Category talk:Los Angeles

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
WikiProject iconCalifornia: Los Angeles / Southern California Category‑class
WikiProject iconThis category 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.
CategoryThis category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Taskforce icon
This category is supported by Los Angeles area task force.
Taskforce icon
This category is supported by Southern California task force.
WikiProject iconCities Category‑class
WikiProject iconThis category 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.
CategoryThis category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Ambiguous/misnamed?

IMHO

Greater Los Angeles area. I think that this category should be renamed to something like Category:Los Angeles area or Category:Greater Los Angeles area, and then put under Category:Metropolitan areas of the United States (see Category:San Francisco Bay Area for another California example). BlankVerse 11:51, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply
]

Copy of old nomination

Moved from
WP:CFDS

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


The result was: No change. – Fayenatic London 11:56, 30 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@James Allison: If you're scratching your head thinking, "this is about as clear of an example of C2D as I can possibly imagine", you're not alone. Oculi's background about this being controversial is quite accurate though. RevelationDirect (talk) 21:39, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.