Talk:Porter Ranch, Los Angeles

	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.
	Greater Los Angeles portal This article is supported by Los Angeles area task force.

Notability

Who is Mark Henschel, and why is he notable? There is no Wikipedia page for him.

S Schaffter (talk) 07:28, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Does Porter Ranch have a newsletter

and if so, who do I contact to get a copy Reply to Ruby222222 @ aol.com 75.76.58.110 (talk) 13:03, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Porter Ranch, Los Angeles, California

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) 22:33, 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.

A precedet setting decision for one of the world's largest city's deserves wider discussion and input.

There is a definite lack of advance 'discussion width', which left me unaware of changes (considered or already done such as here) even though very active with L.A. Districts' articles. Personally I do not find using the word 'notorious' and L.A. used together by some 'change advocates' in other discussions positive or a npov backup. I'm neutral on the decision itself, but not on the process to date though.

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).

Please stop further districts' changes until this is resolved so we all know how to find an article. Thank you-Look2See1 t a l k → 22:32, 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.

No sources. Data subject to challenge and removal.

The tag atop this article has sought sources since October 2011. Will some knowledgeable and interested person please add the proper sources by April 22, 2012, lest the data be removed? Thank you. GeorgeLouis (talk) 05:07, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody added sources, so I removed the data without any. GeorgeLouis (talk) 02:31, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Household Makeup

this line "Bradbury, North Whittier and Bel-Air had the most similar percentage of homeowners in Los Angeles County." is erroneous.

There is not 'North Whittier'. Maybe Northern Whittier, or properly, uptown Whittier. Read the ink to the community, before making up real or assumed "used" names. - Thanks.

From residents perspective, there is City of Whittier, and (Unincorporated) Whittier. The Unincorporated section, especially, east of Colima Road, is what is referred to residents as East Whittier. Additionally, Anything North of Whittier blvd, and West of College Avenue, is referred to 'Uptown'. Along Santa Fe Springs Border (South of Mulberry Avenue, West of Mills Road) is referred to as 'Southside'. Collision-Shift (talk) 16:59, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Who Was Porter?

Came to the page hoping the history section would answer that question. No luck. Anybody know?Ajericn (talk) 06:43, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it was a guy named Ben Porter, and that's all I could find at https://www.newspapers.com/search/?query=%22Ben%20Porter%20ranch%22&p_county=Los%20Angeles%20County%2C%20California&dr_year=1800-1899. Sincerely, BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 03:53, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

More on Ben Porter https://www.chatsworthchamber.com/porter-ranch-then-now/ 2600:1700:4450:AE30:BD6C:A35:8388:7C0A (talk) 08:40, 20 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Porter Ranch, Los Angeles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://articles.latimes.com/print/2007/mar/13/local/me-shapell13
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.thefreelibrary.com/GATE+MORE+THAN+THRESHOLD+TO+LUXURY.-a083619316
Corrected formatting/usage for http://articles.latimes.com/print/1999/aug/17/local/me-1052
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160207072304/http://www.laparks.org/DOS/parks/facility/palisadesPk.htm to http://www.laparks.org/DOS/parks/facility/palisadesPk.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:35, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What a pilot bot you are! Best wishes to you! BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 03:55, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]