Talk:Canoga Park, 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 (assessed as Low-importance).

Water from Colorado

The area began to subdivide the ranches after acquiring water from Colorado — can somebody explain this, please? Certainly they didn't pipe water from Colorado to California! I know that (part of) L.A.'s water supply comes from Mono Lake (with quite devastating effects on the lake's ecosystem), but from Colorado? Shouldn't that be Colorado River? And if so, when was the aequaduct or pipe to L.A. built? Lupo 13:03, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

citations

Due to much good work by editors adding citations, I moved the Refimprove|date=December 2008 message bar from top of article to bottom. Distracting to significant improvements by many of article (in my opinion). Apologize if this was improper action, am learning.---Look2See1 (talk) 21:58, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Citations needed for "Recent history" of the renaming of portions as West Hills and Winnetka in1987. Ammobox (talk) 01:13, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Colorado ?

Re: 2004 question at top; The 1919 annexation of Owensmouth to L.A. City (the town delayed, most other Valley cities joined in 1913 when aqueduct first opened) brought access to the city's 'Owens Valley -Los Angeles Aqueduct water.' Later (1930s) that source was no longer enough for the whole city, so a new Colorado River Aqueduct was built through Coachella Valley to bring Colorado River water in from near Parker Dam above Blythe, California. Believe it was part of overall Boulder Dam (Hoover Dam) project for flood control and water distribution to serve Nevada, Arizona, & California.---Look2See1 (talk) 22:16, 23 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Bunker Hill, Los Angeles which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 19:30, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Interested editors can also comment at Talk:Los Angeles Purplebackpack89 ^{(Notes Taken) (Locker)} 03:48, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Needs Picture

I am marking this article as "needs picture" for obvious reasons. Can we post a screengrab of Google Maps under Fair Use? Cypher3c (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:52, 29 September 2010 (UTC).[reply]

Afraid not. GeorgeLouis (talk) 21:33, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Geography

Actual boundaries should be included. Currently describes geography by listing neighboring communities. A map on the DWP Engineering website shows the boundaries as De Soto Blvd on the east, Vanowen Street on the south, Shoup Ave and Topanga on the west, Roscoe Blvd and Nordoff Street on the north. http://empowerla.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Canoga-Park-Neigborhood-Council-Map.pdf Ammobox (talk) 02:07, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea! I always struggle to find a map of Canoga Park, putting one on Wikipedia would really help.Bunnyisgreat (talk) 02:54, 29 December 2020 (UTC)Bunnyisgreat[reply]

Picture

The Platt Building is pictured and is located in Reseda according to google maps. Is it not in Canoga Park and should be removed. Ammobox (talk) 02:07, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Image-Platt Building

This building is located in Winnetka, not Canoga Park. Imveracious (talk) 17:20, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Platt building isn't even located right next to Canoga Park-Winnteka border like the description implies. The Platt building is right next to the border of Winnetka-Reseda, which is a mile away from where the Canoga Park-Winnetka border is. Busition (talk) 14:44, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Canoga park

Canoga park is a city in los Angeles county. I know i grew up there. Its a city not a neighborhood!!! 65.129.148.101 (talk) 13:08, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but Canoga Park is NOT a city like Burbank or San Fernando...it is not incorporated as a city....it is officially a part of and administered by the City of Los Angeles. It's a neighborhood....just like the entire Valley (except for San Fernando and Burbank). 2603:8000:1701:FC59:9D9E:A331:928C:4693 (talk) 07:52, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nice you had a strong sense of community growing up. This designation is about local government that provides services that kids don't pay a lot of attention to. Fettlemap (talk) 13:24, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge of Owensmouth into Canoga Park, Los Angeles

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

To not merge, given that the prequel place warrants separate discussion; no consensus for any particular new name. Klbrain (talk) 08:53, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First off, "Owensmouth" is the wrong title. Article should be "Owensmouth, California", which already redirects to Canoga Park because the community of Owensmouth was renamed to Canoga Park _pbp 20:16, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merge. Owensmouth is a notable in its own right. We have several articles about the "prequel" places, such as Mission Acres (now San Fernando), Lankershim (now North Hollywood), Tropico (now Burbank), and so on. I do agree it should be moved to Owensmouth, California. jengod (talk) 22:52, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merge. Regarding renaming... As this was part of Los Angeles in 1917 (and renamed years later), it should follow the naming convention for all other L.A. neighborhoods and be moved to "Owensmouth, Los Angeles" like Sonoratown, Los Angeles. Phatblackmama (talk) 04:15, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merge. As stated by others, other articles of this nature also exist with content that would not fit into the articles for their corresponding modern communities. As these articles are, they allow for a focus on a specific moment in the history of these communities that tends to be distinct from their history after their names changed; these historical communities were also much smaller, agricultural and small-town-like, so the content of their articles are more specific to these smaller historical spaces, compared to the sprawling suburban districts that they grew to become.

What may make more sense would be to rename these as "History of (community)," with content relating to these early communities, such as Owensmouth, Mission Acres, and Lankershim, being included in articles that include a broader history of these communities before they were founded and after they were renamed; but this is a bit beyond the scope of this discussion. Christopher Arturo Aragón Vides (talk) 06:29, 3 September 2024 (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.

No got going stay svs fever

No got going stay svs fever 2603:8002:FF0:61D0:C959:430C:1D7D:C4CD (talk) 00:23, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

west hills adult day health care center got going loser down stay svs fever 2603:8002:FF0:61D0:C959:430C:1D7D:C4CD (talk) 00:25, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]