Talk:Los Angeles Daily News

	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).

Journalism High‑importance

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism 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.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Newspapers High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Newspapers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Newspapers 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.NewspapersWikipedia:WikiProject NewspapersTemplate:WikiProject NewspapersNewspapers articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Article title

I moved the page from Los Angeles Daily News to Daily News (Los Angeles), but then reverted to the way it was. Still, I'm confused. My reading of WP:NAME suggests that articles on publications should share the publications' actual name, not the term with widest general usage as in other articles. That leads to the question: What is the actual publication name? The masthead reads only "Daily News", yet the company literature indicates it may really be named "Daily News of Los Angeles". The latter seems the best of these two options, but either choice suggests a name change for this article. Can anyone shed a little light here? I haven't found much else in WP's policies, guidelines, or conventions to point to a clear answer. -Tobogganoggin talk 03:34, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As you found, "Daily News of Los Angeles" appears to be the official name of the paper. I can't find any naming convention that covers periodicals. There are several redirects, including the oficial title, but the current article name seems to be overwhelmingly predominant.[1] My guess is that if we asked a "man on the street" for the full title of the paper he'd say "Los Angeles Daily News". For those reasons I suggest leaving the article at the current name. -Will Beback · † · 19:09, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good point - consensus seems to have been achieved already: in this case de facto rather than de jure. -Tobogganoggin talk 02:41, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As I understand their own convention (going back to Cooke's time, and it may have changed), the name is just "Daily News", and "Daily News of Los Angeles" is just a disambiguation, ie, like "Congo-Kinshasa", not like "Guinea-Bissau". That being the case, the correct article title is "Daily News (Los Angeles)". However, the title bar on the web site says "LA Daily News" and has said "Los Angeles Daily News" recently. Web searching shows "Daily News of Los Angeles" 37,500 hits, "Los Angeles Daily News" 2,630,000 hits, so I agree with the current de facto choice. — Randall Bart Talk 18:45, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

UCLA Digital Collections link

I just added links to publicly available digitized photographs and negatives from the Los Angeles Times an the Los Angeles Daily News held in UCLA Library's Special Collections. It's a rich resource that I think others will find meaningful and useful, but I'm mentioning it here because I'm a librarian at UCLA. I had nothing to do with the creation of the project, but I still want to make sure that it's generally agreed by page editors that this doesn't represent a conflict of interest. Nafpaktitism (talk) 04:55, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Los Angeles Daily News. 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:

Added archive https://archive.is/2013.03.06-175039/http://abcas3.auditedmedia.com/ecirc/newstitlesearchus.asp to http://abcas3.auditedmedia.com/ecirc/newstitlesearchus.asp

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) 03:10, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Los Angeles Daily News. 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:

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) 07:55, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Los Angeles Daily News. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080602131703/http://www.dailynews.com/contactus to http://www.dailynews.com/contactus

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) 10:59, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]