Talk:Redondo Beach, California

Unsourced edit

User:Redondo Lover has repeatedly added this edit to the article. User:Fettlemap reverted the edit as "unsourced and puffery", and I have reverted it as unsourced and POV. The input of other editors about the appropriateness of the edit (if a source was included) would be appreciated. Magnolia677 (talk) 13:08, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Redondo Lover respectfully asks for specific information. Tell me specifically what you don't agree with and we can find compromise language or I will cite. To use such big words as "unsourced" and "puffery", while I may be impressed, they do absolutely nothing to pinpoint the text in question. This is especially true when many of the text I added or amended is/are placed in paragraphs that don't contain citations prior. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redondo Lover (talk • contribs) 22:48, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

User:Redondo Lover, please see the very helpful guides for editing Wikipedia on your talk page. You have it backwards as the entire entry needs a reference. Wikipedia is not the place to add information and hope that a reference might be found someday. Please add the reference as you contribute to the article. Fettlemap (talk) 23:13, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

@Redondo Lover: Your edit makes strong assertions which must be supported by a reliable source. In addition to the excellent advice of User:Fettlemap, let me specifically ask you to read WP:PROVEIT. Please revert your edit until you are able to provide a reliable source. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 23:50, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Comment-- I'm responding to a request to check a current edit war on this article. First, it's best that everyone abide by our WP:BRD guideline when editing an article. That is, once an edit reversion has been made (especially with a request to discuss on the talk page) , then the parties should not re-add any text until a consensus has been formed here. Therefore I've reverted the article back to it's original form with the talk page request.

As regards the Neighborhood section of this article, I think one of the main problems is that almost the entire section is unreferenced. Rather than my placing "cite needed" tags throughout, or immediately excising all the unreferenced text, I suggest it be entirely rewritten with proper sourcing. The article needs it -- and it would be nice to see some collaboration. For example, the sentences about the AES Power Plant should be revised using sources such as [1], [2], etc. Also, the sentence Because the power plant sits on private property, this may become a very complex issue, involving the rights of a property owner is POV commentary. And would be entirely eliminated by a rewrite based only upon sourced facts. — CactusWriter ^(talk) 00:20, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Removed Lynette Fromme from the Notable People section...?

I added in Lynette Fromme, as she was at one point a resident of Redondo Beach and graduated from RUHS. It's no longer there and no explanation was given as to why it was removed by Magnolia677. Fromme moved to Redondo Beach in 1963 and attended nearby El Camino College after graduation prior to moving to Spahn Ranch, all of this information can be found on her article itself. Is it because of her connection to the Manson Family? If Patrick Kearney, a murderer, is listed, why not Lynette Fromme? She may not be notable for a good reason, but she's nonetheless notable. Since there was no grounds for deleting the information I've restored it. Syd Highwind (talk) 07:33, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

@Syd Highwind: My apology. I only meant to resize the image, but deleted Fromme as well. Thanks for adding it back. Magnolia677 (talk) 11:48, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

@Magnolia677: Oh no, it's totally fine, I just thought there was an issue with Fromme that I didn't know about! I didn't want to add anything that had been deemed disruptive in the past.

Poorly Written History Section

The history section is unfortunately very poor. There is one paragraph on actual history, then a brief paragraph on Moonstone Beach, and 90% of the "history" section is devoted to a overly detailed yet poorly explained discussion of various voting measures related to zoning under the subheading "Direct Democracy in Redondo Beach." This "Direct Democracy" section dwarfs the rest of the article and is clearly intrusive. The bulk appears to have been added on August 10, 2018 by anonymous user 47.144.152.95. It is not only overly long and of unclear significance as general background information, but it is also badly written, lacking key dates and context. It is above all confusing and an example of a single editor derailing a Wikipedia page for their own purposes. I believe it should be removed altogether, or at best condensed into a single paragraph, while the actual history of Redondo Beach should be expanded. BenEsq (talk) 13:39, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Citations and unsourced sections

There is a great deal of unsourced material in this article. Some has been tagged, some I have tagged today. This has been an outstanding problem for years (see above) and the unsourced material should be removed, if no one begins work on adding references.  // Timothy :: talk  18:57, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Unsourced material removed

This article has had major sourcing issues for over 7 years now. I removed three sections of text that were not adequately sourced: Sports, Cost of Living, and Neighborhoods. None of these topics are absolute must-haves in an article for a city. The longer this unsourced information stays up, the more likely it is that someone will take it as fact.

I would love to rewrite/work on sourcing when I have more time for research-intensive work, but for now, these sections are removed and marked as stubs. Thickynugnug (talk) 15:06, 12 April 2024 (UTC)