Talk:List of cities and towns in California

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject California (Rated FL-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.
Featured list FL  This article has been rated as FL-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Cities (Rated FL-class, Mid-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.
Featured list FL  This article has been rated as FL-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Indexes
WikiProject icon This alphabetical index of Wikipedia articles falls within the scope of the WikiProject Indexes. This is a collaborative effort to create, maintain, and improve alphabetical indexes on Wikipedia.
Featured list List of cities and towns in California is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.

old comments[edit]

What are the criteria for being on this list? We already have all incorporated places listed on each county page. -- Zoe

It's Angel's Camp, not Angels Camp. -- Zoe

Also, San Pedro is part of Los Angeles, it isn't a city on its own. And there is no such city as Yosemite. -- ~~

There is no apostrophe in Angels Camp -- see their web site at [[1]]. Yosemite was listed as a city in my atlas and at [[2]], but after some checking, it seems to have been corrected in a later edition of the atlas. And you're right that San Pedro was annexed by Los Angeles in 1907. Any more mistakes? GUllman

Why have you listed both "South San Francisco" and "S. San Francisco"?? Moncrief, 10 Mar 2004

Revamped and New Pages[edit]

The page is revamped because it was intended for incorporated cities only like other state's cities list, however, the previous list has been moved to List of cities, places, and neighborhoods in California to best fit the content of the article. --Moreau36; 0326 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Bridgeport, Hydesville, San Andreas, and San Pedro are still on this list, but they are not incorporated cities. There are 478 incorporated cities in California. I intend to verify these four unincorporated places are represented in the list of places page, and then delete them from here.
--GraemeMcRae 04:47, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
I added the names of the counties and dates of incorporation for each city
--GraemeMcRae 06:49, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Cities and towns?[edit] (talk · contribs) did a recent edit to this page marking some communities as "town". I thought that in California there were no distinctions between sizes and types of cities like there are in many Northeastern US states. BlankVerse 15:23, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I did the editing. There is indeed no essential distinction between incorporated cities and incorporated towns. It's just those "towns" call themselves such and reflect this in their names as "Town of XYZ" instead of "City of XYZ".
--WeiGreatness 3:36, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
Since there is no real distinction between the two, then the information is basically useless and IMHO does not belong in the Wikipedia. It would make more sense to show which cities are general law cities and which are charter cities according to State of California law (and use a separate column instead of the asterisk). BlankVerse 15:06, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

COMMON SENSE tells us the difference between a city and a town! The Ancient Greeks knew this difference, and so do we -- despite the fact that some state legislatures have been dim enough to ignore the difference. The difference between a city and a town lies in population, and one very common demarkation is that a city MUST have a population of at least 60,000 people (now). There is a fuzzier demarkation at the bottom between a village and a town. These divisions are built into our language, and in fact into all Western languages, and probably Eastern ones, too. In English and German, we have these pairs, in increasing order of size: village = Dorf; town = Stadt; city = City (an urban area with a population of more than 100,000 people). Furthermore, "Burg" was the old German word for a fortified town, which was an important thing in medieval times. Nowadays, "Stadt" also refers to "downtown" in a large city.

Most Americans and British cannot tell the difference between "berg" and "burg", but the difference is distinct, and the sound is really distinct. Hence the endings of Heidelberg and Hamburg really do sound different.

Likewise, I can really tell the difference between San Francisco and San Fernando just by looking at them. San Fernando and San Sebastian are just specks on the map compared with San Francisco and San Jose' (talk) 02:42, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

The word "city" was foolishly used in place names a long time ago -- for places that are NOT cities, and they usually have never been. They simply never have been large enough. Just because some people were foolish a long time ago doesn't mean that we have to persist with it. These are not cities because they are too small:
Arkansas City, Brigham City, Culver City, Elizabeth City, Forest City, Idaho City (Colorado), Johnson City (Texas), Lake City (Florida or Tennessee), Michigan City, Oregon City, Phenix City, Polk City, Union City (several states)...
Vatican City isn't really a city, either. (talk) 03:11, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
We should just accept that the definition of a "city" varies from place to place. In articles about California, we use California's definition (enshrined in law) of what constitutes a "city", not yours. Best regards, —Stepheng3 (talk) 18:25, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

What happened to the the "O" cities?[edit]

Like Oakland? it jumps from N to P —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:36, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

The "O" section was deleted by vandals. I restored it on Feb 11th. Stepheng3 (talk) 03:18, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

What happened to the "H" cities?[edit]

Hey, where are the "H" cities? There are several cities with H in California, like Hayward, Hawthorne, Huntington Beach and the like —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 00:47, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

An IP user deleted the H section back in December. I have reverted the change. Stepheng3 (talk) 03:16, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Studio City[edit]

Why is Studio City listed? It's not an incorporated city, but a district of the City of Los Angeles. (talk) 18:49, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. Stepheng3 (talk) 20:42, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
Studio City and other San Fernando Valley districts voted for secession in July 2006, but wasn't enough to get approved by the city of Los Angeles nor the Los Angeles County board of supervisors. In my Thomas Bros. California road atlas, I get Tujunga with a dark circle to indicate it's an incorporated city (but small letters, while cities have big lettering) except its' still a district of the city of Los Angeles. They attempt to seceded from the city of L.A. in the early 1990's, probably the mapmakers thought Tujunga had already did (wrong.). + (talk) 15:30, 15 August 2008 (UTC)


As there is only one class of municipality in California, which can be termed either "city" or "town" with no legal significance hinging on the name, shouldn't this be renamed to "list of municipalities in California"? Postdlf (talk) 18:54, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. --Stepheng3 (talk) 20:41, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
"Municipality" often means different things in different places -- different states, different countries. Sometimes, I have seen something called a "municipality" when all it was is an unincorporated village and its surrounding farmland. [I know this sounds foolish, but there are lots of strange governments.] On the other hand, in North America, Australia, etc., we often think of a "municipality" as being something a place on the order of New York City, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, Brisbane, Sydney, Melbourne, San Francisco, Dallas - Ft. Worth, Atlanta, Washington, D.C., Baltimore, Philadelphia, Boston....
The word "municipality" has become so vague that it is practically useless. (talk) 02:53, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

featured list candidacy[edit]

As someone who's been tending this list for over a year, I'd love to see it featured, and I hope other editors are as excited about this as I am. One thing I know it needs is to be made sortable, and I think I can do that easily, if there's no objection. Personally, I'd like to see additional information for each municipality, such as the county it's in, its coordinates, and other rarely-changing information of that sort. Population figures might be worth adding; I'm not sure. Opinions? --Stepheng3 (talk) 17:55, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Coordinates and population would be good. One of the problems with sorting is the sheer volume of cities Purplebackpackonthetrail (talk) 18:55, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
I've gone ahead and made it a sortable table. If this causes problems, feel free to revert. --Stepheng3 (talk) 17:48, 27 October 2009 (UTC)


I found this page on my travels around California related articles on Wikipedia. I would suggest making the incorporation dates as year-month-day, so that when you want to sort by the incorporation date, it doesn't just alphabetize the list, but it will show it in chronological order. Just a suggestion. Killiondude (talk) 08:33, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm gradually adding {{sort}} templates to the dates, which will have the desired effect while retaining easy readability. I'd welcome your help. --Stepheng3 (talk) 21:24, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
All done. The dates should sort correctly now. Of course, if I'd known about {{dts}} before I started, I would've used it instead of {{sort}}. But I don't think it's worth switching at this point. --Stepheng3 (talk) 01:58, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Cabazon is not the only city to disincorporate. The former city of Hornitos, in Mariposa County was incorporated in 1871 and disincorportaed in 1972, after the population had dipped to under 100 people. I think the disincorporation was done by Mariposa County because a government of the City of Hornitos no longer existed.

The county took the action because title to some land in the area was held by the defunct City of Hornitos

hi —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 07:07, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Reference improvements[edit]

I added a {{refimprove}} tag to this article earlier. My main concern had been that the population column appeared to be completely unreferenced, but on re-reviewing the article I see that there is a reference for the population but in a different location than I expected. I.e. the citation for the incorporation dates is located in the column header, but the citation for the population is located in the text above the table and not in the column header. That inconsistency confused me when I read too quickly, but was easily correctible (which I have now done). In addition however, the first two paragraphs of the lead include numerous specific facts that need citation, so I feel the {{refimprove}} should remain for the time being. Examples of facts needing citation include the obsolescence of "township", the equivalence of "city" and "town", the history of Willow Glen and Alviso and Cabazon. — Ipoellet (talk) 16:56, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Former Municipality Table[edit]

I'm working on one on my userpage, if anyone thinks it shouldn't be done, say so or take it down when I finish. Samhuddy (talk) 01:28, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea. I look forward to seeing the list. --Stepheng3 (talk) 02:00, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
Thank you, Sam. Please provide your sources so the data can be verified by others. --Stepheng3 (talk) 17:18, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Merge/redirect List of cities in California (by population) into this page? Discuss[edit]

I have suggested on Talk:List of cities in California (by population) merging/redirecting that article into this one, since this one seems better, does everything that List of cities in California (by population) does, and has more content and is better organized. Darkest tree (talk) 20:18, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

I agree. top 100 is arbitrary. my only concern is that this article get better population estimates, as the 2010 census numbers may be out, and this has estimates from 2008. (other article is no better i believe)Mercurywoodrose (talk) 08:14, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
A year has gone by and no objections. Adding merge tags to the articles. Darkest tree (talk) 19:55, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Missing City[edit]

The article states that there are 482 municipalities, but the list contains 481. Is there one missing? Mattximus (talk) 19:58, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

The list was missing San Mateo, which has now been added. Thanks for catching that. --Kurykh (talk) 11:07, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Just say it: Incorporated[edit]

Some people think of the difference between cities and towns like this: incorporated = cities and unincorporated = towns. Maybe this is technically wrong or we have no "common sense" (as earlier stated on this page), but nevertheless I don't think I'm alone in this. As Quincy has been deemed unqualified for the list merely for being unincorporated, that obviously is the salient factor, so why not say so? Just change the name to List of incorporated cities and towns in California. Or, alternatively, List of cities and towns in California (Incorporated). If you state the plan right at the git go, people will know what they are looking at and won't try to stuff the Quincys of the world in the list (which proves the point). CampKohler (talk) 21:16, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

References to law vs. links.[edit]

Reference 5 (currently) points to code sections. Since most codes are online, shouldn't the references be links to the pertinent law? Is there a reason not to do that? What's best practice? CampKohler (talk) 21:21, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Have the cities photos arrangement changed?[edit]

I noticed (viewed using latest Chrome with a maximized window) that the photos of the cities, which used to be aligned vertically, taking a lot of space above the list, was recently showing grouped more compactly into a horizontal and vertical alignment. I thought this was a good change, because there was less scrolling required to get to the list and it looked more finished. Today I notice that it is back to the vertical. I haven't looked at recent edits or even know if this is some kind of browser artifact that might change from time to time. Is there some way to fix the photos (at least for a maximized window) in a horizontal and vertical grouping? CampKohler (talk) 21:29, 15 August 2012 (UTC)