Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Northwest Los Angeles

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus. L Faraone 01:23, 3 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Northwest Los Angeles[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I understand the idea of "Northwest Los Angeles" geographically, but it's not a phrase or concept that has any bearing in real world usage. Doing a google search for "northwest los angeles" -wiki only gives results relating to a city in Texas. Additionaly, as a life-long resident of the Los Angeles area, I have never heard of the neighborhoods in this article collectively referred to as "northwest Los Angeles". The only citation in the article is on the topic of gentrification in a specific area and makes no mention of the concept of "northwest Los Angeles". I've seen previous versions of LA-district lists on this site and understand why, from an academic perspective, somebody would seek to simplify the classification of LA's patchwork grid, but Wikipedia is not the place to make declarative assertions on what is and isn't an official designation for an area.

Comment - I completed the nomination for 96.40.167.57, and am neutral. Ansh6 6 6 07:35, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I can understand the nominator's concern: if "Northwest Los Angeles" has any common meaning today it's probably the northwest San Fernando Valley, not the near-downtown neighborhoods listed in this article. I don't think, however, that this AfD is the way to handle the question. This term is used as part of a large-scale organization of L.A. neighborhoods and is used in a number of templates. Just deleting this article would add to the confusion. A rename might be discussed, but I note that historically the term "Northwest Los Angeles" was used for some area northwest of downtown, per news cites such as [1] and [2]. --Arxiloxos (talk) 16:03, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have found a way to integrate those into the article, and also into the article on Beverly Boulevard, which the later one appears to refer to. p b p 18:46, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Interesting citations, but like you said they're archaic, and there's no definition for which area they're talking about specifically. Also, nobody refers to the San Fernando Valley as "north" or "northwest" or anything like that, it's just "the valley". PS Thank you very much Ansh666. 96.40.167.57 (talk) 17:18, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:05, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The article contains absolutely no verification that this is a term in actual use; the article's sole reference does not use the term. And I could find no usage at Google News, except that apparently there was a "Northwest Los Angeles Improvement Association" back in the 1890s. A search of the City of Los Angeles website found nothing. As for the "large-scale organization of L.A. neighborhoods," I see no reason why it can't remain in place, while recognizing that the grouping "Northwest Los Angeles" is something invented for Wikipedia's convenience, rather than a real entity deserving of an article. --MelanieN (talk) 18:15, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I noticed that the original author of the article was not notified of this discussion. I have notified them as a courtesy. --MelanieN (talk) 18:21, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Essentially per Arxiloxos. This is an issue for a renaming request, not an AfD. The neighborhoods were grouped together in a template long before the article was created. If this article is deleted, the neighborhoods in that template can't be distributed into other articles, because they are a poor fit to be in other articles (they're not Downtown, they're too far east to be Hollywood, they're too far north and east to be lumped with the Westside, and they're on the wrong side of the river for the Eastside). It's possible that list-index criteria apply here, BTW, which would allay V concerns. As for 96's comment that the use of "Northwest Los Angeles" is archaic, people haven't come up with a better collective name for the area since then, so might as well use it. p b p 18:27, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Question: If the neighborhoods were "grouped together in a template long before this article was created," why can't they stay grouped in that template even if it is deleted? --MelanieN (talk) 19:30, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Every other template has a corresponding article. What happens if this is deleted is we have a number of neighborhoods not grouped by region of the city. Since Los Angeles doesn't link to every neighborhood article, having every neighborhood grouped in a region is important p b p 19:37, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why can't they be grouped by region of the city without a corresponding article? They were before. --MelanieN (talk) 20:14, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Because there really isn't any reason to delete right now. Sources for the name "Northwest Los Angeles" have been found, and even if they hadn't, you could just rename it to something else. I'm surprised at the apparently low value given to consistency among regions p b p 20:38, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: at the very least, as a rational organizing method, grouping the municipalities in this sector of a huge metro area (which can be referred to in this way), for ease of navigation.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 21:28, 29 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.