize and use the full, uncontacted name in the infobox and lede of the article which is clearly "The Palace Hotel".


 * With respect, the reasoning you offer as to why the word "THE" still appears to this day on the two largest and most visible signs located on the hotel's roof four decades after it was no longer being operated as a part of the Shearton chain strikes me, in the absence of providing any source to support it, as both conjecture and illogical. (The fact that you point out that the former Sheraton Town House in Los Angeles handled their name change differently also seems to mitigate against your explanation, not support it.) If it were really the intention to drop "THE" from the full name of the hotel, it seems to me highly unlikely that it would have ever been retained on the roof sign when the change over took place in 1973, let alone kept there for decades. On the contrary, this strikes me as the best evidence that the full name was then and continues to be "The Palace Hotel". Centpacrr (talk) 11:57, 16 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I give up. The hotel clearly calls itself "Palace Hotel" today, but you clearly don't agree, and you have more energy to fight this issue than I do. Anyone who clicks the links will see the current name. Anyone else probably won't care. It's a minor issue and not worth arguing over any longer.Jamesluckard (talk) 20:57, 16 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I think you are missing my point here which is that both the full name and contracted name have been used contemporaneously for the hotel both before and after it was a part of the Sheraton chain. However the name prominently displayed to the public since 1973 by way of two huge lighted signs on the roof of the hotel is "THE PALACE HOTEL", not "Palace Hotel", and that is also how it is referred to by the general public. That being the case both now and historically, as this article relates to both the original (1875-1906) as well as the "new" hotel structures, and for the 41 years since leaving the Sheraton chain the hotel's management has continued to identify it with two massive lighted roof signs which include the word "THE", it seems to me that "The Palace Hotel" is the appropriate usage here as opposed to the contracted name. Thank you also for your kind words about my ThePalaceHotel.org online history of the hotel. Centpacrr (talk) 21:40, 16 November 2014 (UTC)

Neighborhood categories
I moved this article from the Financial District category to the South of Market category, since this building is located south of Market. Please ping me if this is incorrect for further discussion. Thanks! --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 22:07, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Paragraph about original Palace Hotel is mostly superfluous.
In the section about the original Palace Hotel, the paragraph that begins, "Financed primarily by Bank of California co-founder William Ralston, it offered many innovative modern conveniences including an intercom system and four oversized hydraulic elevators called lifting rooms" is almost entirely redundant and probably should be removed.

Also, this section refers to the early elevators as "rising rooms" and "lifting rooms." I think they were called "rising rooms" not "lifting rooms."

In the book, "In the Kingdom of Ice" by Hampton Sides, it is explained that George W. De Long stayed at the original Palace Hotel in 1879 just prior to embarking on his ill-fated effort to reach the North Pole by ship. 76.113.117.65 (talk) 02:34, 27 November 2018 (UTC)