Talk:Greater Los Angeles Area

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Cities (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Urban studies and planning (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Urban studies and planning, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Urban studies and planning on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject California / Los Angeles / Southern California (Rated Start-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject California, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of California on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Los Angeles task force (marked as Top-importance).
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Southern California task force (marked as Top-importance).
News This article has been mentioned by a media organisation:

Greater Los Angeles as a valid area designation[edit]

Wow! this page is really dense. I started a new topic in large part because I'm not sure where my comment would be best placed.

I have lived in GLA virtually my entire life. The area that seems to be referred to whenever this phrase is used in conversation or news broadcasts:

  • Los Angeles County, excluding the Antelope Valley and mountain areas, but including Canyon Country
  • Orange County
  • The Inland Empire as far east as the eastern boundary of Redlands
  • The developed southern area of Ventura County, including the Conejo and Simi Valleys and Ojai

This is a geographically contiguous area. With the exception of the cities east of Redlands, significant areas of open space separate this area from other built up areas in Southern California.

Greater Los Angeles is different from Metropolitan Los Angeles, which seems to roughly include most of the built-up area of Los Angeles County, i.e. the LA Basin and the San Fernando and San Gabriel Valleys; Metro LA includes the City of Los Angeles and all the other smaller cities within that area.

I do believe that Greater Los Angeles should be retained as a distinct entity. Generalized geographic area references often refer to similar areas, but usually have different enough scopes to merit existance. Therefore, I feel that templates for smaller areas are valid unto themselves, but do not invalidate the use of one to cover the entire GLA.

For example: the Inland Empire template is a valid one, but I feel that cities that fall within the larger area defined by GLA should be included in both templates and not forced to be one or the other. —Preceding unsigned comment added by OLEF641 (talkcontribs) 01:27, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Greater LA is known to be as far east as the Cucamonga Valley. House1090 (talk) 01:37, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

This is inaccurate. If you drive on the 10 or 210 freeways, the urbanized area is continguous from Claremont (Los Angeles County)/Montclair (San Bernardino County) until you reach Redlands and Yucaipa (near the eastern edge of San Bernardino Valley.)

From the 210 freeway you will travel through Azusa and San Dimas into Pomona (all in Los Angeles county) into Cucamonga valley. Upland and Rancho Cucamonga are directly continguous with the Los Angeles county cities, which are considered part of the Los Angeles metro area, despite being closer in size and proximity with the Inland Empire (Montclair and Ontario border one another, and Montclair is a small city) than they are with Los Angeles city. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:57, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Why is there a factual accuracy tag?[edit]

There is a "Dispute" tag on this article because it has absolutly no reliable soutces that define its boundaries or what cities or counties are part of it.--Jojhutton (talk) 02:32, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree. Somebody is trying to define this amorphous area in Wikipedi, but why? To what purpose? For example, User:Moalli has pasted a link to this page on, it seems, every named place in the Southland (which is different from GLA), including the Channel Islands! See What can we do to rid WP of this monstrous and unsourced article? In high dudgeon today, GeorgeLouis (talk) 02:22, 16 September 2010 (UTC) Look at this page, too, while you are at it: . Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 02:24, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
It was already nominated for deletion, but there was no consensus. Perhaps a second time around would prove better.--Jojhutton (talk) 02:42, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
It's defined by the census bureau as Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside metropolitan area.--Prosfilaes (talk) 00:03, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Merge Los Angeles metropolitan area and Inland Empire (California) into this article?[edit]

Should the Los Angeles metropolitan area and Inland Empire (California) articles be merged into Greater Los Angeles? Here is my logic:

a) Combined statistical area articles and "extended metropolitan area" articles often cover all of their "metropolitan areas" or "divisions" in one large umbrella article, such is the case with the San Francisco Bay Area, New York metropolitan area, Greater São Paulo, and Chicago metropolitan area articles.

b) The size of the LA Metro article is a small 44 bytes while the IE article is twice the size at 88 bytes. Meanwhile the Greater Los Angeles area article is somewhat in between at 50 bytes. Since the Greater Los Angeles area seems to, in common usage, refer to the extended area, it would seem like a good idea to merge the two articles and greatly increase the size of this article while still using the invaluable information from the IE and LA metro articles.

c) It would get rid of the sometimes confusing disambiguation page titled Greater Los Angeles - as the LA Metro article would be merged into the Greater Los Angeles Area Article and would reduce the need to redirect to Inland Empire.

Thoughts are greatly appreciated on this matter. 08OceanBeachS.D. 02:44, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

I agree that the welter of similar articles is confusing.   Will Beback  talk  03:14, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Merge - first, I think you mean kb, not bytes, but it's a relative term anyhow. These terms can be covered easily in one article. (my initial !vote was otherwise, but I thought through it and agree) tedder (talk) 03:30, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Merge - Two articles basically covering the same geographic area.--JOJ Hutton 03:53, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Sure. Seems like the logical thing to do. I'm expecting some sort of opposition from the IE Wikipedians, but they could surprise me. :-) Killiondude (talk) 05:34, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Comment - I don't see why both of the proposed articles to be merged cannot be sub-articles of the larger Greater Los Angeles Area. Both Los Angeles metropolitan area & Inland Empire (California) are sufficiently notable to warrant having their own articles, and therefore, it maybe only a matter of time before those articles are recreated. Furthermore, if both articles are merged at large, wouldn't the end merged article of Greater Los Angeles Area be large enough to warrant a split? --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 08:05, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
Perhaps. But it may be of interest to point out that county articles also exist, so in essence we have three very similar articles covering the same thing. 08OceanBeachS.D. 08:25, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Do not merge Los Angeles Metro. Area, as other metropolitan areas, needs its own article. It feeds more the reader more information about the area. House1090 (talk) 05:05, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
  • Do not merge either article, for the reasons stated above. The IE is particularly notable in its own right, because of all the reasons (high pollution, high crime, large numbers of working-class people, etc.) anyone who can afford to live elsewhere better (e.g., Thousand Oaks, Santa Clarita, Laguna Niguel, etc.) will do so. --Coolcaesar (talk) 19:16, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
  • 'Do not merge The Inland Empire is geographically, culturally, and somewhat climatically different than that of L.A./Orange/Ventura Counties. --Moreau36--Discuss 01:34, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
  • 'Do not merge for all the above excellent reasons. Would make for a very unwieldy article also, Namaste... DocOfSocTalk 06:09, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Split into two articles[edit]

This article is an uncomfortable shotgun marriage of two concepts: the casual, popular, organic and loosely defined Greater Los Angeles Area, and the precise federal census/management designation of Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside, CA Combined Statistical Area. The two are not equivalent! The eastern edge of GLAA stops at Ontario in most popular definitions and does not usually include the cities of San Bernardino or Riverside. It does not usually include the Mojave Desert, or the Palm Desert, or Death Valley. Some observers see it smaller; they do not include San Fernando Valley to the north. Sometimes, however, the usage extends so far that it might as well be called the Southland or Southern California. This sloppy and varying definition is what we know as the Greater Los Angeles Area.

There is a precedent for splitting this kind of article. The San Francisco Bay Area has historically been thought of as composed of the 9 counties which include shoreline on the San Francisco Bay. The federal government specified a novel designation of 11 counties, two which do not touch the bay. Thus, the 11-county federal definition was split off into its own article: San Francisco Bay Area Combined Statistical Area. I propose doing the same for Los Angeles. Binksternet (talk) 17:38, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Another choice for the split-out article name is Greater Los Angeles Combined Statistical Area, similar to the one about San Francisco. Binksternet (talk) 17:28, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Earthquakes and Building Height[edit]

I removed, again, the reference to earthquakes as the reason Los Angeles has fewer highrises than other large cities. There are few highrises because they are zoned out of existence in nearly all areas of the metropolis. These zoning regulations are for the purpose of aesthetics and NIMBY opposition to traffic. Just think about it for a moment: if earthquakes prevented building tall structures, why are there any tall structures at all in Los Angeles? Earthquakes have nothing to do with it. If you want to re-insert the reference to earthquakes you'll need to cite a legitimate source. EmergentProperty (talk) 04:07, 18 December 2012 (UTC)

real estate[edit]

added a section to the "urban form" section about real estate, using information from a forbes article. let me know if you have any questions or concerns GoGatorMeds (talk) 17:01, 14 July 2014 (UTC)