Talk:Los Angeles/Archive 7

This is an archive of past discussions about Los Angeles. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

San Pedro is part of L.A. and is district 15 on the Los Angeles city council. There are 15 districts. Our zip code is 90731, which is missing from the list of zip codes in the top right box of the Article.

It is interesting we are part of Los Angeles since we are 30 minutes south of downtown and other cities are in between, but the Harbor freeway connects us, and we give L.A. the tax revenue and other benefits of the harbor. We gave the city mayor Jim Hahn; and now his sister Janice Hahn (from San Pedro) represents us in Congress, after representing district 15 on the city council, FYI. Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 11:47, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Zip code 90710 is also missing and I am rather sure that Harbor City is part of Los Angeles and not a separate city as the name would imply. Check out also, Wilmington. Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 11:55, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

You can see the districts and neighborhoods of Los Angeles by looking at the funded libraries:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_Public_Library The zip codes for Wilmington are 90744, and 90748, also not on the list, FYI, needing to be added. Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 12:08, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

At the encouragement of Will B. Back, I'm taking another look and add some missing zip codes, if I am able. The following link lists the Los Angeles City zip codes: http://lahd.lacity.org/lahdinternet/Portals/0/Policy/LAZipCodes.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charles Edwin Shipp (talk • contribs) 04:11, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

For what it is worth, the Los Angeles City department of housing lists these zip codes: 90001-90008 90010-90021 90023-90029 90031-90039 90041-90049 90056-90059 90061-90069 90071 90077 90089 90094-90095 90210-90212 90230 90232 90245 90247-90248 90272 90290-90293 90302 90402 90501-90502 90710 90717 90731-90732 90744 90810 91040 91042 91214 91303-91304 91306-91307 91311 91316 91324 91325-91326 91330-91331 91335 91340 91342-91345 91352 91356 91364 91367 91401-91403 91405-91406 91411 91423 91436 91504-91505 91601-91602 91604-91608 (127 zipcodes) In bold are the missing zipcodes.[1] Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 05:39, 16 November 2011 (UTC) . . . I'm not sure how to make a change.

Please change the city population density to one calculated using the land area of the city only (excluding water). That is the standard density metric used for all city web-pages on Wikipedia. So "7544.6/sq mi (2,913/km2)" should be "8092.3/sq mi (3,161/km2)"

 Done . . . Someone did this a while back. Thanks, Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 01:10, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

And thanks to Dr Photon (light) for noticing .!. Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 01:10, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I reverted some changes to the census numbers but I was reverted again. I looked at http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/0644000.html, a page listing a quick rundown of L.A. population stats, and I found that the previous version was correct, not the new version. I put this URL into the article as a reference. I have to assume that a misreading of the census figures was at fault for the other numbers. Binksternet (talk) 00:11, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Last time I looked it up, L.A. was 1.3% Armenian. Shouldn't that be mention somewhere in the demographics section? Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 14:26, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

The demographics section includes racial categories which comprise as little as 0.1%, so 1.3% would be comparatively significant. However the census data seems to report race rather than national origin. I'm not sure where we're getting the figures for some of the groups, like Cambodians. FWIW, 1.3% of 3,792,621 is 49,304. That means L.A. has more Armenians than all but the the four largest cities in Armenia. Armenia#Cities. That's still fewer than Glendale, though. Anyway, if we can find a good source then we should probably add it, along with other significant populations figures.   Will Beback  talk  08:33, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

[2] reports that in 2010, L.A. had approximately 77,961 Armenians Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 14:30, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Unfortunately that link, like many on the census website, isn't a permanent link. There's probably some way of creating a stable link to the data page, or at least the page that links to it. In any case, I have no reason to doubt it. Perhaps you could add this data and the data for other significant demographic groups. Maybe we can condense some other material to keep it a reasonable length.   Will Beback  talk  18:56, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Here is a recently added hatnote:[3]

I followed the link but I'm afraid the topic may not be well sourced or accurate. "Postal city" is not a common term and the hatnote may confuse readers. I think it'd be better to make "Los Angeles CA" a redirect to the main article. The issue of which neighborhood names are acceptable to the USPS is not unique to this city, and most US city articles don't get into postal issues like this. That info belongs in the individual neighborhood articles instead of either cluttering the main article or occupying a stub of its own. Any other ideas?

FYI, here's a nifty zip-code look-up website which gives a precise map along with the official "USPS Postal Name" and any "Acceptable Names". The are many acceptable names throughout the city, like Hollywood. Curiously, Venice is indeed the official postal name even though it's in L.A.[4] Brentwood is not an acceptable name[5] because there is already a city by that name (Brentwood, California).   Will Beback  talk  10:35, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

PS: It's covered in the second paragraph of List of districts and neighborhoods of Los Angeles#Overview. That looks to me like adequate coverage.   Will Beback  talk  10:56, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

I tend to agree. "Postal city" is definitely incorrect; I think "post office name" is intended. Even if Los Angeles CA is not changed to a redirect, it doesn't need a separate hatnote on this article; it should just be added to the dab page. Station1 (talk) 03:30, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Hey, I just created an article on the Historic Downtown Los Angeles Streetcar, which Metro's been studying. Feel free to take a look Purplebackpack89≈≈≈≈ 17:19, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

This whole article needs somthing new. Theres too many dated photos, isn't there someone who can take good photos and use them here? The LA page just looks so hodgepodge. Maybe there should be less photos or better ones. Someone please remedy.

98.176.203.226 (talk) 04:16, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I wish to add important references, which are lacking, to the historyand geography of Los Angeles. I know there are so many books on theAldonse (talk) 11:51, 11 June 2012 (UTC) subject, but the actual references are very poor :

- Caughey J L (1976) Los Angeles, Biography of a City, Univ of California, Berkeley.

- Marchand B (1986) The Emergence of Los Angeles, 1940-1970, Pion Ltd, London.

- Nelson H J & Clark W A V ( 1976)Los Angeles, Theb Metropolitan Experience, Ballinger, Cambridge, MA.

- Nunis D (1973) Los Angeles and its Environs in the 20th Century, Ward Ritchie, LA.

- Rand C (1967) Los Angeles, the Ultimate City, Oxford Univ Press, N-Y.

- Robinson W W (1968) Los Angeles, a Profile, Univ of Oklahoma Press, Norman, OK.

- Shevky E & Williams M (1949) The Social Areas of Los Angeles, UCLA.

- Stimson H G (1955) The Rise of the Labor Movement in Los Angeles, Univ of California, Berkeley.

Aldonse (talk) 11:51, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Not done: unable to add, I don't have a copy of the books, therefore am unable to assess their content. Mdann52 (talk) 16:55, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

The Valley (aka San Fernando Valley) is given no links. Don't understand. Anti-Valley sentiments happening in the L.A. page? Just kidding. I assume it's an oversight. Whenever Valley mentioned there is no link. I know there is a Wikipedia page for the Valley that discusses both neighborhoods and geography (two areas discussed in LA page). Also in the L.A. page it should be known as "the Valley" when discussing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.4.229.208 (talk) 07:36, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

One link is missing in the Religion section fo Islam. Where it says:

"Because of Los Angeles' large multi-ethnic population, a wide variety of faiths are practiced, including Islam ..."

All the Other Religions have a wiki link except for Islam. Thank you

76.87.14.3 (talk) 02:10, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

 Done Thanks for noticing!— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 02:35, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

This seems like far too much material on these councils (subsection of Law and Government; I can't figure out how to wikilink to it). I would like to reduce the topic to a sentence or three up under the section heading depending on what's sourceable. If no one has any objections, I'll do this in a few days. If people would rather have an actual subsection on these councils, perhaps sources can be found supporting this much space for the topic?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 20:30, 29 July 2012 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Faisalabad, Pakistan is listed here as one of Los Angeles' Sister Cities. According to an e-mail I received from Avak Keotahian, Legislative Analyst for LA City Council, Faisalabad is NOT one of LA's 25 Sister Cities. Faisalabad does not appear on the external LA Sister City website or the Sister Cities International website. 24.43.122.142 (talk) 01:49, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

 Done Thanks for noticing. Note that I'm basing the edit on the city website http://www.sistercitiesofla.com/ rather than the email, which I have not seen.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 04:21, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Polltraxx Music Group, Los Angeles Polltraxx1 (talk) 08:00, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

 I can't understand what you're asking for.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 12:54, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

March 2012 Elections and Elections Process

I'd like to add information pertaining to the open seats of Mayor and City Controller (both of which are up for election in March 2013).

Please be specific in your request - stating the information and citing your sources. When you do this, please change "yes" to "no" in the above template. Skier Dude (talk) 03:27, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Another editor has pointed out that the array of flag icons in the "Twin towns" section of this article probably breaches WP:ICONDECORATION. Would anyone mind if I removed them? --John (talk) 13:38, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I have no position on this yet, but what about WP:WORDPRECEDENT, especially In lists or tables, flag icons may be relevant when the nationality of different subjects is pertinent to the purpose of the list or table itself.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 16:12, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I think they should stay per WORDPRECEDENT. Binksternet (talk) 16:30, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I also think they should stay. This is standard for U.S. Cities articles. See also Wikipedia:WikiProject_Cities/US_Guideline#Sister_cities.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 17:01, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

We need to read WORDPRECEDENT in context though. The same guideline also contains the words "Words as the primary means of communication should be given greater precedence over flags and flags should not change the expected style or layout of infoboxes or lists to the detriment of words." I feel that the flag icons as currently used overemphasise both the section (which doesn't feel like it is that important to the overall subject) and the nationalities of the various associated communities. If it is felt that it would be better to take this to the Cities WikiProject I will do that. However I would point out that normal practice would be for those wishing to include something to demonstrate consensus for it. --John (talk) 18:02, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

I did see the line you quote, but since I expect to see flag icons in lists of sister cities I didn't think it applied. Maybe it does, though. I do think that it'd be better to take it to the cities project than to discuss it here, since the use of the flags is extremely widespread across city articles. I don't have much of an opinion on the issue in particular, but I do feel strongly that the layout across city articles ought to be consistent, and my objection to removing them on this article is based entirely on consistency. Tangentially, I think the fact that the cities wikiproject suggests the use of the icons tends to show that there's consensus for their inclusion.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:15, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Since the same discussion seems to be taking place in at least three different venues, I opened up a general discussion at WikiProject Cities after reading comments here and on Talk:Chicago. Please comment there. Thanks, Mathsci (talk) 21:44, 6 September 2012 (UTC)

Please comment on the following proposal: Talk:Greater_Los_Angeles_Area#Split_into_two_articles. The Greater Los Angeles Area article would be split into a) the casual, various and popular definitions, and b) the specific federal census grouping of five counties stretching all the way to the Nevada and Arizona borders. Binksternet (talk) 18:30, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

I removed all of the new info about the county and the state. Discuss here, of course, if you disagree. If we go down that path why would we not include north america, the western hemisphere, the united nations, the solar system, etc. — alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 23:18, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

The religion section needs more details. The section needs more links to other Wikipedia articles and the section needs to emphasize the unique aspects of religion in Los Angeles and Los Angeles' unique role in the modern history of Religion, including:

A) Los Angeles is home to the administrative headquarters and the first church of the Church of Scientology. The Church also has prominent educational and other buildings in the area. Reference: http://www.scientology-losangeles.org/

Several notable Hollywood celebrities are vocal members of the Church of Scientology. References: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Scientologists

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/02/celebrity-scientologists-hollywood-stars-practice-scientology_n_1643934.html

B) Los Angeles was the birthplace of the Pentecostal church, a Protestant Christian movement that has spread around the world, and is growing very fast in developing nations. Although there is one sentence in the article, this unique role of Los Angeles in a world religious movement definitely deserves its own paragraph. Also, Pentecostalism is controversial among mainline Protestants and traditional Born-Again Christians; they would not want to be lumped in together with Pentecostals. It was also the place where the Pentecostal practice of "speaking in tongues" began. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentecostalism

C) Los Angeles is a major center of Jewish Study, Learning and Philanthropy. This needs its own paragraph. It is home to several unique institutes and organizations:

The Hebrew Union College - Jewish Institute of Religion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hebrew_Union_College-Jewish_Institute_of_Religion

The Museum of Tolerance en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Museum_of_Tolerance

The Skirball Center en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skirball_Cultural_Center

UCLA Center for Jewish Studies www.cjs.ucla.edu/

(ok, I'm getting tired of putting references in here. I am just going to list the things that should be included in the religion section) Several notable Jewish Delis Large Persian, Russian and Israeli Jewish communities. The Persian Jews have their own reality TV show on the Bravo network, "The Shaws of Sunset".

The Kabbalah Center, which has spawned a mini-movement of its own, popular among non-Jews and Jews alike. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kabbalah_Centre

D) There are mosques and organizations representing most, if not all, of the different sects of Islam including: Shia, Sunni, Sufi, Ahmaddiya, Ismaili, Nation Of Islam, etc. as well as mosques that preach in specific languages or for particular immigrant groups such as Chinese, Pakistani, etc. There are consulates from many muslim nations in Los Angeles.

The controversial film that recently caused riots throughout the Muslim world was filmed in Los Angeles.

E) Los Angeles is home to several Atheist organisations and notable Atheists. The Center for Inquiry West. United Atheists and their adopted strip of freeway.

F) Los Angeles is a center of New Age spirituality, especially regarding crystals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lawndaledigger (talk • contribs) 19:18, 19 December 2012 (UTC)

There's a lot of discussion of these issues in the talk page archives, but there seems to be no will to write new material on them right now. Perhaps you'd like to propose something?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 00:38, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Add (G) Los Angeles is a major hub for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints: In the morning my wife and I serve at the Los Angeles LDS temple; and in the afternoon, at the Los Angeles Family History Library, under the Los Angeles Temple Visitors Center. We also sing in the Southern California Mormon Choir. As far as the LDS Church goes, Los Angeles is a major area of the church. FYI, Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 03:27, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Here's at least one place we've discussed this already: Talk:Los_Angeles/Archive_6#Protestants. I don't think that Jewish delis have much to do with religion, by the way.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 04:27, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

{{geodata-check}}

The following coordinate fixes are needed for

—174.141.208.108 (talk) 11:37, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

 Not done. You've not specified what you think is in error, and the coordinates currently in the article look OK to me. If you still think there is an error here, please explain exactly what you think needs to be corrected. Deor (talk) 14:49, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

regarding this sentence in environment subsection:

With pollution still a significant problem, the city continues to take aggressive steps to improve air and water conditions.<:ref>"Air Quality Programs at the Port of Los Angeles saw Refinement in 2005 with Focus on Ramping up in 2006" (PDF). Port of Los Angeles (News Release). February 17, 2006. Retrieved September 29, 2011. {{cite web}}: |first= missing |last= (help); Unknown parameter |;ast= ignored (help)</ref><:ref>Staff Writer (December 6, 2004). "Air Quality Protections Take Off". Environmental Defense. Archived from the original on March 1, 2006.</ref>

the sources don't seem to me to support the statement. one is about the port of los angeles taking measures to reduce air pollution generated there, the other is about efforts to reduce air pollution generated by LAX expansion. even allowing for some synthesis, which i don't think we should do, these don't add up to "the city continues to take aggressive steps..." i have no doubt that this statement can be sourced adequately, but i don't think that it is now. comments, suggestions?

→The environmental office would be a better source to quote for the city:

"The City of Los Angeles released its climate action plan, Green LA: An Action Plan to Lead the Nation in Fighting Global Warming, in May 2007. The Plan sets forth a goal of reducing the City’s greenhouse gas emissions to 35% below 1990 levels by the year 2030, one of the most aggressive goals of any big city in the U.S. This voluntary plan identifies over 50 action items, grouped into focus areas, to reduce emissions. While the emphasis is first on municipal facilities and operations, several measures address programs to reduce emissions in the community.

Moving forward, ClimateLA is the implementation program that provides detailed information about each action item discussed in the Green LA framework. Action items range from harnessing wind power for electricity production and energy efficiency retrofits in City buildings, to converting the City’s fleet vehicles to cleaner and more efficient models, and reducing water consumption. Information about proposed and/or ongoing programs, opportunities for achieving the City’s goals, specific challenges, and a list of milestones is provided for each action item. The scope of these actions range from those impacting only municipal facilities, such as retrofitting City Hall with high efficiency lighting systems, to those facilitating changes in the private sector, such as rebates for the purchase of energy-efficient appliances."

http://www.environmentla.org/ead_climatechange.htm

→FYI, according to CARB, the largest polluter in LA-Long Beach is the LA-LB Harbor. The freeways and auto emissions are 2nd. It might help if that were explained. Reducing pollution at the port alone does amount to fairly aggressive action. It is also subject to lawsuits, SCOTUS, and a certain boisterous politics.

→From the NYTimes:

"The ports have long been known as the biggest contributors to air pollution in the region, with local officials complaining that such pollution has caused an epidemic of asthma, stunted lung development in children and chronic lung disease in adults.

But in recent years the ports have spent hundreds of millions of dollars to clean up their operations. In 2006, they approved policies that now ban the use of any truck built before 2007. Both ports are also expanding plans to require some of the ships to shut down their power generators, which run on diesel fuel, and instead “plug in” and use the electric power grid at the docks."

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/12/us/rail-project-for-port-of-los-angeles-sparks-anger-in-long-beach.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

→From the NRDC:

"In 2006, the Port adopted with the Port of Long Beach a joint Clean Air Action Plan, which includes a roadmap of how the two ports will reduce air pollution while growing their operations. And in 2008, the Port of Los Angeles began implementing its Clean Truck Program. This program sought to address a myriad of environmental, safety, and security challenges created by port-serving trucks, known as “port drayage.”

The Clean Truck Program has been widely successful, with some estimating nearly a 90% reduction in truck-generated air pollution in three years. Under that program, licensed motor carriers—the companies that haul port goods—must comply with the Port’s business standards if they want to do business at the Port. That means using less polluting trucks, meeting the Port’s safety and security standards (e.g., making sure trucks are properly maintained and motor carriers have proper IDs and credentials), parking trucks in lots off of residential streets, and posting placards inside trucks that list a phone number that the public can call if a truck is driving unsafely or in an area it should not be.

On April 16, 2013, the United States Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in American Trucking Associations v. Los Angeles and decide the fate of Los Angeles’ award winning Clean Truck Program.

On the surface, the legal questions before the Court are quite narrow—whether the Port has the authority to require licensed motor carriers to provide off-street parking and post placards, and bar motor carriers that violate the Port’s standards from doing business at the port. How the Court decides these questions, however, could have broad effects." http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/mlinperrella/the_port_of_los_angeles_clean.html

→In addition, LA is facilitating electric cars:

"Los Angeles

According to the EDTA, Antonio Villaraigosa -- Mayor of Los Angeles -- has made such a commitment to the development and adoption of alternative fuel and electric vehicles that the city deserves a mention.

Highlighted by the EDTA are two incentives ran by the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, which include rebates of up to $2,000 for home owners to install electric car charging stations in their homes, and cheaper time-of-use electricity pricing schemes to allow electric car owners to cheaply charge their cars at night time. " http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1073481_what-makes-a-town-electric-car-friendly-we-find-out

The Electric Drive Transportation Association (EDTA) is a membership association, or I would provide a link to them. The LA Times article is older and archived.

→Results:

"A study by Jerome Brioude (of NOAA/ESRL/CSD and CIRES) and colleagues used data collected during NOAA's CalNex field campaign in California in 2010 to estimate emissions of CO, NOx and CO2. Starting with emission inventories from EPA and California Air Resources Board (CARB), the authors used a high resolution regional model WRF-Chem and aircraft measurements to derive a so-called top-down inverse estimate of emssions.

The results were able to confirm a decrease in CO and NOx emissions in LA region over the past decade. 2002 measurements from another NOAA field campaign ITCT were used to verify the change in emissions. A remarkable 43% decrease of CO emissions was reported in the past decade for LA.

Emissions outside LA County were relatively larger when constrained by observations, indicating that the study found a different spatial distribution of the emissions than the original emission inventory. NOx emissions were found to have decreased by 32% in LA. Both CO and NOx estimates carry about 10% uncertainty, but otherwise confirm previous studies showing emission decrease. Meanwhile, CO2 emissions show no statistically significant increasing or decreasing trend in the past decade, although the study revealed significant changes in spatial distribution of emissions around LA County. "

http://cpo.noaa.gov/ClimatePrograms/EarthSystemScienceESS/ESSArchive/TabId/541/ArtMID/1399/ArticleID/129/NOAA-Supports-Study-of-Urban-Greenhouse-Gas-Emissions-in-Los-Angeles.aspx

There are more sources and examples, but LA does still have a significant pollution problem, and the article should not give the impression LA has totally resolved its issues. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.189.109.53 (talk) 10:07, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

There are a lot of resources claiming that Los Angeles is the "sister city" or "twin city" of various cities in Asia and the Middle East. For example, List of twin towns and sister cities in Asia and Jeddah. Does anyone have more information / sources for them? Twillisjr (talk) 15:40, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Here we try to stick to the list on the official city website about sister cities, which can be found here. I don't know how they do it on other articles.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 16:38, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

LA ranks number one in absolute release of Sulphur oxides, Nitrogen oxides and Carbon monoxide. The city has failed to implement any sort of mass transit requiring millions of people to drive footprint heavy cars and trucks to work every day. This should be mentioned in the first paragraph as it is significant negative health factor. Los Angels is a core polluter to the atmosphere. This article currently downplays LA's massive contribution to the deterioration of clean air and atmosphere.

66.116.62.178 (talk) 15:18, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

You can add that information if you can cite a source. If you don't know how, just put the citation into the body of the text and somebody will come along and format it for you. GeorgeLouis (talk) 15:30, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

An editor changed "Los Angeles" to "Los Angeles, California" in the infobox name. Another reverted, cited WP:COMMONNAME. But commonname is not relevant here; the article title conforms to WP:USPLACE, but WP:USCITY suggests that the state should be included in the infobox. Actual practice on city articles is mixed, but this seems like a good convention, yes? Dicklyon (talk) 17:53, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

At USPLACE the AP Stylebook is cited for 30 city articles including Los Angeles, deprecating the "city, state" formulation for the listed cities. If the article name does not need the state, the infobox name does not need the state. Binksternet (talk) 18:21, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't see the relationship, or why the infobox should try to be as concise as the title. What do others think? Dicklyon (talk) 18:33, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

I don't care one way or the other. The article isn't in such good shape that I want to spend time worrying about this kind of thing. I will note that the same editor made the same change on San Francisco and was reverted there. Perhaps this is a broader issue which should be discussed in a more general forum?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 19:10, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

And I don't see that WP:USCITY "suggests" that the state should be included in the infobox. It merely fills in the top of the infobox with "City Name, State/Province Name" for the "official name" parameter. The USCITY infobox example leaves out the "name" parameter which is one of the possible parameters listed at Template:Infobox settlement along with "official name". Here at the Los Angeles article both "name" and "official name" are employed in the infobox. The inclusion of "Province" name in the USCITY example leads me to think that it was poorly thought out and so should not be used here as an argument for anything. The province is a Canadian geopolitical unit, but the guideline is for US cities. Binksternet (talk) 19:38, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

page update Pingpong123q (talk) 17:01, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. RudolfRed (talk) 17:47, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

The article states that LA ranks highest in year round particulate pollution and short term particulate pollution. According to the American Lung Association, that honor belongs to Bakersfield-Delano. LA ranks highest in ozone pollution.

http://www.stateoftheair.org/2012/city-rankings/most-polluted-cities.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.189.109.53 (talk) 08:32, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The name given by the Chumash tribe of Native Americans for the area now known as Los Angeles translates to "the valley of smoke."[118]

This statement is based on one source, and that source is incorrect. The entire sentence should be removed.

The SacBee quotes this article in which the source states the purported phrase.^[1]

However, that phrase—according to many^{[2] [3]} sources online—actually means "poison oak place." The couple of sources that claim the Chumash named it "valley of smoke" all trace back to this one paper. There are no other supporting sources. Lahistorygirl (talk) 18:21, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Lahistorygirl (talk) 02:09, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

What sources do you have to counter the Sacramento Bee article? —C.Fred (talk) 02:15, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 17:41, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

 done, sort of I added this information to the article, without removing the statement that was there already. —rybec 08:56, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Wouldn't Tinseltown be another nickname for L.A? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.8.59.86 (talk) 03:21, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

The history box on this page states that LA was part of the California Republic in 1846. There was never any such country.

There was a group of people in Sonoma county who proclaimed a California Republic in 1846, and who formed a provisional government there. That "government" only existed for two months before it folded, when they discovered the United States had declared war on Mexico; and it never exercised any jurisdiction outside of the Sonoma-Napa counties area It certainly did not include Los Angeles, or anything south of the Sacramento River Delta.

The provincial government of California at the capital city of Monterey continued to function without any impairment during the period that the bogus "California Republic" tried to get its own revolution started

This sort of romantic political fiction has no place in an encyclopaedia and should be removed.

69.181.62.103 (talk) 04:23, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Please refer to published accounts rather than asserting facts on your own authority. Let's hew to what the literature says. Binksternet (talk) 04:43, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

As of July 1, 2013, the Mayor of Los Angeles is Eric Garcetti. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.149.63.161 (talk) 21:51, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

The mayor of Los Angeles is Eric Garcetti. Snishiya (talk) 13:40, 28 October 2013 (UTC)snishiya

The current mayor is Eric Garcetti. Snishiya (talk) 13:46, 28 October 2013 (UTC)snishiya <Government Los Angeles>

So LA is the point on the earth's surface directly above the film industry? That would explain a lot, I suppose. Would have fixed it but the page was locked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.134.190.166 (talk) 15:56, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

I think it's rather a nice metaphor, myself, but it can be changed if you have a better suggestion. What do you suggest? --Stfg (talk) 18:16, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Can somebody add to this article that Los Angeles was ranked as having the 3rd best startup ecosystem, just behind Silicon Valley & Tel Aviv, according to the Startup Ecosystem Report (2012, techcrunch). Source: http://techcrunch.com/2012/11/20/startup-genome-ranks-the-worlds-top-startup-ecosystems-silicon-valley-tel-aviv-l-a-lead-the-way/

I think it's pretty relevant.178.117.252.112 (talk) 07:08, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Not done: please make your request in a "change X to Y" format. Thanks, Celestra (talk) 19:31, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

"The metropolitan area is home to the headquarters of many companies who moved outside of the city of Los Angeles to escape its high taxes and high crime rate while keeping the benefits of remaining in close proximity. For example, Los Angeles charges a gross receipts tax based on a percentage of business revenue, while many neighboring cities charge only small flat fees." I checked the source and nowhere was there any mention of headquarters moving outside of the city of Los Angeles due to high crime and tax rates. Please delete this part. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.117.252.112 (talk) 13:14, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Done. In fact, the word "crime" doesn't appear anywhere in the source. Thanks. --Stfg (talk) 17:00, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Can you also point out to me where this is mentioned "The metropolitan area is home to the headquarters of many companies who moved outside of the city of Los Angeles to escape its high taxes while keeping the benefits of remaining in close proximity." in the source? I can't seem to find it.178.117.252.112 (talk) 07:07, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

That's going to be harder to find, because it will be a paraphrase. The source is 169 pages long and I'm not going to read it, but I've tagged the statement with {{Page needed}}. Give it at least a few weeks, and it can be deleted if nobody has come up with the goods. --Stfg (talk) 18:12, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

I searched the document on several keywords "flee" "escape" "high taxes" "avoid", and nothing was found at all related to this, some of the words are not even present. This is nothing more than an ideological smear-campaign. It's pretty obvious.178.117.252.112 (talk) 23:03, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

I would try to assume good faith if I were you. OK, I've skimmed the source, and having found pp 65–66, it seems to me that the text needs strengthening rather than removing. For the moment, I'm not prepared to pre-empt other editors' input. --Stfg (talk) 23:32, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

This is just original research. Nothing at all is said about leaving, fleeing or escaping the city of LA due to high taxes! The ONLY thing the source says is that there is a certain discontentment with LA taxes coming from the business community. 178.117.252.112 (talk) 00:22, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Done. I think it was probably poor citation rather than original research, actually. I was going to rewrite the paragraph to summarise pp 65–66, when I noticed that the date of the source is January 14, 2004. That's much too old to justify statements about the current tax regime, so I've deleted the whole paragraph. In fact, the citation just deleted gives a document date of 1997, so the citation may have been to an older report. I don't know, but no matter. Now, since we're battling original research, how about some sources for that huge list of companies in LA in the previous paragraph? --Stfg (talk) 14:30, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

According that climate chart we should define LA climate a semiarid/subtropical climate. Surely not mediterranean. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.10.235.128 (talk) 01:52, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

I learned at UCLA in the 1950s that Los Angeles had a subtropical climate. In fact, there was a department of subtropical horticulture there in that era. GeorgeLouis (talk) 15:28, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Los Angeles is a Mediterranean climate zone, due to the ocean inversion layer offshore. A Med climate zone is a subtropical climate zone, FYI.

"The dry summer subtropical climate is found on the west side of subtropical continents and on the coast of the Mediterranean Sea. The largest area of dry summer subtropical climate is on the border lands of the Mediterranean. For Americans especially, the lure of "sunny" coastal central and southern California's dry summer subtropical climate is a draw for tourism and habitation. Mediterranean climate is also found in the Cape Town area of South Africa, central Chile, and southwestern Australia."

http://www4.uwsp.edu/geo/faculty/ritter/geog101/textbook/climate_systems/mediterranean.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.189.109.53 (talk) 20:28, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

"Temperatures are subject to substantial daily swings; in inland areas the difference between the average daily low and the average daily high is over 30 °F (−1 °C)."

While it is true that an absolute temperature of 30 °F equals -1 °C (approximately), since this is talking about temperature differences, not actual temperatures, the Celsius figure should be 17 °F, unless I've missed something.

To give another example, a temperature of 100 °C equals 212 °F, but the difference between the melting and boiling points of water is 100 °C / 180 °F. 82.10.225.43 (talk) 17:18, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Some recent vandalism, maybe some old. Dougweller (talk) 16:26, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

61st World^[4] Tzicul (talk) 10:52, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. --Anon126 (talk - contribs) 05:07, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

In Los Angeles, does temperatures exceed 90° F one day on November. In 2013, it was only 87° F only. Are you really sure all of Los Angeles exceeds 90°. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.243.80.13 (talk) 06:09, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

ShawntheGod added this material: Los Angeles in the year of 2013 totaled 251 murders, a decrease of 16 percent from the previous year. Authorities attribute this decrease in crime to a number of things, but technology playing a huge role due to the modern day environment.<:ref>"LAPD City Murder Rate Drops 16 Percent". Retrieved 2014-2-4. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)</ref> which seems relevant and well-sourced. The trouble is that it's a too-close paraphrase of the source. I changed it here to Los Angeles in the year of 2013 totaled 251 murders, a decrease of 16 percent from the previous year. Police speculate that the drop resulted from a number of factors, including young people spending more time online.<:ref>"LAPD City Murder Rate Drops 16 Percent". Retrieved 2014-2-4. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)</ref> to fix the close paraphrase. Now comes Grade X and reverts back to Shawn's version with the edit summary So what?. What does that even mean?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:01, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Agree its close and with a little puff added in..this should be fixed as per Wikipedia:Copy-paste ...Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing -- Moxy (talk) 18:17, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Yep, and now Grade X is edit-warring over it without discussion. Sigh...— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:25, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

No I'm not. I've read the rules now. Grade X (talk) 18:26, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

So will you consider self-reverting?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:38, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

 Done. Grade X (talk) 18:48, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. We really can just talk about what form the information can take in the article. No one is arguing that it's not important.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:48, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

I really have no problem with your change to my editorial, but I also don't really think it was that necessary. I put "Authorities attribute this decrease in crime to a number of things, but technology playing a huge role due to the modern day environment." and the source says "Authorities attribute the drop to a number of things, including technology.". I singled out technology like the source due to the fact it seems to be a large reason, but also because the source later states "A lot of people believe it’s the sociology of our environment. A lot of kids and youthful individuals are spending a lot more time on the Internet, which means they’re indoors a lot more. They’re not on the streets involved in street-level activities,” so it's quite clear technology has a huge role in our modern day environment. I don't really see how I was paraphrasing or directly copying the material either, but I guess I should have put 'technology playing a huge rule in the modern day environment' instead. In all honesty, either way, your altercations were fine with me. The thing mostly of importance was the factual statistics about the amount of murders in LA in 2013 and the percent decrease from last year. ShawntheGod (talk) 18:34, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

I agree that the factual stats are important and should go in. The sentence struck me as too close, but YMMV. The main thing is that we ought to discuss it, which I know you're always willing to do, rather than edit-warring, as Grade X seems all to happy to do.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:38, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Nah, it's all good. No need to edit war over something as miniscule of the wording of a sentence, either way both of our versions talk about how technology plays a role in the decrease in crime. ShawntheGod (talk) 18:46, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

It's interesting, isn't it, that the murder rate went down so much and no one knows why. Maybe Steve Jobs really did save the world. I wouldn't mind seeing more detail in there about it.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:49, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

I'm actually not that surprised in all honesty; I've always pondered whether or not the spread of technology would help increase or decrease certain things and it seems to be working for the decline in crime. The article really doesn't elaborate much more on technology playing a possible huge role in the decrease than the sentences already put in the article though. Obviously some people do see certain advantages with technology, but people do see certain disadvantages as well. You know, the usual criticism that comes with the use of technology. Either way, it's great that crime rates have declined. ShawntheGod (talk) 19:08, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

according to the Los Angeles Times, not only the media-speculated Crime rate is down, they even said the number of Latinos is at 44 percent instead of reaching majority (over 50 percent) status. The local media hyped of Latinos/Hispanics will form the majority of the city (and county) population. Other facts reported by the local media is air pollution, unemployment and opoverty rates are down, despite what the media long portrayed of these things are going up or getting worse. Local media loves to stir the pot before they find the real facts. 71.102.1.95 (talk) 12:38, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

This edit request to Los Angeles has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

According to the city's 2010 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, the top ten employers in the city as of 2009 were, in descending order, the City of Los Angeles, the County of Los Angeles, University of California, Los Angeles, University of Southern California, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Kaiser Permanente, Fox Entertainment Group, Farmers Insurance Group, TeamOne,and Northrop Grumman.[101]

The text, "TeamOne,and" should be changed to "TeamOne, and" 76.169.19.101 (talk) 22:26, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

 Done Thanks for noticing!— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 22:44, 22 April 2014 (UTC)

Shouldn't this article title simply be "L.A.", as per wp:commonname? (Personally, I don't think so, but it would be nice to see some consistency with this ridiculous policy...) - ^theWOLFchild 22:47, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

I would argue that there is not enough evidence that would warrant a page move based on wp:commonname at this time. If you did a google search on L.A., you still get many pages that spell out "Los Angeles" without the abbreviation, or use both interchangeably. I assume Google is programmed to search for "Los Angeles" results even when you put in the abbreviation. However, I would still have to see an overwhelming exclusive use of L.A. to support such a change like that (significantly more than the over 279 million results I get for los angeles) Among the things I would be looking for, reliable news sources like the Associated Press would have to be using "LA" exclusive instead of "Los Angeles" in their articles' datelines. Otherwise, we should retain the current title. Zzyzx11 (talk) 06:04, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

This edit request to Los Angeles has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please add Emperor's College of Traditional Oriental Medicine under Colleges and universities, second paragraph beginning "Private colleges in the city include...

216.14.62.242 (talk) 00:29, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Done Mlpearc (open channel) 03:22, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

This edit request to Los Angeles has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

"Emperor's College" was recently added to the Colleges and universities section. The correct entry should be "Emperor's College Of Traditional Oriental Medicine" our official name. To omit that is like omitting "of Art and Design" in Otis College's name.

Thanks! 216.14.62.242 (talk) 01:12, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

 Not done Wikipedia articles use the Commonname to determine article titles and, our article, which is linked to from that section of this article, is just called Emperor's College, as this is the term the college uses throughout its own web-site, other than in one or two titles. - Arjayay (talk) 12:17, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Due to the fact that the population has increased since the 2010 Census, shouldn't we include that information in the lede? Let me know if you agree, and I can make that edit. GoGatorMeds (talk) 15:15, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

As long as you cite something with a reliable source, like perhaps the U.S. Census Bureau's Population estimates. Zzyzx11 (talk) 05:47, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

According to List_of_cities_proper_by_population the rank should be 63rd (not 48th). Wasing (talk) 18:40, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

Google finds a total of 5,647,000 hits for the two English phrases, "Queen of Angles" and "Queen of the Angels". With "Queen of the Angels" representing 84% of the total. Since the current name of the city contains the Spanish article "los", which is invariably translated into English as "the", I put a "the" into the translation of the original name in the History section of the article. It just seems strange to translate the original name as "The Town of Our Lady the Queen of Angels of the Porciúncula River" without the "the" which is in the original Spanish and is so very prominent in the current name of the city, "Los Angeles." Nick Beeson (talk) 13:56, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

This edit request to Los Angeles has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

city of angels not nickname but English for los angeles which is spanish

171.6.245.35 (talk) 07:38, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Anupmehra -Let's talk! 15:22, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Los Angeles is not Spanish for "City of angels" just "The angels", the "nickname" is, therefore 'City of "The Angels"' - Arjayay (talk) 16:12, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm not sure the infobox photos are as good as a group as they could be. They are all excellent images in their own right, but you have to consider also how well they interact with each other to produce a multiple image that is easy on the eye, and not too "busy". I wonder if removing two images, which to me seem to jar with the others, might be worth considering. Here's how it would look. A P Monblat (talk) 11:31, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

 Done -- TNKS! It looks great. -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 06:06, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Each pronunciation should be shown, not just one of the three. Meemo16 (talk) 01:04, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Well quite. The pronunciation currently shown is a British(?) one. I've mentioned in discussions elsewhere that Wikipedia's system for showing pronunciations is sometimes rather stupid - this is a case in point. If the information is going to be given, then it has to be given accurately. (But hang on - you're the same user who just removed additional pronunciations at Diphthong - what's with the inconsistency?) W. P. Uzer (talk) 17:55, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

The difference there is that there are two pronunciations of diphthong, /ˈdɪfθɒŋ/ and /ˈdɪpθɒŋ/, but these may be realized differently. With the father–bother merger it would be pronounced /–ɑŋ/ and with the cot–caught merger it'd be pronounced /–ɔŋ/. But the issue with including these is that /ɒ/ already covers all realizations of /ɒ/; that's the whole point of Wikipedia's IPA key.

And when you hover over the /ɒ/ in an article, it says '/ɒ/ short "o" in "body"'. When someone with either merger would read this, they'd just pronounce it with /ɔ/ or /ɑ/ depending on which merger they have.

The IPA key says, 'If, for example, you pronounce cot /ˈkɒt/ and caught /ˈkɔːt/ the same, then you may simply ignore the difference between the symbols /ɒ/ and /ɔː/[.]'

-

There are three pronunciations of 'Los Angeles' /lɒs ˈændʒɪliːz/, /lɒs ˈændʒɪlɨs/, and /lɒs ˈæŋɡɪlɨs/, but these are not different realizations, so they should be included.

Meemo16 (talk) 00:04, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

How can /ɒ/ possibly represent "/ɔ/ or /ɑ/" in that word when in most cases it just represents "/ɑ/"? The whole system is warped and is based on various incorrect assumptions and expectations about readers that I've explained elsewhere, but in the case of "diphthong" it seems clear that even the (awful) system we have requires both pronunciations to be given - they're not deducible even by people who know the secret key. W. P. Uzer (talk) 08:38, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

"Chumash people lived in Los Angeles before Europeans settled there."

Conquered you mean? "Settled" does not match the history. They were violently conquered by Europeans. Not "settled." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.246.232.41 (talk) 06:08, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

This edit request to Los Angeles has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

103.239.87.106 (talk) 05:08, 13 March 2015 (UTC) aurangabad maharashtra.

Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. Incidentally, Aurangabad, Maharashtra is a city in India. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 05:38, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

While reviewing recent changes to the Sports section, I noticed the the scope of the article is creeping toward that of Greater Los Angeles Area. I understand the temptation to mention that the city serves as the core of the metro area. I understand the temptation to mention teams outside the city which have "Los Angeles" in their names. But Greater Los Angeles Area is a separate topic. The Rose Bowl and Edison Field are in a different city, a different county, even. It's hard for me to see why they should be listed in an article about the City of Los Angeles.—Stepheng3 (talk) 18:14, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi Stepheng3 - This is an interesting issue. And I almost always agree with your editing, but this time I'll have to take the counter-point, to a certain extent. I do think mentioning the Rose Bowl and Edison field towards the end of the article is a bit of a creep, but the Rose Bowl is home to one of the major collegiate teams which are from Los Angeles. Edison is a stretch and should probably be removed. I look at other articles like Boston and New York, and when the brand is most closely identified with that city (Patriots for Boston, Jets and Giants for NY), the stadium receives coverage in the city article. NY also includes a brief mention of the New Jersey Devils and their arena. I guess my overall viewpoint is that if a team from the city, or identified with the city, then mentioning their arena/stadium is okay, but to do so in connection with that team (in other words, move the Rose Bowl up to where UCLA is mentioned). But to simply mention nearby venues isn't. Onel5969 (talk) 00:35, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your perspective, Onel5969. If other large city articles experience the same phenomenon, that doesn't convince me it's not a problem. On the other hand, I don't want to be pushy. I'll go ahead and remove Edison as you suggest.—Stepheng3 (talk) 00:41, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Oh, I'm completely on the same page about not doing something "just because", but I think in the case where a team from a city uses a stadium, there is a decent rationale for mentioning them in the article. I especially brought up Boston, however, since that is an FA article. Take it easy, Stepheng3 Onel5969 (talk) 00:56, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

In the section "Economy" there is written that the city is home to 6 Fortune 500 companies, while on the site http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Angeles_metropolitan_area it is stated, that it's five companies. 217.99.206.97 (talk) 13:18, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

For the 2014 Fortune 500, it's six for the city of Los Angeles. I added a citation for the claim. HollywoodCowboy (talk) 18:45, 13 April 2015 (UTC)

GA toolbox
Copyvio detector Authorship External links
Reviewing
Templates Criteria Instructions

This review is transcluded from Talk:Los Angeles/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 18:33, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Ok then, I'll take this one. Given the size of the article I should complete this one within 48 hours ☯ Jaguar ☯ 18:33, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

I appreciate you taking the time. - SantiLak (talk) 20:17, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

• At a first glance, some aspects of the lead contains some jargon and is slightly cluttered. The opening is bombarded with statistics and all of these different, umm, symbols! Is there really a need for three different pronunciations ("lɒs ˈændʒəlɨs/, Listeni/lɒs ˈændʒəliːz/, or /lɒs ˈæŋɡəlɨs/")? Can just one be used?
• The lead could be better organised to summarise the main aspects of the article better. I looked at San Diego which is a GA, and its lead looks cleaner. For example, the first paragraph of Los Angeles could mention what the city is known for and what makes it famous?
• Per WP:LEADCITE, citations are usually discouraged from the lead if it doesn't cite controversial or statistical information. Statistics like "with a population at the 2010 United States Census of 3,792,621.[13]" is fine, but some simple instances such as "The city's inhabitants are referred to as Angelenos.[19]" and "Los Angeles was founded on September 4, 1781, by Spanish governor Felipe de Neve.[3]" could have their citations removed
• "It became a part of Mexico in 1821" - link First Mexican Empire? (if this is correct)
• Furthermore, the third (history) paragraph in the lead could be expanded a little to showcase more of LA's history. I'm sure it has a lot of history after 1850, so a small expansion shouldn't be difficult. It had an important role in World War II, right?
• "Los Angeles is a global city, with strengths in business, international trade, entertainment, culture, media, fashion, science, sports, technology, education, medicine and research and has been ranked sixth in the Global Cities Index and 9th Global Economic Power Index" - could read better as Los Angeles is a global city, with strengths in business, international trade, entertainment, culture, media, fashion, science, sports, technology, education, medicine and research. It has been ranked sixth in the Global Cities Index and 9th Global Economic Power Index

• I'm not very well versed on policies to do with images, but there seems to be too many images in this section that it disrupts the flow of the prose. Perhaps one or two could be cut for now, but then again I think it would depend on the reader's monitor resolution (width and height).
• For such a major city in the world I think the history section itself could undergo an expansion, even South Bend, Indiana, another GA, has a slightly larger history section than this! Ideally, the history section could be split into sub-sections (I think San Diego again is another good example of this) and some more information on LA's pre-colonial history could be added. A fair expansion would be required to pass the broadness criteria
• "New Spain achieved its independence from the Spanish Empire in 1821" - would be best to link New Spain
• "Railroads arrived with the completion of the Southern Pacific line to Los Angeles in 1876" - this paragraph in particular could be expanded a little. What kind of role did the city have in the American frontier era?
• "Oil was discovered in 1892" - sounds a bit vague. Where was it discovered? In LA's area? Sea or land?
• "In 1910, not only had the city of Los Angeles annexed Hollywood" - what does it mean by annexed? Sounds like it was taken by force? Was it incorporated into the city limits? Also link Hollywood
• "...and signaled the demise of the city's electrified rail system, once the world's largest" - this needs a reference
• The Los Angeles riots of 1992 was a major point in the city's history, and could be expanded upon at the end of this section
• "In 2002, voters defeated efforts by the San Fernando Valley and Hollywood to secede from the city" - is there really nothing else on contemporary history?

• Be careful of WP:OVERLINKING in this section. Both the main section and the Landmarks section contains heavy overlinking
• "Greater Los Angeles includes a number of enclaves and nearby communities" - what does this mean? Greater Los Angeles contains a lot of communities? What kind of communities?
• The last paragraph in the Cityscape section is all unreferenced
• Not only is the Landmarks unreferenced (and overlinked) but it contains almost no prose, but rather just a list of all the landmarks. Some prose could be taken out from National Register of Historic Places listings in Los Angeles, California to put here.
• "See also: Category:Landmarks in Los Angeles" - this category should be removed, per most guidelines
• "Los Angeles is irregularly shaped and covers a total area of 502.7 square miles" - what is irregularly shaped? The city or its coastline?
• "it is predicted to be the source of Southern California's next big earthquake" - what does this mean? Are the actually predicting an upcoming earthquake?
• Second paragraph in the Climate section is unreferenced
• I really shouldn't keep comparing, but look at San Diego's climate for comparison, though it is similar to LA's climate section it does contain more prose and details on climate change. I like the way LA's climate section is written, but I think the first half contains too many statistics, but that could just be how I read it?
• Nothing on global warming or climate change in the Environmental issues section?

• "...and 26,415 (0.7%) were institutionalized" - the end of this paragraph is unreferenced, is it mentioned in that census reference?
• The third paragraph is also unreferenced
• "provide examples of the polyglot character of Los Angeles." - could read better as something like {{xt|provide examples of the multiculturalism characteristics of Los Angeles.
• "According to the 2010 Census, the racial makeup of Los Angeles included" - should this paragraph be here? Can't the exact figures just be mentioned in the table above?
• The fourth and fifth paragraphs are unreferenced entirely. Also can't that fifth paragraph be merged or expanded?
• "Pacific Islanders make up 0.1% of Los Angeles' population" - all this could be merged into the fourth paragraph, as that talks about the ethnics
• Please ensure that every paragraph of the Religion section is also backed up by a reference. Very small paragraphs could also be expanded, if possible
• "Construction of the cathedral marked a coming of age of the city's Catholic, heavily Latino community" - when was the cathedral built? And what does a coming of age for the Latino community mean?
• "(It is no longer a sacred space and is being converted to a museum and community center.)" - this doesn't need to be in brackets?
• "Sawtelle district" AKA (also known as) Little Osaka. (so I've been told) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vickryan (talk • contribs) 14:48, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

• Extreme overlinking in this section too! I'm sure a lot of the non significant companies could be cut from this section. As I mentioned above, please make sure that the fourth paragraph contains prose instead of a basic list of companies in the city
• Can the section be expanded a little too? Isn't the music and film industry second to none in LA? A lot of content from the Los Angeles County Economy could easily be put here

• "L.A. has a long history of attracting cult leaders and cults" - Los Angeles
• Can the Cults section be expanded? I know a few, like the Heavens Gate cult was in LA
• Does the High percentage of creatives section need to be there? It could be deleted to make a nice opening
• Why Did Brit Marling even get mentioned, cause of that one movie she did? It's not relevant.

• At least three paragraphs in the Sports section are unreferenced
• "These Los Angeles teams include the" - seems obvious, so I would cut the "Los Angeles"
• "Los Angeles is the second-largest television market in the United States but has no NFL team" - how is a television market relevant here?
• "It was also home to the Los Angeles Avengers of the original AFL" - was? What happened to it?

• The first half of the prose contains no citations
• "Los Angeles is a charter city as opposed to a general law city" - what's the difference? Is this common? And can "general law city" be linked or elaborated?
• I don't know if it's my place to say this, but I would strongly recommend either deleting the entire Federal and state representation section or somehow merging the major points into the prose. Long and tedious lists such as the congressional districts is strongly discouraged from GA articles

• Moar WP:OVERLINKING, no citations here! This section would require a copyedit or a reconstruction to meet the GA criteria, as in more facts and less statistics
• "There are numerous additional colleges and universities in the Greater Los Angeles area" - why are they additional?

• While I think the prose is generally better here, there is only one reference
• "Los Angeles and New York City are the only two media markets to have seven VHF allocations assigned to them." - how are these two cities categorised as 'markets'?

This section seems too short to be in the article, would you think it best to cut it and include the link to List of notable people elsewhere?

• Ref 56 is dead
• Ref 90 is dead too
• Ref 113, ref 111 and ref 152 suffer from 401 errors

SantiLak, I am so sorry to do this, I really am, and it was just because I love LA so much and I love the article that halfway through the review I had it in my mind to leave this on hold, but as the review progressed I feel like there are a lot of problems that stand in the way of this becoming GA any time soon. I know that this is a long review and at first it may seem overwhelming, but as to say I have had a lot of nominations like this too. At the moment there are a lot of prose issues and overall most parts of the article lack references and some sections seem too "listy" and state a lot of statistics rather than actual details. Take a look at San Diego and other California GAs to help. I think that in the mean time this article could be salvaged through a group effort, perhaps some people at WP:CALIFORNIA would be willing to help with this article? If you have any questions please let me know, otherwise good luck with developing this article. If you happen to renominate this, please let me know, I would love to review this again. Thanks! ☯ Jaguar ☯ 23:56, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Jaguar I appreciate the feedback and the review and I will take the necessary steps to fix problems with the page and cooperate with other editors including at WP:CALIFORNIA to be able to bring this article to GA. - SantiLak (talk) 00:07, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, SantiLak! I would also be happy to help out with this article. ☯ Jaguar ☯ 00:14, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Jaguar I appreciate the offer and I'd like to take you up on it most specifically with the History section or anything else you find. I am currently cleaning it up and dealing with things that you mentioned in the review but expanding the history section is something I could really use some help with. I have so far divided it into subsections to cover different periods but the periods before the American period are still lacking seriously in material. I am continuing to go through the other article to deal with the specifics of the review before I contact other editors about improving as to lessen the work. Again I appreciate your help with this, this is my first GA review and I can use all the help I can get. - SantiLak (talk) 02:06, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Sure, and sorry for the late reply as I've been a little busy lately. I'll clean up whatever I can find in the article and will perform a copyedit of the hitsory section ☯ Jaguar ☯ 17:46, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

I appreciate the assistance, GA has never been my specialty so I'm trying to learn and you've been a big help. - SantiLak (talk) 22:33, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

The GA review mentioned over-linking in the Economy section. One of the culprits is the comma-separated list of Fortune 500 companies, followed by another comma-separated list of other companies headquartered in Los Angeles. I propose we take those lists out and insert a table of the top publicly traded companies in Los Angeles, similar to the Economy section of the article for New York City. Does anyone have an objection to this? HollywoodCowboy (talk) 17:24, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

There's too much narrative and not enough numbers for religion to be under demographics, and it's part of culture anyhow

No Opinion

• Looks fine to me. (Wishy-washy, no opinion on this.) -- AstroU (talk) 06:13, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
• The California article puts religion in the "Culture" section. The New York City article does not give religion it's own sub-section, but the paragraph discussing religion is under the "Demographics" section. HollywoodCowboy (talk) 18:41, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Support

• pbp 05:51, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
• The way that the WP:Community has written this section, it should definitely be under "Culture." There is some mention of the number of Jews but not any statistics for the other religions, or for the unchurched. This section is mostly about the culture of L.A.'s religions. I hope we can agree to change it as suggested above. Another option would be for a separate section for "Religion and churches." Sincerely, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 20:05, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Oppose

• As per articles such as United States that list religion under demographics. - SantiLak (talk) 06:04, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
• I don't think of religion as culture. The section on Culture needs to be beefed up with cultural aspects of Los Angeles--there is so much--but not with Religion. -- Charles Edwin Shipp (talk) 06:09, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
• WP:USCITIES suggests that religion goes under demographics. Bahooka (talk) 18:44, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

What is missing from the city timeline? Please add relevant content. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 08:50, 18 May 2015 (UTC)

See discussion at Talk:Angeltown (disambiguation) In ictu oculi (talk) 07:03, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

On-location feature production as of 2014 is about half of its peak in 1996. When even Paramount has thrown in the towel and outsourced feature production to Vancouver, it would seem more accurate to state that Los Angeles was historically a leader in motion picture production and continues to be a leader in motion picture development. Although chroma key greenscreen now makes it possible to film almost anything anywhere, at least most major producers still have their offices in LA (for now). --Coolcaesar (talk) 09:04, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

The WP:lede should reflect whatever the body of the article says. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 20:06, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Good point. Which means the article itself needs to be revised concurrently. I will have to think through that. Of course, if anyone else is thinking along the same lines, feel free to jump in. --Coolcaesar (talk) 11:25, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Los Angeles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20111005150134/http://musiccenter.org/visit/index.html to http://www.musiccenter.org/visit/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:07, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

If I did not get it wrong, the full name of the city would be El pueblo de Nuestra Señora Reina de los Ángeles de la Porciuncula, also El Pueblo de Nuestra Señora la Reina de los Ángeles sobre El Río Porciuncula. It was stated also in the Guinness Book of Records, as the longest city name in the world. Actually, if you type this name, you will be redirected to Los Angeles page. Could it be worth to add a small section about the city's name? Filippo83 (talk) 11:15, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Native Americans and Alaskan Natives (including Latin American Indian groups) are a low-percentage, yet notable part of the population. Los Angeles is thought to have the largest Urban Indian community in the United States (est. above 100,000-about 2% or higher upwards to 5% of the city population) who belong to over 100 tribal nations. There are between 2,000 to 25,000 members of the Cherokee Nation based in Tahlequah, Oklahoma in the city and county respectively. There is the local Chumash tribe whose homeland encompasses the Los Angeles Basin and Central Coast of California. Native Americans in Los Angeles, like throughout the country, are referred to an "invisible minority" in the press. ^[1] 2605:E000:FDCA:4200:A97F:3DC4:37A3:68EB (talk) 23:07, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Los Angeles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20111002195549/http://stevens.usc.edu/news_only_in_la.php to http://stevens.usc.edu/news_only_in_la.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 06:06, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Your attention is called to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cities#Request for comment, where a discussion is being held concerning the Sherman Oaks, Los Angeles, article. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 19:39, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Los angeles wikipedia is ugly change it with better pictures recent updated info stop focusing on LA negative past more on present good stuff — Preceding unsigned comment added by OneMetropolis (talk • contribs) 20:42, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Anybody is welcome to edit an article, but we have to have WP:Reliable sources. In other words, you can make it better yourself. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 08:26, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

I removed this suspicious photo because the info at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Rafael,_a_Chumash_who_shared_cultural_knowledge_with_Anthropologists.jpg does not give very much information about its authenticity, nor whether this person is actually a Chumash or what other connection it has with Los Angeles. Sincerely, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 17:22, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Don't know the provenance of the image, but its appearance here implies that it's probably legit. (It's credited to anthropologist Leon de Cessac on the Chumash people article.)--Junkyardsparkle (talk) 20:09, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Los Angeles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20141113102218/http://www.lacity.org/CityDirectory/index.htm to http://www.lacity.org/CityDirectory/index.htm
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150907050707/http://ladot.lacity.org/WhatWeDo/Operations/NeighborhoodServices/Neighborhoodsigns/index.htm to http://ladot.lacity.org/WhatWeDo/Operations/NeighborhoodServices/Neighborhoodsigns/index.htm
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20111002023211/http://egsc.usgs.gov:80/isb/pubs/booklets/elvadist/elvadist.html to http://egsc.usgs.gov/isb/pubs/booklets/elvadist/elvadist.html#50
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130902181245/http://cdo.ncdc.noaa.gov/climatenormals/clim20/ca/041484.pdf to http://cdo.ncdc.noaa.gov/climatenormals/clim20/ca/041484.pdf
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20101127033250/http://www.lacity.org:80/mayor/deliveringresults/results_cibasic.htm to http://www.lacity.org/mayor/deliveringresults/results_cibasic.htm
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20111018115613/http://www.lmu.edu/about/The_Los_Angeles_Region.htm to http://www.lmu.edu/about/The_Los_Angeles_Region.htm
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150721210109/http://abclocal.go.com/story?section=news/local/los_angeles&id=7204706 to http://abclocal.go.com/story?section=news/local/los_angeles&id=7204706
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080916055045/http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/DCGeoSelectServlet?ds_name=ACS_2006_EST_G00_ to http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/DCGeoSelectServlet?ds_name=ACS_2006_EST_G00_

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:12, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

A Subtropical Mediterranean climate does not exist according to Köppen's Climate Classification. I am a climatologist, so please stop reverting to "Subtropical Mediterranean". It does not make any sense, since Mediterranean is Csa, so already "Subtropical" in its classification. It is called a "hot-summer Mediterranean", as opposed to "warm-summer" for San Francisco and "cool-summer" for other places further North.Daylon.murray (talk) 10:06, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Please cite your sources. You may find Wikipedia:Expert editors helpful and informative. Regards, James (^talk/_contribs) 12:59, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

I took the liberty of creating a new photo montage for the LA wiki. Los Angeles is a global city and it only seemed fitting to give this page one just like most other wikis of major cities on this site. PeaceUT (talk) 22:10, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Nothing from the San Fernando Valley? BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 06:57, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, like, totally... and what's with that bridge?! :P --Junkyardsparkle (talk) 08:36, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

I took your and BeenAroundAwhile's input into consideration and replaced the Vincent Thomas Bridge with a pic of Mission San Fernando Rey de España located of course in the LA part of the San Fernando Valley. PeaceUT (talk) 05:44, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

As much as I might personally want to work the iconic concrete of the L.A. river into the mix, I must admit that looks pretty good to me. Junkyardsparkle (talk) 06:46, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Maybe the Sepulveda Dam? --Junkyardsparkle (talk) 18:20, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Is there any reason this should not be called "City of Los Angeles"? The article says the city is officially City of Los Angeles but the article should be called that. If there is no problem then I will (try to) change it but I want to give people a chance to explain why not to. Sam Tomato (talk) 19:31, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

See WP:Commonname. Unambiguous common names are used instead of official ones. ("Rhode Island" instead of "the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations", and so on.) AlexiusHoratius 21:20, 9 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Los Angeles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160604031730/http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demographic/reports/estimates/e-1/documents/E-1_2016PressRelease.pdf to http://www.dof.ca.gov/research/demographic/reports/estimates/e-1/documents/E-1_2016PressRelease.pdf
• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6YSasqtfX?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.census.gov%2Fprod%2Fwww%2Fdecennial.html to http://www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:45, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

A discussion regarding renaming of Van Nuys, Los Angeles to Van Nuys may have the potential of serving as a precedent for naming conventions of neighborhoods in cities throughout the United States. Participation is invited. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 20:33, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Population; Birth Rates ? AveOscuraInq (talk) 03:14, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

The population is in the "Demographics" section. As for the birth rate, if you have any information, with a reliable source, just add it yourself, along with the source. If you don't know the coding, do the best you can and somebody will be along to fix it up. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 05:01, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Los Angeles's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "NOAA":

• From Bangkok: "Climate Normals for Bangkok". National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Retrieved 9 June 2014.
• From Stockton, California: "NowData - NOAA Online Weather Data". National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Retrieved 2012-12-06.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 16:40, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

We have info that the Sister City org in L.A. suspended its affiliation with Tehran in 1979, but suspension is not the same as ending it. http://sistercities.lacity.org/html/11.htm. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 01:46, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

The US Census Bureau populations (decennial census and yearly estimates) are the yardstick used throughout WP. Otherwise we are comparing apples to oranges, as all other city info boxes record the US Census figure. An editor had replaced the last valid US Census estimate for the city of Los Angeles (2015; released May 2016) with a figure from the California Office of Finance, a bureaucratic agency that uses future projections and different demographic methods. This renders any comparison with other US cities on WP invalid and is ill advised (to say the least). A < ! > warning bar beside Population and Demographics might be useful. Meanwhile, I replaced the figure in the article/source restored. Mason.Jones (talk) 00:40, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

They could both be used. Why not? BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 21:12, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Not if it replaces the primary US Census population figure in a WP article's introduction, info box, or historical demographic table, which is what the previous editor did. In encyclopedias, those figures come from the US Census. Other figures might be mentioned as a supplementary remark under "Demographics"; otherwise, "dueling stats" are cumbersome, confusing, and rather pointless. Mason.Jones (talk) 16:14, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Yes, that's what I mean. Use the other figures as relevant information elsewhere (if indeed it is relevant). I don't understand why the editor who made this fix did not do that. It's almost as if those figures were not important, even though a previous editor decided they were. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 23:17, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Apparently this monicker came from La La Land (film), with a source in the Edit summary when it was added, but, really, I have never heard it before and I don't think it is truly a nickname. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 21:11, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Agreed. I removed it. Dkspartan1835 (talk) 16:59, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Los Angeles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://archive.is/20160602200744/http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2015/SUB-EST2015.html to http://www.census.gov/popest/data/cities/totals/2015/SUB-EST2015.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140815134909/http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk to http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140815134909/http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk to http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.census.gov/prod/www/decennial.html
• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/69hd5KAIE?url=http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0076/twps0076.html to http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0076/twps0076.html
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://abclocal.go.com/story?section=news%2Flocal%2Flos_angeles&id=7204706
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://beta.flavorpill.com/losangeles

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:42, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Los Angeles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150823092410/http://www.lmu.edu/about/The_Los_Angeles_Region.htm to https://www.lmu.edu/about/The_Los_Angeles_Region.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130731001604/http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/twinning-link-with-la-925445 to http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/twinning-link-with-la-925445

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:19, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Los Angeles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150109051618/http://www1.american.edu/ted/mono.htm to http://www1.american.edu/ted/mono.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160115055145/https://performance.lacity.org/ to https://performance.lacity.org/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:50, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

I'd like to propose changing the main skyline photo of Los Angeles to a more recent image, which includes Wilshire Grand, among many new developments to the expanding Los Angeles city skyline. It also includes the unique feature of Mt San Antonio in the background with snow capped peaks. Please consider. This image is my own with full Commons license for distribution and public usage and consumption. See link >>

Bovinecop (talk) 22:31, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose - The photo is low quality. The camera sensor needed cleaning, hence the spots on the image (or the lens was filthy). The image also has an unnatural color as if it has been excessively Photoshopped, which is cool on Flickr, but looks awkward in an encyclopedia. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:29, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

It looks like it was passed through a filter designed to give it a late 60s-early 70s color film appearance. The graininess and spots would be typical of that era. It also makes it utterly unacceptable for a modern encyclopedia. PS, inthumbnailed it here, because the full size image is obnoxious. oknazevad (talk) 00:05, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Size: Understandable. Color: chalk that up to my blue colorblindness. Grain: it happens. Lens dust: understandable. Dully noted. Thank you for feedback. Bovinecop (talk) 16:51, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Agree with the issue regarding quality of photo, but still support updating the photo. A modern encyclopedia needs the most recent photos and a couple throughout the passage display photos that are out of date. The skyline needs a major update as several new buildings are awkwardly missing. 2605:E000:1702:40B4:D902:179F:37AB:C7BC (talk) 04:55, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Los Angeles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081225054728/http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/saipe/district.html to https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/saipe/district.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:39, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Any way to list the main avenues of Los Angeles, for each neighborhood? By that I mean business streets, but it could also mean main thoroughfares too. --Inowen (talk) 02:22, 24 January 2018 (UTC)