Talk:Los Angeles

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Former good article Los Angeles was one of the Geography and places good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Mediterranean climate???[edit]

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)

Edit request, 31 October 2013[edit]

"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)

Edit request on 20 November 2013[edit]

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)


Climate figures[edit]

Some recent vandalism, maybe some old. Dougweller (talk) 16:26, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 12 January 2014[edit]

61stUNIQ981a2710f47e1c96-nowiki-0000000D-QINU1UNIQ981a2710f47e1c96-nowiki-0000000E-QINU World Tzicul (talk) 10:52, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. --Anon126 (talk - contribs) 05:07, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Temperatures in Los Angeles[edit]

In Los Angeles, does temperatures exceed 90° F one day on November. In 2013, it was only 87° F only. Are you really sure all of Los Angeles exceeds 90°. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 23.243.80.13 (talk) 06:09, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

Murder rate down in 2013[edit]

ShawntheGod added this material: Los Angeles in the year of 2013 totaled 251 murders, a decrease of 16 percent from the previous year. Authorities attribute this decrease in crime to a number of things, but technology playing a huge role due to the modern day environment.<:ref>"LAPD City Murder Rate Drops 16 Percent". Retrieved 2014-2-4.  </ref> which seems relevant and well-sourced. The trouble is that it's a too-close paraphrase of the source. I changed it here to Los Angeles in the year of 2013 totaled 251 murders, a decrease of 16 percent from the previous year. Police speculate that the drop resulted from a number of factors, including young people spending more time online.<:ref>"LAPD City Murder Rate Drops 16 Percent". Retrieved 2014-2-4.  </ref> to fix the close paraphrase. Now comes Grade X and reverts back to Shawn's version with the edit summary So what?. What does that even mean?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:01, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Agree its close and with a little puff added in..this should be fixed as per Wikipedia:Copy-paste ...Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing -- Moxy (talk) 18:17, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Yep, and now Grade X is edit-warring over it without discussion. Sigh...— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:25, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
No I'm not. I've read the rules now. Grade X (talk) 18:26, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
So will you consider self-reverting?— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:38, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Yes check.svg Done. Grade X (talk) 18:48, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. We really can just talk about what form the information can take in the article. No one is arguing that it's not important.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:48, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
I really have no problem with your change to my editorial, but I also don't really think it was that necessary. I put "Authorities attribute this decrease in crime to a number of things, but technology playing a huge role due to the modern day environment." and the source says "Authorities attribute the drop to a number of things, including technology.". I singled out technology like the source due to the fact it seems to be a large reason, but also because the source later states "A lot of people believe it’s the sociology of our environment. A lot of kids and youthful individuals are spending a lot more time on the Internet, which means they’re indoors a lot more. They’re not on the streets involved in street-level activities,” so it's quite clear technology has a huge role in our modern day environment. I don't really see how I was paraphrasing or directly copying the material either, but I guess I should have put 'technology playing a huge rule in the modern day environment' instead. In all honesty, either way, your altercations were fine with me. The thing mostly of importance was the factual statistics about the amount of murders in LA in 2013 and the percent decrease from last year. ShawntheGod (talk) 18:34, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
I agree that the factual stats are important and should go in. The sentence struck me as too close, but YMMV. The main thing is that we ought to discuss it, which I know you're always willing to do, rather than edit-warring, as Grade X seems all to happy to do.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:38, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
Nah, it's all good. No need to edit war over something as miniscule of the wording of a sentence, either way both of our versions talk about how technology plays a role in the decrease in crime. ShawntheGod (talk) 18:46, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
It's interesting, isn't it, that the murder rate went down so much and no one knows why. Maybe Steve Jobs really did save the world. I wouldn't mind seeing more detail in there about it.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 18:49, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
I'm actually not that surprised in all honesty; I've always pondered whether or not the spread of technology would help increase or decrease certain things and it seems to be working for the decline in crime. The article really doesn't elaborate much more on technology playing a possible huge role in the decrease than the sentences already put in the article though. Obviously some people do see certain advantages with technology, but people do see certain disadvantages as well. You know, the usual criticism that comes with the use of technology. Either way, it's great that crime rates have declined. ShawntheGod (talk) 19:08, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
according to the Los Angeles Times, not only the media-speculated Crime rate is down, they even said the number of Latinos is at 44 percent instead of reaching majority (over 50 percent) status. The local media hyped of Latinos/Hispanics will form the majority of the city (and county) population. Other facts reported by the local media is air pollution, unemployment and opoverty rates are down, despite what the media long portrayed of these things are going up or getting worse. Local media loves to stir the pot before they find the real facts. 71.102.1.95 (talk) 12:38, 26 February 2014 (UTC)


Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist}} template (see the help page).