Talk:Los Angeles/Archive 7

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. 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)

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:

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. Brentwood is not an acceptable name 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= 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= 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= 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= 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= 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= 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= 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= 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= 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)

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

GA Review

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

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: