Talk:List of cities and towns in Russia by population

Saint Petersburg Federal City vs. Saint Petersburg

I've actually been wondering about the accuracy of the definition of the city of Saint Petersburg. Does it include the entire federal subject of Saint Petersburg Federal City, or is Saint Petersburg merely a part of the federal subject? I am specifically speaking of such "cities" as Kolpino, Krasnoye Selo, Kronshtadt, Zelenogorsk, Sestroretsk, Lomonosov, Pavlovsk, Petergof, and Pushkin, which are all part of the Federal City of Saint Petersburg. If they are all separate "cities", would the area/population of the City of Saint Petersburg be reduced by the numbers of these cities? I've been looking at a spreadsheet of the 2002 Russian census results from www.perepis.ru/ (in Russian) and cannot tell what the official definition of the city is. Backspace 18:58, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Short answer:

the city of Saint Petersburg and the federal city of Saint Petersburg are the same thing. The population/area of all municipal entities is included into the total figures for St. Petersburg overall.

Long answer:

Federal cities of Russia enjoy a special status. A "federal city" is not the same as a regular city/town, but it is a city nevertheless. Federal cities, being equal in status to other federal subjects, are, however, more similar to them in that regard. All municipal towns/urban settlements under jurisdiction of Saint Petersburg are considered to be parts of (and located on) its territory; just like all settlements located on the territory of, for example, Krasnodar Krai, are considered to be parts of that krai's territory.

It should also be noted that each federal subject of Russia is responsible for defining its administrative divisions. The (federal) city of Saint Petersburg, for example, is subdivided into eighteen city districts. These city districts are further subdivided into municipal districts and/or municipal towns and settlements. Territories of these municipal districts/towns/settlements are, of course, included into the territory of the larger city districts, which in their turn comprise the federal city of Saint Petersburg as a whole.

I realize this is confusing. Perhaps if you think of federal cities as a hybrid of a city and a federal subject it would help. Calling subdivisions of Saint Petersburg "municipal towns" and "municipal settlements" is probably the most confusing part to you, but it's important to remember that it's just terminology Saint Petersburg officials chose to use. Note that in Moscow all subdivisions are called "districts" (okrugs), even though some of them had also once been towns and settlements. Zelenograd administrative okrug was even at one time called "the Administrative Okrug City of Zelenograd".—Ëzhiki (ërinacëus amurënsis) 19:25, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

What's the sense of listing Zelenograd separately from Moscow, then? I suggest we combine them. Conscious 05:24, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I was hoping someone would eventually write articles on the rest of the Moscow okrugs. Their okrugs have essentially the same status as republic/oblast/krai raions, and we have articles on those. Besides, Zelenograd used to be separate from Moscow, so its history is not exactly the same as that of Moscow.—Ëzhiki (ërinacëus amurënsis) 12:04, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Let's be consistent and either remove Zelenograd or add Kolpino, Peterhof and all. (Unless there are some differences in status, of course.) The first option looks more logical. Conscious 13:14, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I didn't know you were a deletionist :) I'd rather have separate articles on all Moscow and St. Petersburg subdivisions, but I realize that may not happen overnight (and what's already there about Moscow is a horrid mess that needs to be sorted out). If you prefer to merge them into the main articles yourself, I'm not going to be the one to stop you—I don't give a damn about Moscow one way or the other (I only edit Moscow-related material when it is part of a bigger picture) and have too much on my plate now to worry about St. Petersburg. The only recommendation I can make is to inform the Russians of your intent before you make any changes. Cheers, Ëzhiki (ërinacëus amurënsis) 13:31, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh... I was talking about this list, not articles. I'm absolutely sure that the subdivisions of Moscow and Saint Petersburg should have dedicated articles. Conscious 14:01, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Ah, yes, I misunderstood. To tell the truth, I am not exactly sure how to handle this list. Zelenograd is now a part of Moscow (its okrug), but Kolpino, Peterhof et al. still retain their town status despite being parts of St. Petersburg. The two federal cities are just structured differently, which is where our problems originate. I'd say we should remove all Moscow subdivisions from this list (because they are not cities/towns as the list title suggests), but add municipal towns under jurisdiction of St. Petersburg to the St. Petersburg section (because they are towns). It may seem inconsistent, but so is the Russian federal cities' administrative structure.—Ëzhiki (ërinacëus amurënsis) 14:35, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

You Rule!

To whoever wrote up this article -- you rule! Zweifel 09:35, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

You can help in Wiktionary - to Wiki editors

The English Wiktionary's list of Russian cities is rather small and needs expansion. Only the largest cities are represented.

You can join and help to enhance the list of entries. Start with your favourite city if they don't exist yet (a regional centre or a famous city). Here are 2 examples of an entry in English and Russian (both in the English Wiktionary):

• Krasnodar
• Краснодар
• Belgorod
• Белгород

Ideally, the English entry should have at least the Russian translation and the Russian entry should link to the English one. --Anatoli (talk) 03:12, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

File:0 3d46f 31b05490 orig.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:0 3d46f 31b05490 orig.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests April 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:0 3d46f 31b05490 orig.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 22:04, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Suggested changes to article

I'd like to see a number of changes made to this list:

• Sources should be in English so people can check references easily. Possible pages to use are [1] [2]. Are there any English-language summaries within the official Russian census pages?

• The list is way too long, and should be cut to perhaps the top 50 or so

• It should stick to being a current population list, and not also have 2002 data. This would mean a number of columns could be deleted, helping the table look less cluttered.

• Too many images in the gallery. People should be able to see the References from the bottom of the table.

Any thoughts on this? Eldumpo (talk) 09:23, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes, here are mine:

• English-language sources are only preferable to native sources when they are of equal or higher quality. Neither of the two sites you mentioned are anywhere near being of the same quality as the official census data; heck, I don't think they can even be considered reliable at all! Just some amateur stats cruft which Internet is full of (this doesn't mean the figures are inaccurate, but it does mean that those sites themselves are not reliable sources). That said, I don't believe the official stats are published in English (which I agree would be nice).
• The list is long because it includes all cities/towns in Russia. But since Wikipedia is not paper, I don't see how it is a problem. What is it to be gained by trimming the complete list to just top fifty entries?
• I'm currently going through all articles to update them with the final 2010 Census results. After I'm done, I'll update this list to use the final 2010 data as well (and of course, if someone beats me to that task, I don't mind in the slightest :)) As far as removing columns goes, once again, I just don't see what it is to be gained by it. Having the results of the two most recent censuses shows whether the population is growing or going down.
• I do agree that there are too many images and I'm not all too happy about their placement either.

My additional suggestion is to merge this list with the list of cities and towns in Russia (which is incomplete and is a subset of this list anyway).—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); February 4, 2013; 14:37 (UTC)

• If those two sources I picked do have the right data, then how can they be described as of lower quality? Citypopulation.de is a long established source which I regard as reliable, and I propose to add it as an external link in any case.
• Why does the list include 'all' cities. Many lists on Wikipedia are ranked like this one but just list the top/leading entries on the topic.
• I don't mind the idea of one column listing the last census count but this list is dominated by a previous census.
• Whilst that other article needs work, I don't see how merging them would help. The list of top cities would have even more entries to wade through. Eldumpo (talk) 22:14, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

• Having been around on the Internet long enough is not a criterion by which we judge reliability. Please read WP:RS, it explains very well what can and what cannot be considered a reliable source. Also look at WP:SPS while you are at it.
• The data for all cities are available, so why not include them all? What's the benefit of removing the rest of the list? In what way does the list become better after all the entries below 50 are removed? They are sorted by population anyway, and other sort keys are also available.
• It probably would be better if the previous census column went after the current census. I don't even mind too terribly if it were removed, but I'd rather not do it unless more people complain about it.
• I didn't say it would help the issues you raised here. Mine was more of a side comment, pointing out that the other list is a complete subset of this one and, as such, is redundant.

Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); February 7, 2013; 22:35 (UTC)

I raised a thread at WP:RSN, and whilst only one person has responded, the post and my subsequent findings would not seem to suggest that the citypopulation source is not reliable. Notwithstanding that, can the second citation be made direct as it seems to go to a page where there are further word/excel page options.

We may not agree on the length of the list, so as a compromise why not use a 100k cut-off (which tallies with Citypopulation). Also, you said earlier the list includes 'all' cities, in which case the page name should then change to List of most populous cities in Russia.

What about agreeing that the 2002 census column remains so people can see the actual population figures, but the 2002 rank and change columns get deleted? Regards. Eldumpo (talk) 09:15, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

We might not agree on the length of the list, but I would still very much like to hear the benefit of cutting it. Can you elaborate, please? It's not just cutting the list for the sake of cutting it, I hope?

I'll comment on WP:RSN later today as well and also post on WT:RUSSIA; perhaps it'll draw further comments.

I don't mind seeing the change column gone (it's easily calculated anyway), and am ambivalent about the 2002 rank column (on one hand, it's a good indicator of the trend, and the only one if the change column is removed; on the other, it's indeed only marginally useful). Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); February 11, 2013; 13:15 (UTC)

I've invited the members of WP:RUSSIA, WP:GEOG, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities to provide further input (both here and on the RS-noticeboard). If you can think of other applicable WikiProjects whose input could benefit this discussion, please don't hesitate to invite them as well.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); February 11, 2013; 15:30 (UTC)

• I basically agree with Ezhiki. Right now, the census results is the only reliable source on the population, and we do not even have reliable sources on the current population - they are decentralized and inconsistent. I do not see any harm in having a long list. Note that in Russia a town/city is a locality which has a town status confirmed by a decision of the parliament - not just anything which has multistory buildings and looks like town. Concerning the 2002 results, as soon as we have the 2010 results in order, those can go. As far as I am concerned, the images can go as well.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:09, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Return

• OK, there seems to be no consensus to shorten the list, but there needs to be some clarity about what the list represents. Further up this thread there is a suggestion that the list includes all towns/cities, but the intro to the article states it is only those over 50,000. Can someone confirm?
• There does seem to be consensus to reduce all the columns related to 2002, except (for now) the one that relates to the actual population figures, and. I plan to make this change. Eldumpo (talk) 19:59, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
  • The list represents an enumeration of cities and towns in Russia sorted by population, of course ;) It includes all cities/towns with the population of over 50,000 (and including the rest, should there be an interest in doing so, is a trivial task).
  • In absence of any further comments regarding the columns dealing with the 2002 Census, I'd say go ahead. It's certainly not an enjoyable task one would be looking forward to doing, so thank you for volunteering!
  • Just as an FYI, I'm planning to update the 2010 column with the final results (as opposed to the preliminary results currently in place) in the next month or so. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 14, 2013; 20:30 (UTC)
    • Thanks for swift response. Is there a formal difference between a 'town' and 'city' in Russia? If so, how many of the current entries are towns, and what do you think about removing those, making the list Cities only, and then potentially another list could be created for Towns. Or should the list refer to Settlements instead if there is no formal difference, or should the 50k threshold being used be integrated into the title? Eldumpo (talk) 22:40, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

      No, there is no formal difference. Settlements are a different thing, but none of them is in the list.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:49, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

A number of the 2002-related columns have now been deleted. After I started the process, a helpful IP finished the changes. Also, can the 2nd citation at the article point to a particular page. At present, it appears to point to an 'index' page. Eldumpo (talk) 17:02, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

It'll need to be changed after the figures are updated with the final numbers anyway. Thanks for taking care of the cleanup, by the way!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 18, 2013; 12:08 (UTC)

ranking numbers

Why are there ranking numbers missing from the end? They are alright until #322, then they go like this: 326, 327, 328, 329, 334, 342, 344, 346, 349, 351, 355, 357. There are only 335 cities on the list, of which the last one is not a city anymore. So is there a reason for the gaps on the list? 85.217.42.90 (talk) 23:58, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Because the list originally contained all the cities/towns with the population of over 50,000 as of the 2002 Census. When the 2010 data became available, the populations of some towns dipped below 50,000. They were not removed from the list (because the 2002 column is still available), but they dropped in rankings; hence the gaps.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); July 26, 2013; 12:11 (UTC)

So those are correct current rankings? :O 85.217.42.90 (talk) 07:04, 5 August 2013 (UTC)