Talk:Los Angeles

Semi-protected edit request on 26 May 2024 (2)

Spanish is spoken by 39.4% in Los Angeles. Add this information to the demographics section.

Source: https://data.census.gov/profile/Los_Angeles_city,_California?g=160XX00US0644000 103.38.254.254 (talk) 10:14, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

 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 and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 05:29, 30 May 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 19 June 2024

The top non-English languages spoken at home in Los Angeles are Spanish, Korean, Armenian, Chinese and Persian. Add this to demographics section.

Source: https://research.newamericaneconomy.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2021/12/G4G_CityOfLA.pdf 2600:6C50:7E00:20C:55B:9069:94D4:62B7 (talk) 00:55, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: The source is pretty outdated. (from 2021) '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs) 07:05, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Hmm, really, you expect that to change in three years?? I mean, it could, if they're currently close, but that sort of thing is more on the order of a generation usually. --Trovatore (talk) 21:17, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

"Third Largest Node of American Film Production"

Neither of the two sources listed for this statement seem to say anything supporting it. Section should be reverted to a previous version or an additional source should be provided. Cosmomaduz (talk) 01:18, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

It's odd wording anyway. Who talks like that? What's a "node of film production"? And if LA really is the third-largest one, what are the first two? Not sure how to fix it though; we can't claim that LA is the biggest movie city if it isn't (though that surprises me a little). --Trovatore (talk) 01:48, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

Seems to have been added by Castncoot, somewhere in this series of edits on 12 June. Castncoot, care to comment? --Trovatore (talk) 01:52, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

This report surprised me a little, saying that in 2018 California surpassed New York in Film Production. I Donald Albury 12:57, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

That was 2018, pre-pandemic. It’s an entirely different world now. Los Angeles is now struggling to get much done within its borders. Atlanta and NYC have zoomed ahead. But at least L.A. hasn’t dropped to fourth place yet. Castncoot (talk) 20:58, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

But thank you for for bringing up this point. Going forward in this new world, it’s going to be an ever-changing horse race. So I’ve rephrased it to say, “one of the largest”, which I’m sure it will be for the foreseeable future. Castncoot (talk) 21:06, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

I don't think the problem is the rank, but the use of the word "node." I assume it's supposed to be mean "hub" or "center" here but that's a pretty uncommon definition of the word. ~~ Jessintime (talk) 22:50, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

 Done. Changed it to “hubs.” Best, Castncoot (talk) 23:07, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

What are these wildly different population numbers?

First it says 4 million, then below that it says, urban: 12 million. What's going on? 2604:3D08:5B80:B70:7B4B:B05A:3702:FA12 (talk) 23:03, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

The city (incorporated municipality) has a population of 3.9 million. The metropolitan area, which is defined for statistical purposes by the U.S. Office of Management and Budget (see Metropolitan statistical area) and includes the city and 5 counties, has a population of about 13 million. Donald Albury 23:13, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much. To be sure, the page lists "urban" as 13 million and "metro" as 17 million. OK, thank you. 2604:3D08:5B80:B70:7B4B:B05A:3702:FA12 (talk) 00:43, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Oh, and the combined statistical area has 20.6 million. See Greater Los Angeles. The 17 million may be an older figure that has not been updated. I'm busy with other things, but hopefully someone will figure out and fix up the article. Donald Albury 13:27, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

There are wildly disparate (and unofficial) population figures in many US city articles, including this one. They should not be used, in order that all US city, metropolitan, and combined areas follow the same US Census Bureau yardstick: the latest official estimates listed in List of US cities by population, List of United States urban areas, Metropolitan statistical areas, and Combined statistical areas. All are 2023 except for urban areas, which are 2020. I just now corrected the LA figures in both infobox and lede, plus I added the 2023 CSA population. This parallels the infobox's separate GDP numbers for LA's MSA and CSA as well. Mason.Jones (talk) 20:16, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for dealing with this. Editors inserting population figures from unofficial, unreliable sources is a constant problem. I just didn't feel up to dealing with it today. Donald Albury 23:26, 8 September 2024 (UTC)

No problem. Also corrected inconsistent populations for the City of Los Angeles. The tag "2023 estimate" should actually give 2023, not other years. Mason.Jones (talk) 15:18, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Lack of good, useful map showing neighborhoods of Los Angeles

Where is the good map showing all the neighborhoods of Los Angeles? It's very, very, very, very, very, very ridiculous and unencyclopedic that there isn't one in the current version of this article.

An example of such a map: https://imgcap.capturetheatlas.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/neighborhood-map-los-angeles.jpg 98.123.38.211 (talk) 00:35, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Any existing maps on the internet are obviously not free to simply upload into Wikipeadia. So if you feel so passionately about this, why dont YOU make the map you desire? Wikipedia is what we make of it.Cristiano Tomás (talk) 15:19, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Infobox image for Calle Olvera

I was wondering what folks would think about replacing the image we currently use in the infobox for Calle Olvera with this newer one, as it seems like basically a strict upgrade of the same subject taken from a very similar angle. The current one from 2004 is really blurry and a bit washed out. While the newer one lacking pedestrians could be seen as a downside, I think this aspect is basically a sidegrade, since while it fails to capture typical people inhabiting the environment, it does draw more attention to the architecture etc. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 02:31, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

The new image is centered on the tree, and I think gives less sense of a street than the old image. Donald Albury 12:23, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Yeah I agree with Donald, new image is definitely higher quality, but the visual focus is too much on the tree IMO. Cristiano Tomás (talk) 17:59, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

@Donald Albury: @Cristiano Tomás: Interesting point I didn't even notice, namely that the street continues in the old image but doesn't in the new one. Withdrawing the proposal since I agree the old image serves this purpose better. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 06:09, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 20 November 2024

There is a typo in the "Infobox settlement under Goverment" section, where it says "government_type = Strong mayor–council". "Strong mayor–council" is the typo. It should be "Strong Mayor" this is to avoid confusion with Week mayor–council which is a Elected Mayor thats apart of the city council Not to be confused with council–manager Mayors where the Mayor is not elected and is appointed by the City Council for a 1 year term I also want to mention. Week mayor–council also has a city manager and this is where the confusion comes in to play the elected mayor is a part of the city council there for its a Mayor Council form of goverment. Mayor Council being the confusing Terminology It would be best for to remove Strong mayor–council and simply put Strong Mayor to avoid the confusion. 2603:8000:57F0:9D00:4086:FC9:C070:785F (talk) 05:40, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

 Partly done: We should use what the sources say, which depending on where you look is either "mayor-council" or "mayor-council-commission", which seem to be essentially the same thing (the cited source in the infobox uses both). I've removed the 'strong'. DrOrinScrivello (talk) 21:53, 26 November 2024 (UTC)