	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
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	Greater Los Angeles portal This article is supported by Los Angeles area task force (assessed as High-importance).

Moved this text

I moved this text here from West Los Angeles because that name refers only to one neighborhood while the article was about the whole region (The Westside). View the history of that page for this text before I pasted it here. We decided to paste (rather than move) in order to keep the old page around with the topic of the more specific neighborhood. There may have been a better way to do it, I apologize if this messes anything up. See Talk:West Los Angeles. EmergentProperty 00:48, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK - so now the page is titled "West Los Angeles (region)". Why don't we have a discussion to decide what the name should be. When I hear "West Los Angeles" I think the particular neighborhood. When I hear "The Westside" I think of the region. This seems to hold true with most people I talk to. So I vote for some variation of "Westside". EmergentProperty 03:03, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

'Hollywood' business

I removed the sentence, "Indeed, far more "Hollywood" business is conducted on the Westside than in Hollywood itself." from the business section because it's not entirely true. It depends what kind of "Hollywood" business you're talking about. There's still a lot of editing, props, effects, and other ancillary industries in Hollywood. And don't forget Burbank. EmergentProperty 22:57, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Rappers' nomenclature

Rappers do not say "Westside" because they are from West Los Angeles, but from the West "coast" of the USA. Which refers to the word Westside as well. No? (21 November 2006)

Criteria for inclusion?

According to the description at the top of the article, the cities of Hawthorne, Manhattan Beach, and Torrance should not belong. Unless someone can provide a good justification for their inclusion, I will delete them. BlankVerse ∅ 20:32, 12 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's the South Bay. User:Zoe|(talk) 22:51, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"The" 310

I have never heard this area refered to as "The 310." Unless we can get a good reference for this "fact," I propose removing the section — say, on December 29, which will make a good start to the new year. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 00:16, 23 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The term exists, even though it is not completely accurate - as Beverly Hills and Culver City, while mostly in the 310 area code, do have areas that are part of the 323 area code (although very few residents of Culver City live in the tiny part of that city within the 323 area code)

"East of the Pacific Ocean"

No kidding? bearstory 07:26, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Exposition Light Rail

Should we add mention of this project to the transportation section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.10.41.94 (talk) 23:37, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Request for sources

I am beginning a project to source all of this information and to remove that which cannot be verified. I removed the asserted "boundaries" of the Westside as unsourced, but I am retaining it here in case anybody wants to find sources and work it into the article.

West Los Angeles (also known as West L.A. or the Westside) is generally considered to be the portion of Los Angeles, California that lies east of the Pacific Ocean, west of La Cienega Boulevard (or, by some, Fairfax or even La Brea Avenue), south of the Santa Monica Mountains, and north of the Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). (Compare to East Los Angeles or South Los Angeles.) It is bordered on the west by the Pacific Ocean, on the northwest by Ventura County and the Conejo Valley, on the north by the San Fernando Valley, on the east by Hollywood district and the Wilshire area, and on the south by South Los Angeles and South Bay.

Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 00:13, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I found a source, rewrote the above description (which could not be backed up), added the source, and somebody removed it (no reason given). So I put it back in a modified form. Yours sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 18:41, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not an Angeleno, so excuse me if I get some of this wrong, but isn't one problem with sourcing this article the fact that "westside" is not an official designation, but an informal one, used (for instance) by real estate agents and in everyday conversation, but not supported by any kind of governmental delineation? The closest thing I can find to an official area which is close to "Westside" is County Supervisorial Area #3 (map), and even that encompasses much more to both the east and west than is meant by "westside" as defined here.

Without an official designation of what "westside" is, I think it's going to be difficult to find support for the many claims made about it in the article, since every potential source is going to use a slightly different definition. I hope I'm wrong, but that's how it looks to me after some amount of poking around. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ^{(talk / cont)} 21:53, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For any of the statements, we might want to include the exact geographic area that the Source is talking about, if we can find it. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 03:38, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

This article has been renamed from West Los Angeles (region) to Westside (Los Angeles County) as the result of a move request.

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. 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 proposal was - Move.

It is confusing to have two articles titled "West Los Angeles," one for the city region and one for the general region including Santa Monica, Beverly Hills and Culver City, which are not part of L.A. at all. The usual term for this district is "The Westside." A 'West Los Angeles" article should confine itself to the neighborhood council which has adopted that name. I am proposing to rename this article as The Westside (region of Los Angeles metropolitan area). Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 06:00, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have no strong opinion on a title but oppose the use of the definite article ("the") before the name. Plus, wouldn't Westside (Los Angeles) be simpler? I doesn't conflict with anything at Westside. — AjaxSmack 08:19, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Westside (region of Los Angeles metropolitan area) would be better. But it is more than Los Angeles. It also includes Culver City, Beverly Hills, Santa Monica (all independent cities) and Marina Del Rey and the Sawtelle Veterans Hospital (both unincorporated). Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 20:04, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The parenthical should serve as a disambiguator, not a descriptive. "Region" doesn't disambiguate becuse other Westsides are also regions. "Metropolitan area" doesn't disambiguate because there is only one Westside in the L.A. area. The parenthetical only needs to set it apart from the other entries at Westside and Westside (Los Angeles) is sufficient. — AjaxSmack 20:56, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Westside (Los Angeles) might be sufficient, but it would not be accurate. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 22:03, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking Los Angeles/West. How about that? Agtax 00:53, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Or Westside (Los Angeles County). Reginmund (talk) 04:25, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Westside (Los Angeles County) would be just fine. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 06:42, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Westside (Los Angeles County) is grand. — AjaxSmack 16:32, 10 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the page to the new title. GeorgeLouis (talk) 22:59, 11 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. 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.

Is Malibu in the Westside?

I couldn't find any sources that say Malibu is part of the Westside. In fact, the Malibu Times seems to be fairly consistent that it is not. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 04:52, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Result of No Sources

I removed all the unsourced material as a compendium of hearsay, speculation, rumor and stereotype. This has been tagged for quite a while and nobody has stepped forth to verify any of these supposed facts. I sent messages to most of the editors who have worked on this article over the past year or two. Sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 17:24, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Tagged for quite a while"? - those tags are dated December 2007, I'd hardly call a couple of months "quite a while". And speaking of that, your call for sources dates from about a ~~week~~ month or so ago (corrected - I was mistaken, the notice of the sourcing problem was posted on my talk page about a week ago) - I think it would be appropriate to give it a little more time before deleting a lot of material.

It would be different if you suspected that the information is not true, as opposed to not supported by citation, which is not the same thing. Is that the case? If so, then I can understand your deleting material that you know to be false. But this is not a courtroom where black is white if the judge or a stipulation says it is, we're allowed to use our common sense to decide which material is factual and which is not, regardless of the state of its sourcing.

in the long run, yes, all factual material should be sourced, but the grim fact of the matter is that a significant percentage of the material on Wikipedia is not sourced. That means it's more productive to work toward sourcing it then it is to delete it on sight simply because it's unsourced.

I hope I'm being clear in what I'm saying. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ^{(talk / cont)} 17:34, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I assume the author of the above note is writing in Good Faith, although the wording is quite peremptory. Let's give it a while longer! Cheers! GeorgeLouis (talk) 17:44, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I had to intent to be peremptory. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ^{(talk / cont)} 17:50, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved this discussion down to the bottom of the page, where it will be more easily seen by people. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ^{(talk / cont)} 17:38, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect borders

Being a lifetime member of the Westside, I have to say, I was a little appalled to see the northern border as Sunset. The Northern border is definitely Wilshire, not sunset, because if it's sunset you're adding a huge chuck of north beverly hills, and quite a large amount of west hollywood territory, not to mention brentwood and the pallisades, which are the furthest thing from the Westside. Ask any West LA resident, and they would tell you that to include those ares as "Westside" is a joke. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.1.242.7 (talk) 23:10, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tell that to the IP user who edited those boundaries. Agtax 00:07, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Let us be clear: The only paragraph that cites sources of areas to include within the Westside is the first one. The others have been added later, with no sources or with a poor one, I refer to http://travel.yahoo.com/p-map-191501884-map_of_los_angeles_ca-i, which simply gives a generic map of Los Angeles, with no boundaries marked. Thus I am removing the two paragraphs without sources. If anybody wants to add them back, kindly do so, but with good citations to good sources. Yours very sincerely, GeorgeLouis (talk) 03:54, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'Overview' section

The section marked "Overview" is not needed because the lede is supposed to be an overview of the entire article. In addition, this section is faulty because it is mostly WP:Original research. Some of the particular problems are: (1) The MGM Holdings document is original research because it is a primary document. Not sure why all the addresses are given as part of the citation. Please explain. (2) You can't link to another WP article and consider that to be a citation ("World's Busiest Airports by Passenger Traffic"). (3) The news release by LAWA is self-serving and not a reliable source. (4) The information pinned to the LA Business Journal (King, Danny (September 1, 2003). "Projects move forward on Westwood's Golden Mile". Los Angeles Business Journal. p. 3.) could be valid, but please post the text on the Talk Page so we can verify it. See this diff. GeorgeLouis (talk) 04:54, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Westside (Los Angeles County)/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

== B class? No way == This article is filled with unsourced opinion and "facts" that may or may not be facts. I've asked for Sources, and if none are forthcoming within another week or so, then all of this cant will just have to go down the chute with the rest of my garbage. Yours in a search for wisdom, GeorgeLouis (talk) 06:55, 13 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 06:55, 13 March 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 10:28, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Historical boundaries=

It's weird that all of these boundaries are based off of 2009 Los angeles times, when boundaries were defined well before that. I remember seeing maps back in the 90s describing westchester as part of the southbay area. I've moved away from la, but maybe someone can do some research at the local planning department to see where all these boundaries are really set at rather than where everyone "thinks" they should be because like it or not, boundaries are set by people who have political power and wealth and boundaries were set intentionally to segregate and control people and LA definitely has a history of geographical discrimination. I think maybe both can exist, like cultural boundaries vs political boundaries. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:12F0:5DF0:4594:987F:8C44:72EC (talk) 13:37, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]