Talk:Southern California/Archive 1

Definition / Northern Boundary
I reverted recent (as of Nov 2007) edits to the portion of the article pertaining to the "Definition of the Northern Boundary". It's ridiculous to include San Luis Obispo, Kern and Northern Santa Barbara Counties in Southern California. Those are Central California counties & regions. You cannot be as pragmatic as a simple "North/South" defintion, lumping everything south of the geographic center of the State into "Southern California". This article is not titled "The Southern Geographic Region of California". I think it is just common sense that Southern California is everything south of the Tehachapis. Ask somebody from Delano or Paso Robles or San Luis Obispo if they live in Southern California and they will laugh at you. California is more complex than "North/South". There is Southern California, Northern California, Central Valley, Central Coast, etc. Dcmcgov 08:00, 12 November 2007 (UTC)


 * I disagree that it's common sense that Southern California never includes Kern, SLO, etc. As I though I made clear in my edit, when California is divided into two parts, (north and south), it is often divided (unofficially) at the 6th parallel. I agree that California is a lot more complex than just a north and a south part and that the two-part devision of California (north/south, no central part) is not really adequate. hajhouse 16:36, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

What is "the sixth standard parallel south"? Is this equivalent to 36th parallel north?

California can be divided in various ways. Californians living outside the biggest urban concentrations naturally favor divisions that recognize their own regions. People from the far north view the SF Bay Area as not really Northern California. Nevertheless, a two-way north-south division is frequently used, although it may often be without a definite boundary in mind. A three-way definition should also be mentioned, but Central California is less used, poorly defined and primarily consists of two regions, Central Coast of California and Central Valley (California), that are geographically separated, quite different, and not closely economically connected. --JWB (talk) 03:38, 16 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Having grown up on the "Central Coast" in Arroyo Grande, California and SLO and now living in Sacramento, California, I am very familiar with this dilemma. Basically if you are going to divide the state geographically into two parts, northern and southern, then the dividing line is nearly always at the northern edge of San Luis Obispo County, Kern County, and San Bernardino County. This does not do a very good job of identifying the regions culturally, though. Dcmcgov's assertion that people from Paso Robles would laugh at you for saying they live in Southern California is not usually true. We always recognized that we were associated more closely with SoCal than NorCal. We would think of ourselves first as Central Coast residents, but also as Southern California residents. Likewise, residents of Delano probably consider themselves Central Valley residents first, and Southern California residents second. Tulare County, where I have a lot of relatives, is even more difficult to place. It lies north of Kern County, so it would lie in NorCal according to my earlier definition using county lines. However, the Automobile Club of Southern California (AAA) and several other SoCal organizations include Tulare County in their SoCal areas. Tulare County receives television transmissions from Bakersfield (over the air), which identifies with SoCal, and Fresno (over the air and through Comcast cable), which identifies with NorCal. Is it any wonder then that the residents there more closely identify with the Central Valley (or Central California) than with either NorCal or SoCal?
 * All of that being said, I don't think this article is trying to cleave the state into two parts. I think it is essentially trying to identify the part of the state that locals commonly think of as "Southern California" or SoCal, and that outsiders usually refer to collectively as "L.A." (making locals, especially of Orange County and points south and east, wince in pain at that misnomer). It's not just a physical thing, but a cultural phenomenon. Even the desert communities, like Palm Springs, join in that different style and attitude--something that most of the Central Coast (to a lesser degree) and Central Valley (to a greater degree) do not share. Ventura County is another one of those regions that falls into two categories. South of the mountains bisecting the county, the culture and geography are clearly SoCal, but north of them, the culture feels more Central Coastian. Even Santa Barbara County feels that split, with the southern half (again, mountains divide the county) feeling more SoCal, and the north feeling very Central Coast.
 * And what is "Central Coast"? There are really two "Central Coasts" in California. There is the "Tri-County" area (Ventura, Santa Barbara, SLO) and the "Monterey Coast" (Monterey, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz, San Benito). Collectively they are all part of the Central Coast, but there is a very strong cultural difference that is much more SoCal/NorCal in feel than you might expect from such geographically adjacent areas.
 * I'm fine with this Southern California article being about the cultural area of SoCal, but it should mention that somewhere within the article. Likewise, it should clearly, but briefly, articulate that the boundaries of SoCal are ambiguous and vary based on criteria (geographic location, culture, economics, principal industries, cost of living, weather, etc.). --Willscrlt 22:00, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Does anyone ever use the definition ending at San Gabriel Mountains or San Gabriel Ranch? Unless someone can come up with references, I would like to reduce or eliminate it from the article. --JWB (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 03:19, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Baja California
Shouldn't "Southern California" be Baja California? This is truly Southern California. --Daniel C. Boyer 21:30, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * Baja California is a state (actually two states) in Mexico. Southern California is the common name for a (more or less loosely defined) region of the US state of California. Can you cite a different usage of the term? --Brion 23:16, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * Well, what I was pointing out is that California can be just the U.S. state, but more properly is the entire area (a region, just like "Siberia" or "New England" but in this case now in two countries)encompassing the State of California and Baja California, so... --Daniel C. Boyer 14:56, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * Is this a real, modern usage or are you just speculating for fun? --Brion 00:08, 20 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * Maybe he means "south of California"? --Menchi (Talk)ü| â 23:53, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * Actually, among Chicano activists (e.g. members of MEChA), it's the other way around -- California is viewed as an extension (but as yet unrecovered) of the Mexican state of Baja California. Joelwest 09:56, 23 Dec 2003 (UTC)
 * Want to spread more lies about MECha?


 * MMM, shouldn't Mexicali the capital of the state of Baja California and Tijuana be included in this Megalopolis or Southern California since they are border cities. I think they should because they contribute to a lot as well. Well this is my opinion :)


 * In this usage, the word "Baja" translates to "low" in English, so "Baja California" is "Low(er) California", a completely separate entity to California. To include Baja California in Southern California is as asinine as including South Carolina if one was referring to southern North Carolina.  And besides, common usage of Southern California by residents never includes Baja.Brien Clark 05:27, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Definition
How come Wikipedia's definition for "Southern California" separates it from Central California, but the page for "Northern California" seperates it from Southern California? What is the Wikipedia definition for Central California? Now I'll never get to sleep. Mackerm 05:16, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * "Northern California", in my opinion, can include or exclude Central California, depending on who you ask, but southern California never includes it. (This is coming from a born-and-raised southern Californian.) -Branddobbe 07:30, Jun 24, 2004 (UTC)


 * Haha. That's obviously a SoCal-centric viewpoint. It's not appropriate to ask a "Southern Californian" (metropolitan L.A. or San Diego area) or a "Northern Californian" (S.F. Bay area) native where Central California falls. Instead, you have to ask the Central Californians which of the two they associate with. Please read my comments above to see how that seems to fall, having been raised in Central California, visiting SoCal regularly throughout my childhood and early adult years, and now living in NorCal. Of course, if NorCal were to deny SoCal use of NorCal water, I think that Central California would immediately agree with you about which half of the state they live in. ;-) --Willscrlt 22:24, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

I'd like to know who the "many" are that consider Las Vegas and Phoenix to be part of the outgrowth of Southern California. I'd like to know one, besides the author. A base-less statement IMO. westmt01 4-28-06

When I was a Southern California lad in the 50s and 60s, many people considered the region to include the eastern side of the Sierra Nevada (e.g., the old area code 714, or the current territory of the Automobile Club of Southern California). Of course, I was attracted to that nice, more-or-less straight east-west line. :) Jim 06:13, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Explanation of Corrections

 * 1) Spelled San Berna-R-dino, not Bernadino.


 * 1) The "high desert" is only in L.A., Kern, and San Bernardino Counties, not Riverside county.


 * 1) The "lower desert" is in Riverside, San Bernardino, and Imperial counties.


 * 1) Coachella Valley (Indio, Palm Springs area) is in Riverside County, not Imperial.


 * 1) Orange County is not part of the Inland Empire. --Anon 05:47, Sep 1, 2004 (UTC)


 * I've never heard of Imperial described as part of the IE either.

Northern border
How can we even take seriously a definition that lists Santa Barbara as being outside of Southern California? That's absurd. Does anyone really use any specific mountain range as a "border"? -68.8.31.231 05:27, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * "Forget it Jake, it's...Chinatown..."

Cute remarks aside...AAA has defined this informally in their magazine over the years! I.m Southern Californa born,& have followed this for 30 years at least. Southern California is informally defined by the (AAA) Auto Club of Southern California, since they distribute the majority of the maps and tourism info. They have considered the the coastal communities of Santa Barbara county to be the extreme northwest of geo-cultural Southern California." In fact the tunnel taking highway 101 away from the sight of the sea north of Gaviota (Santa Barbara Co.) was cited as the AAA gateway to the "Central Coast". Buelton,Solvang, Lompoc are all clearly "Central California", though in north Santa Barbara Co. On the I-5, entry into the Central Valley near Grapevine is the portal to and from Southern California. Bakersfield, is NOT climatically anything like metro Southern Cal. I would use the Kern County/L.A. County line at Tejon Pass to keep it neat. Southern California is geogrqaphical region marked by climate, lifestyle, and culture, in the sense that "Provence" is a distinct region of France. One should not consult a map and simply trace a west to east tier of counties, as an imagined divide. Nativeborncal 05:24, 25 October 2005 (UTC)


 * I agree completely. However, there are those (in and out of Santa Barbara) that feel Santa Barbara is a "Central Coast" city, and therefore outside of Southern California.  It's basically common sense that So Cal is everything south of the Tehachapi Mtns, but there are those that like to argue semantics.  They have a voice too. Dcmcgov 21:24, 17 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Nobody uses the San Gabriel Mountains as the border - this is the first I've seen of it and it strikes me as absurd - you leave out the Antelope Valley, Santa Clarita, and Victorville - and what about Ventura/Oxnard? Mentioning this border alternative only serves to add confusion.EmergentProperty 02:54, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Kern County
When even the tourist board of Kern County doesn't think its part of Southern California, there's no reason we should include it as such. Kern County is widely recognized as a Central Valley county geographically, economically, and culturally. Infernalfox


 * Here is the intro to Northern California:
 * Northern California (sometimes NorCal or NoCal) refers to the northern portion of the U.S. state of California, roughly covering all of those counties except for the ten counties which make up Southern California.
 * In other words, the basic division is north/south. I see that in the California geography template articles most of the sub-regions do not specify counties. Kern could be included in Central Valley, Mojave, and Sierra Nevada regions, if they listed counties. It belongs to all of those regions, as well as to Southern California. Cheers, -Willmcw 08:31, May 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * A meta-wikipedia reference would be an inappropriate source as to whether Kern County is a Southern California county. GIS "Kern County Southern California"  first results to show up clearly indicate the Central Valley identification for the county.  The Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) considers it as a Central Valley.  The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) does NOT include Kern County.

Per the division of California into two, counties just north of Kern are definitely not Northern California. Sierra Madre countries on the southern Nevada border are also never referred to as part of NorCal. Kern is also not a Sierra Nevada county, San Bernardino is to its east. Northern and Southern California have for sometime widely-recognized boundaries, integral to this knowledege is that there parts in the middle that are neither. - signed by anon IP


 * This seems a very valid criticism to me. Why hasn't the article been changed?LordSnow 22:36, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Thirty million?
The first paragraph currently claims that Southern California's population is 30,000,000. Borrowing California Department of Finance data and using the most extensive credible definition of Southern California (the ten counties of Imperial, Kern, Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, and Ventura), I get a total population of 22,565,762.

So where did 30,000,000 come from?

Are you including residents of Phoenix and Las Vegas in this figure? If you add the 2000 Census counts of the entire states of Nevada and Arizona (which I'm loath to do), you do get a grand total of 29,694,651. Throwing in the 1,200,000 residents of Tijuana and the 900,000 of Mexicali puts us well above the 30 million mark. But the article should make more clear that's what's going on. —Joshers 03:58, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Urban fusion
Regarding Calwatch's edit (Jan 20 '06). He says "he communities along Interstate 15 have nearly fused together," citing specifically Temecula's association with San Diego. However, it's my contention that the 15 is one of the last corridors in SoCal where the cities are still somewhat separated. I haven't gone north of about Escondido in a good while, but if I do recall what's up there is Fallbrook (tiny) and then nothing except Palomar mountain until you get to Temecula. Now, I have an even vaguer idea of what's north of Temecula along the 15, but looking at a map it looks like next to nothing until Corona/Riverside; I just don't think the 15 is a good example of the continuity of urban development along freeways. I propose changing this to the 10, which as far as I can tell is continuously urban pretty much from Santa Monica to San Bernardino. Soltras 15:58, 20 January 2006 (UTC)


 * OK, fair enough, the 10 is urban about to Beaumont, perhaps 90 miles east of Santa Monica. The 15/215 corridor is the real corridor, as the Cleveland Mountain range gets in the way. The 215 towns up the road are Temecula, Murrieta, Perris, Moreno Valley, Riverside. Calwatch 06:01, 21 January 2006 (UTC)


 * Actually Soltras, you probably need to take a trip up the 15 North from Escondido to Corona one of these days soon. Over the past 5-10 years, this area has boomed tremendously, and is virtually completely developed.  The only patches of open space left these days is the mountainous 10 mile stretch between North Escondido and South Temecula (but even this corridor is being rapidly developed) and the hilly 2 mile stretch just north of Lake Elsinore and south of Temescal Canyon.  The developements of Temecula, Murrietta, Wildomar, Lake Elsinore, Canyon Lake, Temescal Canyon and South Corona have truly nearly fused together.  The 215 is still a little more disconnected, but the 15 is another urbanized ribbon. Dcmcgov 14:48, 2 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Hmm. Well the 10-mile stretch of undeveloped land you point out between Escondido and Temecula is particularly what I was referring to as evidence opposing the claim that the 15 is continuously urban. That stretch is two thirds the length of the 5 through Camp Pendleton, and I think no one claims that south Orange County and Oceanside are fused. The original author even specifically noted that the urban continuity along the 15 has resulted in an association of Temecula with San Diego. This may (perhaps) be true of Temecula's local culture, but the wording and positioning of this fact within the article implies that the town is attached to San Diego through continuous urbanness. I think the 15 is a bad choice to illustrate this phenomenon (and particularly to focus on Temecula's association with San Diego) when there are plenty of other freeways, like the 10, that demonstrate the fusion without the countering evidence of a 10-mile moutain pass. Soltras 16:34, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Article needs major revision
This article needs some major revision, to-wit:

1. In the first paragraph, it says that the SoCal megalopolis includes Phoenix, Vegas & Tijuana; however, it defines the borders of SoCal as the Mexican border to the south and the Arizona and Nevada borders to the east. Well, which is it?

2. The article mentions LAX and Van Nuys airports- but what about San Diego, John Wayne/Orange County, Ontario, Long Beach, Burbank- these are important commercial airports as well. Certainly, if Van Nuys warrants mentioning, then these do also.

3. How can you justify saying SoCal is the Sports...Capital of the World when Los Angeles doesn't even have a Pro football team. I'd be careful throwing around unsubstantiated POV like that.

4. Excuse me?? What about Mexicali, that city is a booming city if you ask me...

Remember Joe Friday (So Cal TV Cop)- just the facts, ma'am? Hokeman 14:49, 16 March 2006 (UTC)


 * The cities of Southern California list with populations over 100,000 should include Indio and Santa Maria, two of the fastest growing cities in the state during the 1990's and 2000's, to surpassed over the 100,000 mark. But there was special attention given to Santa Barbara with a special figure table of how many people live in surrounding communities, but only 90,000 live in the city proper and 125,000 more outside the city. What about Bakersfield located in Kern County about 90 miles north of L.A. within the confines of "SouCal" unless its location being in the San Joaquin valley doesn't deserve to be on the list of "Southern California" cities with over 200,000? Sometimes, Mexicali and Tijuana south of the US-Mexican border are considered in Southern Cal. by a mile or less from the actual geopolitical region, both cities each have over 1 million people and depends on the economics of Southern California to get by on a daily basis. + 71.102.32.144 (talk) 13:59, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

No It Doesn't
1. If you read the article in it's entirety, you will find that there are no clear boundaries for Southern California. If you are speaking in the strictest of terms, SoCal is everything south of the Tehachapi Mountains, West of the Colorado River, and North of the U.S/Mexico Border. In looser terms, over the past 2 decades a "MegaMetro" has begun to form that includes all of the strict interpretation of SoCal, as well as the Las Vegas, Phoenix and Tijuana Metros. The article very clearly addresses this issue, all you have to do is read it.

2. The article did need to mention the other international airports in Southern California, and so I added them. That is called a minor addition, not a "major revision" as you suggest is needed. However, no such mention is needed for the smaller airports of Long Beach and Burbank. Van Nuys is not an international airport, but it is the world's busiest general aviation airport, and is therefore deserving of mention as one of the key SoCal Airports.

3. Name another region of the country where you have as many storied and succesful sports franchises gathered together. The UCLA Bruins basketball program is the most succesful and storied college basketball program in history. The same is true for the USC Trojans football program, the Cal State Fullerton baseball program, the Pepperdine volleyball program and UCLA softball program. Those are just the college teams. The Dodgers are one of the most storied franchises in all of sports, and the Lakers are arguably the most succesful sports franchise in the nation (perhaps second to only the Yankees). The Angels have been one of the top MLB teams since the new millenium, and Clippers and Chargers have had both had success in recent years. You also have to consider the High School Sports programs in So Cal. More blue chip athletes come out of So Cal high schools than any other region of the nation. The fact that SoCal remains dominant in so many sports, and constantly in the national eye, despite not having an NFL franchise is only further proof of the aforementioned claim. From top to bottom, all things considered, So Cal is the sports capital of the nation.

Stick to what you're good at, Hokeman, like alligator attacks and Florida towns! :-P Just kidding. I enjoy reading your articles (awesome job with the shark attacks article!), but I had to take issue with your claims here.

Dcmcgov 21:13, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Location and wealth
While I think the section is just a piece of original research I at least feel the responsibility to maintain some facts here. Thus, I am continuing to revert the changes by one 71.144.105.17 to include the unreferenced section. Please feel free to have someone revert or delete the changes unless we can find something to back it up with. Calwatch 08:22, 6 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm going to help this section out (if it should even be kept in at all) because it is poorly written, lacking in any qualifying facts or statistics (other than poor stereotyping), is extremely speculative and condescending in nature and leaves out the fact that the majority of the wealth in So Cal is not in the hilly suburbs, but in the beach communities (Malibu, La Jolla, Manhattan Beach, Newport Beach, etc. Ironically enough, the writer states that "Newport Beach is relatively low-lying" compared to the hilly suburbs... OK, this is just an observation from someone who has lived in SoCal for 26 years, but typically, beaches tend "lie lower" than hills.)  The writer is very clearly somebody residing in, or infatuated with, the Anaheim Hills area in hilly Northern Orange County (see: Anaheim Hills listed first, followed by Villa Park which is virtually the same neighborhood as Anaheim Hills) who is in a "pissing match" with coastal Southern Orange County (see: listing Mission Viejo and San Clemente as lower class than Anahiem Hills.  The problem with that is the that the median income in San Clemente is $80,000 and the median price for a home is well over one million dollars.  The same applies to Mission Viejo, whose median income is $90,000 and a million dollars will get you a 50 year-old fixer upper.)  I've re-written the article; it's not perfect, but I feel it is a much better approach to this subject matter.


 * Thanks, I appreciate your willingness to clean this up. FYI, Malibu is very hilly. -Will Beback 06:25, 10 April 2006 (UTC)
 * True. But Malibu is a much more famous, and popular with the rich, for it's 37 miles of beaches than it is for it's hills, ridges and canyons. 67.124.202.29 03:10, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Airports
I removed the airports from the list of major cities, as there was already an airport list under Transportation. Also, I updated the airport list to reflect airports that currently have commerical service. I may have left an airport or two off. Dtcomposer 03:38, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Burbank
The inclusion of Burbank - 106,739 as a Major city and its inclusion as a Principal City: Burbank - 105,400 with a different population is not acceptable and needs to be changed. Dbiel 05:01, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Oceanside
Like Burbank it is listed as a Major City with 175,085 and as a Principal city with 161,029. I would think that Oceanside should be removed from the Major City List when Huntington Beach, a larger city is not considered a Major City but is definately in the same class as Oceanside. Dbiel 05:01, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Pasadena
It is also listed both as a Major and Principal City but at least with the same population both places. I would think that it should be deleted from the Principal City List Dbiel 05:01, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

East Los Angeles
I am deleting this from the list of principal city simply due to the fact that is not a city but rather an unicorporated area. -signed by an anon IP
 * East L.A. is an unincorporated area under complete jurisdiction by Los Angeles County, there had been many attempts to have the 3.5 square mile zone annexed by the city of Los Angeles and incorporation efforts in the early 1990's had failed. The southern sector of East L.A. was made into the Commerce in the 1930's. If East L.A. was an official city government or municipality of over 140,000 residents, it would be the 6th most populated in L.A. county. + 71.102.32.144 (talk) 13:53, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

FIRES
This area is on fire. Two of these are arson related. Need a mention here. This shit is all over the news. 65.173.104.140 22:25, 23 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Uh, it's all over the news, so why bother? Wikipedia has a longer viewpoint. It, however, would be good to mention the tendency for the dry rural areas to catch fire as well as a mention of sociopathic reasons that arson might occur. Binksternet 22:47, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

The South Land
>> "Southern California, also colloquially known as SoCal or the South Land" <<

I'm sorry, but what the hell? I've lived in Southern California my entire life, and not once have I ever heard it referred to as "the South Land."

I hear the phrase on KFI every so often. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Special:Contributions/ (talk)

I too reside in SoCal (Oceanside/Vista), and I have not heard the term "South Land" very often either, but it does sound familiar. I think I've heard it said before on KNX 1070 radio, but I thought they were referring to an area of LA. Anyone else know anything about this term? Ryrodman1 02:22, 3 October 2007 (UTC)I was Born in Glendale So.Cal And have heard Southland mentioned often for Southern california. Let's face it tge North (I beleive everything North of the Tehachapis Mountains) is well more "eastern in attitude the South Land is more midwestern, Southern US and Cosmopolitan and Hispanic. Too bad we cant resolve the Northern California "problem"< By a SoCal Republic a new State of Southern California!


 * I corrected your poor spelling and grammar, SoCal Republic. You're among the many Southern Californians feel more regionally loyal and identify with the Southern half than the whole state itself. San Francisco Bay area and "the Monterey or Mendocino Limousine Liberals" areas overshadows the "Coastless Centrist Conservative" Central Valleys, coasts, northernmost and easternmost counties, and some denizens of Fresno or surrounding counties want a separate state too. Must be the whole state government is centered on Sacramento, but originally came from Berkeley, Monterey and Hollywood, and represents a strip of land from Sonoma or Mendocino to San Diego around La Jolla or San Clemente. Anywhere south (more like east) of you is becoming more of a "border-land", the Aztlan nationalist groups in Hispanic communities want Mexican "reclaimation" or annexation by another country, others preferably want their own nation-state: VIVA LA RAZA CHICANO-MEXICANO-LATINO for them. I doubt the state will break into 3, 4 or 5 smaller ones, the lines drawn somewhere around Monterey, Merced or Mono Lake.+

You guys must live under a rock. KFI 640, KNX 1070, KLAC 570 and all the TV stations refer to the "Southland" multiple times a day every day of the week. Dcmcgov 07:48, 12 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Even growing up in San Luis Obispo County, I heard that name frequently. Maybe it has gone out of style in the last 20 years or so, but I remember the tagline of one of the TV channels down there was "The Southland's ___" (greatest, best, largest, or some other superlative). It is (or was) a common term for the area. I got the feeling it was just a way of saying Greater Los Angeles Area (i.e., including Orange and Riverside counties, but probably excluding the more eastern and southern counties) without being totally L.A.-biased. --Willscrlt 22:30, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Education
I wonder if an education section would be germane? There are a number of high quality educational institutions located in this region. --70.89.197.153 (talk) 04:04, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

City List
The other day I added the county seats of under 100,000 people to this list. I see that someone else has added "other large towns of significance."

I debated adding other cities of under 100,000, but decided to limit it to county seats, as that is a tangible qualifier. Defining what makes a city "significant" is subjective and could turn into a pissing match...Indio, Santa Maria, and Barstow were the three cities added. Why not Palm Springs (certainly has better name recognition)? Why not Ojai? Why not Laguna Beach? etc., etc.

Also, the cities added had populations that were not verifiable with the listed source for the already-listed cities (California Department of Finance) or the Wikipedia-standard source (U.S. Census Bureau) (and in at least one case was egregiously off from either of those two sources).

Therefore, I have removed that section. I have also removed the section that lists Mexicali and Tijuana as "border towns considered part of Southern California" - they are not in California, and therefore should not be listed in an article about California. --Dtcomposer (talk) 22:31, 16 March 2009 (UTC)


 * OK if you must in order for this article to comply with the Wikipedia rules. These three cities have tremendous population growth rates in the past decade or starting around 1980, much of the surrounding desert or chapparal was converted into suburban housing tracts, and the frequent migrant labor/winter resident populations adds onto the "24 new residents a day" statistic for the Coachella, Santa Maria and Victor valleys. The border towns are directly facing the U.S.-Mexican border to feel like it's a geopolitical portion of Southern Cal., nowadays Tijuana is a "second half" of San Diego and Mexicali-Calexico functions like one singular community combined by free trade, cultural ties and some political importance. I know a new terminology in Spanish for the "twinning" border-town phenomenon: "AltaBaja Califas" or in the Wikipedia search engine, I found Bajalta California to provide fodder for this explanation of the inclusion (now removed) of Tijuana and Mexicali on the city listings. + —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.102.2.206 (talk) 15:50, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

"For more" or "See also"?
An editor mentioned that the following lead-ins are not "fair" for this article.

I do kind of agree that it is rather pessimistic to highlight the Earthquakes at the top of the article. The link to the schools is not negative in any way I can see, though. But do these really belong at the top of the article like disambiguations? They don't really seem to be meeting that purpose. Perhaps they would be better in the "See alo" section of the article. Is there anything in the WP:MOS that gives suggestions here? &mdash; Will scrlt ( “Talk” ) 14:03, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I truly think that they don't belong at the top of the article, just like a disambiguation. In the same sense we can put dozens of {for}. Why put those about colleges and not about restaurants? These links belong, in the worst case to the "See Also" section. But at the top? It's kind of funny, and the reader can really handle reading Southern California without reading those two articles. YemeniteCamel (talk) 19:10, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Removed descriptive section on LA neighborhoods
I removed the following from the article, because, while it is a good thing if we had some text like this, the current version is so riddled with sterotypes, odd inclusions and exclusions, and other errors of interpretation that it would be better not to have any text. It's a really hard task to describe whole neighborhoods in a sentance or two, and while I admire the audacity, this is not a succesful version. Please feel free to improve the copy I include below. Hopefully we can get this up to a good standard... JesseW 09:22, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The text I removed
The Los Angeles Westside is known for its showbiz types, with predominantly affluent white as well as a large Jewish populations. The San Fernando Valley is regarded as the X-rated film capital. South Central Los Angeles is noted for its troubled African American population, with frequent drive-by shootings. The Los Angeles Eastside has predominantly poor working-class Latino neighborhoods as well as several gentrified neighborhoods. The San Gabriel Valley may be best known for its large lower-middle-class to upper-class Chinese American populations with 4 major suburban "Chinatowns" and with contigious cities approaching Asian American majorities.

The text we should work on fixing up
The Los Angeles Westside is known for its showbiz types, with predominantly affluent white as well as a large Jewish populations. The San Fernando Valley is regarded as the X-rated film capital. South Central Los Angeles is noted for its troubled African American population, with frequent drive-by shootings. The Los Angeles Eastside has predominantly poor working-class Latino neighborhoods as well as several gentrified neighborhoods. The San Gabriel Valley may be best known for its large lower-middle-class to upper-class Chinese American populations with 4 major suburban "Chinatowns" and with contigious cities approaching Asian American majorities.
 * "Forget it Jake, it's...Chinatown..."


 * Southern Californian whites are at it again, get out the P-C police and make sure the article mentions all those poor blue-collar rural white folk in the High Desert are gonna commit a domestic terrorist attack on the poor diverse denizens of L.A. city/county. + 71.102.3.86 (talk) 20:11, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Critizism involving SoCal & San Diego
I was wondering if there should a critism section. Basicially, there has been some complaints, especially in San Diego, that they get left out on "Southern California", mainly by the media. For example, there is a radio station that considered themselves "The best sports talk station in Southern California", yet, they do not even broadcast in San Diego. This has also kinda spun off the term "LoCal".


 * If you can find some sources then go for it. But I don't follow your logic regarding the radio station. They could be, or claim to be, the best sports station in the country or the world without having to broadcast to those areas. Anyway, the tendency of users of "SoCal" to mean "Greater LA., Long Beach, and Orange County" is noteworthy. -Willmcw 19:33, August 15, 2005 (UTC)


 * I guess I've never really noticed that. Greater LA is referred to as the "Southland" not Southern California.  By the way, I lived there all my life, and to refer to Southern California as "SoCal" is a Northern Californian thing (and highly annoying).LordSnow 22:36, 12 September 2005 (UTC)


 * "SoCal" was a sloppy abbreviation of mine rarely used south of Point Conception, which LordSnow was correct to question. I meant "Southern California". -Willmcw 09:53, 13 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Southland and SoCal refer to the LA Basin, including Orange County, by common usage. As a San Diegan, I really don't want to be "merged" with the area.  Technically, Southern California includes San Diego, but culturally and by common usage, it really does not.  My 2 cents. Dananderson 19:43, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Please speak for you self. I live in San Diego, but I don't mind if San Diego is considered Southern California. In fact, I believe it is, both culturally and terroritory wise. I don't believe that two places (Los Angeles and San Diego) have to have the same culture in order to be considered "Southern California". Think of it this way: There are different parts of Los Angeles right? Think about Bevelerly Hills compared to South Central. Both completely different places and cultures right? San Diego may be considered conservative while Los Angeles is considered liberal, but that does not make San Diego not Southern California culture wise.


 * Agreed. I have lived in both San Diego and Los Angeles (as well as Ventura and Orange Counties), and San Diego is included in Southern California technically, geographically, culturally and in common usage.  This is common knowledge, and while there may be a handful of "hardcore" San Diegans that somehow feel a need to seperate themselves from any relationship or assocation to Los Angeles, that is simply impossible. Dcmcgov 14:56, 2 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Approved. I live in Southern California and I see alot of prejudice against others, not by ethnicity(Which is one thing in most schools and psycological help) but also by apperance, see lookism. You see, I witnessed a chav who listened to hiphop and rap not because he likes it for the music, but because it's trendy. anyway, he pulled down his pants in front of a girl showing his genitals, nothing happened, just a simple warning, when my raver friend begin talking about how he support Mitt Romney over a democrat he gets in huge trouble, mostly because "SoCal" is slowly stripping off human rights, and only allow the trendys freedom. I have some sources if you guys wish, because it's not only me, it's alot more people from different areas in SoCal. You know, maybe I should move away from a dumpster and to a safer more friendly state, or infact, move to Canada. I'm sick of seeing teenagers mistreated over music taste and political beliefs. So much for the constitution eh, Barrack Obama? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryan Zeron (talk • contribs) 06:02, 2 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Good story you shared with us on where Southern Californian morals or values are headed, and there is plenty of classism in a place where over half the population may end up on the federal poverty range soon in this "new" troubled depressed economy. Old timer Southern Californians mostly of rural white Midwestern background find their community is alot different and it does breed a reactionary ultra-conservative reaction in the suburbs and affluent retired communities of the Inland Empire, Valleys or Deserts. They became hotbeds for racist Neo-Nazis, Fringe religious groups and redneck stereotypes. + 71.102.3.86 (talk) 20:07, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Santa Clarita
Yet one more city listed both as a major and Principal City but will different population totals, Updated US census reports from the year 2000 (official) and 2005 (estimated) figures, as the Santa Clarita Valley was one of the several "edge cities" to form in the late 20th century, by the so-called "third wave" of suburban development, after the first wave brought Long Beach and the San Fernando Valley (1910s to 40s), the second wave made Pomona and Orange County (1950s to 70s), and the third wave pushed people to the Inland Empire and Desert cities from 1980 to 2010. Suburban sprawl seems to center in the geographic center of L.A. County (between Maywood, Pico Riviera and Downey) and expand 100 to 120 miles in all four directions, therefore Southern Cal. must be the ultimate global metro area. + 71.102.7.77 (talk) 10:11, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Santa Clarita - 187,600 (a major city)
 * Santa Clarita - 167,954 (a principal city).

Column formatting in college and universities section
I've removed the column formatting in the college and universities section. It broke all the edit section links because the headings were inside the columns templates. Section editing should never be disabled in articles because sections without an edit link don't conform to user expectations. As it says on my user page, I'm blind, so I don't notice any major problems with this change. However if it has a substantial impact for sighted users, reformat the colleges and universities section but make sure that section edit links still appear beside *every* section. Graham 87 15:49, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
 * i went in and added a couple more colleges (mostly from ie) that were not on the list. but after i previewed it, it looked a bit tacky to me, so i split it into two sections for better presentation. i also made sure colleges list was alphabetized.Snoopyloopy (talk) 22:32, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

I-210/State Route 210
i'm removing the part in parenthesis that states that in effect the entire route will be an interestate (it currently isn't signed as one from fontana to junction with 10 in redlands) because when the stretch from fontana to the 215 opened, i remember the article about it quoting a transportation official saying that they would NOT seek to upgrade it to interstate status as there would be no added benefit (aka federal dollars) for the effort. of course, seeing the length of time it's been open, i don't have that specific paper in front of me. but it was the press enterprise if anyone has an account to search old issues.Snoopyloopy (talk) 22:32, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Would like to know where SoCal came from?
Article great! But no explanation as to where SoCal started (was Born Glendale,SoCal ) Up till the 1980s never heard SoCal used for Southern California. Thanks! AfternoonMnSoCalKid (talk) 23:49, 17 August 2009 (UTC)


 * A trendy "valley speak" or "surfer talk" dialect invention from the likes of like, for sure, totally of young adults from more posh/affluent parts of the L.A. basin in the 1980s. The valley speak moved outward from L.A. and soon adapted by other young adults in America by the end of that decade, but they all grown up and lost the juvenile code speak. San Fernando Valley has been more diverse like the inner-city of L.A. when it comes to language diversity, and Southern Cal. has over 100 languages plus Spanish being dominant by a plurality of over 5 million Angelenos alone. + 71.102.3.86 (talk) 20:16, 29 September 2009 (UTC)


 * I would disagree with that hypothesis of the origin of the term. The term has been around since *at least* the mid 1950s.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.181.178.202 (talk) 15:41, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

What about the statehood movement? I think this has a long contemporary history... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.82.148.179 (talk) 03:57, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Portal Order
It should be according to the population, largest to smallest. Sound logical right? I'm sure User: SoCal L.A. is assuming good faith but every time he adds something to the article he very sneak rearranges it to the order the specific order he wants it as seen here:. Any thoughts? Thanks House1090 (talk) 06:12, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


 * House i have noticed a tendency in you where you constantly try to elevate the Inland Empire (a region) over cities (smaller in population than regions) who have a larger sphere of influence and greater importance in the world. You are trying to arrange them based on population however the San Diego and Los Angeles portals refer to only cities while the Inland Empire refers to a region. Perhaps now you understand. SoCal L.A. (talk) 06:28, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Yea the IE needs credit for being the 14th largest metro in the US and 25th in the New World. Okay then IE goes under SoCal above LA followed by SD ect. I dont have nothing against any one, specially you that has done so much, but I honestly think population will stop future edit wars and it will keep everything straight. What you think is important may not be important to me or some one else, in this case population is the way to go. I will change it to the order stated above and we wil have to wait for a third opinion. House1090 (talk) 06:35, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't think you should be the one who decides the order. However it was hardly important to me, just more logical to put cities before regions. After all no one knows of the IE like they do Los Angeles or San Diego. SoCal L.A. (talk) 06:40, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Okay well population seems logical as thats how wiki write down the list of cities in California. And I know the IE, I'm someone. Now if Regions go before cities why is SoCal ahead of LA and SD? House1090 (talk) 06:43, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I thought it would seem obvious. This article is about SoCal. I thought you were going to wait for the third opinion before changing it? SoCal L.A. (talk) 06:46, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

One-revert rule, House per your agreement. I see this as the first, this as number 2, and this as number 3. I recommend you revert yourself until this is resolved on this talk page. Alanraywiki (talk) 06:48, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


 * First one I did not revert, rearranged. 2nd one was my first and only revert. 3rd one I rearranged not the way I had it before, look at it again. House1090 (talk) 06:53, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


 * (ec)::Reverting is not just pressing undo. Rearranging someone else's content multiple times is the same thing.  See Reverting for definitions on reverting. Alanraywiki (talk) 07:01, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


 * If you still want want me to put it the old way I will, and I will just wait until tomorrow. House1090 (talk) 06:58, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


 * That would be the proper thing to do. In the meantime, because it is just the two of you in disagreement, a third opinion request would be appropriate here. Alanraywiki (talk) 07:01, 31 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Yea I was going to do that. House1090 (talk) 07:19, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Major Central Business District
Only cities with 200K downtowns should be here, and w/ major significance i.e. county seat w/ population exceeding 200K. As the heading says Major central business districts. Also lets try to keep downtowns, not other districts in a city. Thanks, House1090 (talk) 04:27, 15 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Who set the 200,000 threshold for a major city? Alanraywiki (talk) 04:42, 15 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Well thats what we were using for the SoCal article, 200K+. House1090 (talk) 21:33, 15 March 2010 (UTC)


 * There is no rule that says it has to be 200K. Your revert does not have a good enough revert. A large city does not necessarily have a "good" downtown. Downtown Glendale is a major CBD being headquarters to companies like fox. Also Century City is another CBD that is also the headquarters of many companies. I am for adding back what you removed. SoCal L.A. (talk) 22:02, 15 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Also they are major CBD's. Size does not make something major. As far as downtown it has to do with how many and what companies are there. Glendale has a much larger skyline then Riverside and San Bernardino. SoCal L.A. (talk) 22:04, 15 March 2010 (UTC)


 * How is Century City a downtown area? Skyline has nothing to do with how large a downtown is, San Bernardino and Riverside's downtown has county offices and is the center for a larger region. Besides there is no "Downtown Glendale" article either. Also, how is Burbank a major CBD? The city has a population less than 120K. House1090 (talk) 23:27, 15 March 2010 (UTC)


 * It's really not that big of a deal, sorry if i seemed to "explode". Well to me Burbank and perhaps Century City and Westwood are all home to headquarters of major companies, that can make a CBD major. I also think i made a list of what companies Burbank hosts. Burbank is also where a lot of movie and film industry corporate offices are being moved to. As for Century City and Westwood, they are popular tourist destinations, i.e. Wilshire Blvd. In this case it is population that makes it major but the amount of corporate offices and tourism it receives. SoCal L.A. (talk) 00:17, 16 March 2010 (UTC)


 * They may be major districts, but they are not the central business district. CBD are usually downtowns. House1090 (talk) 00:49, 16 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Good point. So perhaps Century City, Westwood, and Glendale be removed? I still think Burbank should stay though just because how many corporate offices it hosts. Also it is central to the SFV. SoCal L.A. (talk) 00:52, 16 March 2010 (UTC)


 * LA is the hub for the SFV, but I can live with your proposal. House1090 (talk) 00:55, 16 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Haha okay, I will make the changes so you wont violate your 1RR. SoCal L.A. (talk) 02:18, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

"Not by metro but regions"
What does this mean? Metropolitan areas are regions as well, and calling LA and Orange Counties the "Coast" is ridiculous, as they consist of much more than that. all that was accomplished in this edit was the removal of a link to Greater Los Angeles Area for no clear reason. --TorriTorri(talk/contribs) 03:51, 15 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Coastal Southern California are the coastal counties, that doesn't mean it only consist of the coast. Inland SoCal however are the counties or areas situated father inland with no coast. Maybe it should of been Coastal Region, or the basin. House1090 (talk) 04:21, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Seeing as there are no sources for these allegations, the best way to link the relevant articles is to use their titles. Also, I've readded the link to Greater Los Angeles Area due to your lack of a rationale for removing it in your response. --TorriTorri(talk/contribs) 06:02, 15 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Inland SoCal source here: Coastal Socal counties must be thethe counties near the coast. Inland SoCal not the same division as the rest of GLAA. In fact it should be the the basin region. Take a look at the newer divisions, hopefully it makes more sense now. House1090 (talk) 17:25, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Difference in the Classification of cities
There are two seperate categories for cities. but there is not much difference between the size of the cities in the subdivision.

Source of Population Totals
I have been having a difficult time finding the source used for the population totals listed in this article. I did find one source http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/prelim06/t4al_ca.htm that lists totals for all but two of the listed cities that fall within the same approximate range. Burbank would be the one major exception in that it indicate a variance of over 30%. The second exception would be East Los Angeles which did not appear on the list as a city in California, but was probably because it is not a city but rather an unincorporated area

Awkward
One of the captions in this article states: "on a sunset October day" Sunset isn't an adjective and this doesn't make sense anyway - it was sunset-like all day long? Now, at very northern latitudes, you can have twilight conditions for most of the daylight hours, but not in LA unless something has gone terribly wrong with the Earth's axis. You probably wouldn't say "on a sunset" in any case. It would be okay to say "at sunset on an October day" If you're worried about character count "at sunset on a Fall day" also works or even just "at sunset" (in LA there's not much to distinguish Fall from other parts of the year and, in all places, sunsets look about the same year round no matter what the season. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.51.66.32 (talk) 10:51, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Southern California. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140912050950/http://www.csac.counties.org/images/users/1/2008population.pdf to http://www.csac.counties.org/images/users/1/2008population.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 17:44, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

High school sports
If there's going to be mention of high school sports, it should include more than rugby. Personally, I would leave high school-level out altogether; it is way too big for a intro article such as this one. And I'm not sure that high school sports are considered notable. Leschnei (talk) 15:43, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

The real cause of Northern/Southern California. Ocean water temps.
Actually this article misses the main cause- That the Pacific Ocean waters off of Point Conception are 8- 10f warmer on average then the Alaskan current that runs down all the northern coastal areas. The California current off of Point Conception is visibly clearer and bluer then the gray northern Alaskan current. Also,the waters in soucal can warm up to 80f in summer. That's far above the little warming in the north. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:642:4101:4167:40AE:1F73:64E6:AD1 (talk) 17:50, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Properly known as "southern California"?
Isn't this area properly known as southern California, but the "S" is capitalized in the article when it begins a sentence (or as used in the title)? –Newportm (talk • contribs) 22:20, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * "Southern" here is a compass direction only; it is not truly part of a proper name, hence, the correct capitalization is southern California. If CA were to split into two or three political divisions, then, there might be a "true" Southern California. 207.210.134.83 (talk) 20:46, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I couldn't agree more. Northern and southern California are functional regions, not (should-be-capitalised) formal regions. It already seems that Wikipedians, writers, journalists, &c. have divided California to their liking (note that the former feel no need to cite WP:RS in the respective articles because "everybody knows"). I suppose the next logical step is to pretend that this division has some official sanction. -- 75.111.19.160 (talk) 03:44, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the input. Shall we let this item mature here on the talk page before concluding we have reached consensus and effecting corrective edits? –Newportm (talk • contribs) 05:48, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Rs use it both ways; a quick Google shows "s" may be a bit more popular. see Google search Rjensen (talk) 15:40, 16 December 2012 (UTC)
 * With no compelling contrary argument above to show inline instances of the place name as though it were a distinct geopolitical entity, I put inline instances of "Southern California" to lowercase, as "southern California," and similar changes. –Newportm (talk • contribs) 18:49, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 09:52, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Lax sign.jpg

Image
I wonder if this image could fit into the article, as it shows the use of the term very well.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:38, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Infobox photo - all photos of the coast
Could use an inland (desert?) photo in the infobox gallery. Facts707 (talk) 00:23, 10 August 2015 (UTC)