Talk:Shadow Hills, Los Angeles

California Low‑importance

	California portal 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.CaliforniaWikipedia:WikiProject CaliforniaTemplate:WikiProject CaliforniaCalifornia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

It is requested that an image or photograph be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible.
The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.

Upload

Comment[edit]

Shadow Hills, is in fact shared between Sunland and Sun Valley, I believe everything south of Stonehurst has a Sun Valley zipcode, including Stonehurst Park.--Pozole 22:39, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Per a discussion I had with the Sunland postmaster, Shadow Hills is 100 percent contained within Sunland. Do you have any supporting information for your supposition? David Hoag 04:42, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This is correct. I edited accordingly. Some Realtors may try to sell parts of Sun Valley as Shadow Hills, but it's not.207.69.137.24 21:06, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Per this map from the City of Los Angeles [1] Shadow Hills is clearly its own distinct section of Los Angeles. The Post Office is just saving money lumping Shadow Hills in with Sunland. I have a friend who lives on the thin strip of Los Angeles City heading towards San Pedro yet his address is Torrance as far as the Post Office is concerned. He is still in the city of Los Angeles despite the postal service. Just a weird quirk in government agencies.~~Fangs4U Fangs4U (talk) 22:43, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shadows Hills not in SFV[edit]

Like Sunland and Tujunga, Shadow Hills is not in the San Fernando Valley. It's in the Crescenta Valley. 207.69.137.24 21:01, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recommended changes[edit]

Does anyone have a supporting reference for the Clark Gable hunting lodge? I have searched through numerous sources including two Clark Gable biographies and could find nothing referring to that. If there is no reference it should be removed. Darkgrrrl 20:19, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some of statements need citations like the mistake statement.
References and sources would be nice with expansion if available, i.e., what the grassroots group called today.
What is the LA Planning Commission's actual title?
Picture and/or map would be nice. Ronbo76 06:36, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move?[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Page not moved - see also Talk:Los_Angeles#Various_move_requests_involving_LA_Neighborhoods Ronhjones ^(Talk) 23:11, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As with others, Please consider: To align with predominant city's district/town nomenclature of 3 names; & for Spanish placename/word multiple use clarity.

User talk:Purplebackpack89, Please consider a stop to changing time tested template/approach of many until clarified and resolved by editor community.

Thanks---Look2See1 (talk) 22:32, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strong oppose/Request speedy closure User has offered no reasoning for move. The name of the city is Los Angeles, not Los Angeles, California; therefore the name of the article should be Chatsworth, Los Angeles, not Chatsworth, Los Angeles, California. Many neighborhoods in other cities, in and out of the United States, do not contain state names, including quite a few neighborhoods in Los Angeles now. I would direct you to Talk:Angelino Heights, Los Angeles for precedent for my move. Also, don't call me out in movereqs...that's flirting with an AN Purplebackpack89 ^{(Notes Taken) (Trails blazed)} 22:06, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I agree. Unless there is a disambiguation problem, "neighhborhood, Los Angeles" is sufficient. Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:48, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral: While understanding a larger view now than when posting the 'movereq' above; I agree with User:Will Beback that a precedet setting decision for one of the world's largest city's deserves wider discussion and input. My posting the 'movereq' was due to lack of 'discussion width', leaving me unaware of changes (considered and done) even though very active with L.A. Districts' articles. Personally I do not find using the word 'notorious' and L.A. together by some 'change advocates' positive or a npov backup.

More transparency before further changes, with notification and 'auto-forwarding' of 'old 3 names' titles (in both article links and new searches) could avoid difficult startles. The Reseda, Los Angeles, California (OR Reseda, Los Angeles ?? eg: the 'crap shoot' problem for now...) has discussion on talk page of neighborhood vs. district vs. census-designated place (CDP). If the change is inevitable perhaps doing so in district name alphabetical order would take out random 'crap shoot' searching now (or explaining another system being used). Thank you-Look2See1 t a l k → 22:04, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Possible references[edit]

Shadow Hills

Community Info - Sunland - Tujunga Ronbo76 06:52, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]