Talk:List of largest cities

Change Name to List of Larges Cities by population

I believe the title is alittle misleading as in you might thing it's about area. Changing the name would help people looking for area and help people who want to find population as well BrandonALF (talk) 12:33, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Istanbul

It is a common misconception that Turks do things properly, so when you get figures from Turkish Bureau of Statistics (TUIK)’s Address-Based Population Recording System (ADNKS) you would think that is a proper estimate of population. Here are the problems with that: our current official definition of a metropolitan area is simply the entire province, including rural areas sometimes over 100km away from the actual metro area (this was done recently as a gerrymandering tactic by the current government which gets more votes from rural areas). This usually results in overestimation of metro areas. However, in the case of Istanbul there is another problem: Istanbul’s urban sprawl has spilled over to the neighboring provinces decades ago, but those bits don’t count in the official figures. This makes Istanbul underestimated. (plus I think the figure here are 2014, so that adds to the underestimation)

The data I provide below are the official Dec.2015 figures (in thousands) from Turkish Bureau of Statistics’ ADNKS as well, but I am using county-level data under the guidance of GoogleEarth as well as first hand knowledge.

Istanbul province 14657 (i.e. official figure for metropolitan municipality). Substract rural Şile and Adalar from this to get 14608.

Uninterrupted urbanization that conects to this: Çayırova, Darıca, Dilovası, Gebze counties of Kocaeli province and MarmaraEreğlisi county of Tekirdağ province. Total population 720, bringing the total of Istanbul “urban area” or “urban agglomeration” (as defined in the respective wiki pages of these terms) to 15328.

In addition to these, there are towns that have daily commuter relations with Istanbul: Başiskele, Derince, Gölcük, İzmit, Kartepe and Körfez counties of Kocaeli province; Çerkezköy and Çorlu counties of Tekirdağ province. Total population 1375, bringing the total of Istanbul “metropolitan area” (as defined in the wiki page of this term) to 16703.

So the correct figures are 14.7 million city proper, 15.3 million urban and 16.7 million metro area, at the end of 2015.

Note: I'll post a copy of this to talk pages of other population lists in Wikipedia. Nkt777 (talk) 23:18, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

″It is a common misconception that Turks do things properly″ can you please elaborate more on the first sentence? It's Wikipedia not alex jones comment section. Thank you 37.210.185.129 (talk) 08:29, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

De-redirected

I see no reason why this page should confusingly redirect to the discussion on the agglomerations article. I've reverted it. - Aucitypops (talk) 12:43, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Dispute Disambiguation

I am not sure how this page can actually be declared to have the {{Disambig}} to quote the explanation

... is placed at the bottom of articles which exist to help readers find other articles with similar names (or which perhaps should have the same name). This concept is called Disambiguation and is used with common words such as cross, life, and work. This template automatically adds articles to Category:Disambiguation.

I would recommend that the DISAMBIG template be removed. -- billinghurst (talk) 13:55, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh my goodness yes. You're quite right. Stand by... --AndrewHowse (talk) 18:00, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

where can?

where can I find the biggest cities from a historical point of view? there's no article talking about that. I'd like to know which was the buggest city in each historical period --83.58.250.252 (talk) 17:07, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia has two articles on this topic: List of largest cities throughout history and Historical urban community sizes. They should probably be linked to from this article. --Polaron | Talk 17:12, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

And now they are.  ;-) —DragonHawk (talk|hist) 18:00, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Table

Mark J (talk · contribs) added this table, which I think is a good idea. And what's there certainly looks very nice. But I'm a bit confused about a few things:

1. What are the numbers? Population? Land area? What's the scale? Millions? Thousands?
2. Why are some numbers bold?
3. What is the difference between "Morph." and "Morph. (UN)"?
4. Any particular source for the information?

Just to be clear, I like the idea, I just think the presentation needs some clarification.  :) —DragonHawk (talk|hist) 23:37, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

OK, so I forgot to add some text explaining the table. The numbers are the rankings in each of the different lists that we have on Wikipedia. If I put the cities in the ranking according to any particular list, that would be seen as favouring one list over the others (although if people think that one list should be given greater weight, please say...) so I put them in alphabetical order. A number gets bolded if it's in the top 20 in that list. Some cities are in the top 20 for every single list, so they get bold numbers in every column. I should put links into the table to reference the different lists - the table is a compilation of information from elsewhere on Wikipedia, so you'll have to look at the individual list pages for source information. Mark J (talk) 23:52, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

I like the table. It's a nice little summary of all the other pages. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 01:25, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Since another list was added, how about adding World Gazetteer and City Population? Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 16:04, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for finding these, they look like good sources, and these sorts of things aren't easy to find. I'll add them in when I have time or unless somebody else does it first. Mark J (talk) 17:26, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Added them. Elockid ^(Talk·_Contribs) 00:10, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Does "largest" refer to population or land area?

I want to repeat the original question. Are these rankings based on population or area? The introduction to this article states: The "size" of a city can refer to either its land area or, more typically, its population. But it never says which of these definitions is used in the remainder of the article or in the table.

The table itself has seven number columns, each with a different ranking. My suspicion is that all seven of these columns are based on population, not land area. The reason that the rankings are different is because they reflect different determinations of the boundary of a city, and perhaps because they use different statistical data. But they all define "size" as population, not land area. Is this correct?

If the entire article deals solely with population rankings, then this needs to be specified clearly in the introductory paragraph and before the table itself. On the other hand, if some portions of this article deal with population rankings and other portions deal with land area rankings, that needs to be made clear. — Lawrence King ^(talk) 17:49, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Also, the very first sentence in this article should tell you what this article is about. What information is the article going to provide to the reader? Right now, the first sentence tells the reader the difficulties encountered in providing some kind of information, but there's no sign what that information is. I suggest a sentence such as "This article ranks the world's largest cities, in population and in land area, using a variety of ranking methods." — Lawrence King ^(talk) 19:22, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Since nobody has replied, I have provided a tentative introductory sentence. But since it's not clear whether this article ranks cities by population and land area, or just by population, I left the introductory sentence vague. — Lawrence King ^(talk) 20:26, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Single most lagest city

I fail to see that there is any disagreement as to what is the single most largest city in the world, as is stated in the article introduction. That sigle answer is Tokyo which on all accounts given here - apart from one, absolute official administrative size - is the definite largest (that is, most populous) city. Can we do something about said article introduction? Martinor (talk) 21:39, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Do you want to get really technical? Tokyo isn't even a city. It's a prefecture (if you're from the US, that means it's the equivalent of a State). I'm not even joking. Tokyo is a prefecture consisting mainly of towns that appear to be blended together, but in a legal sense, it's not a city. Smyslov (talk) 02:12, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm not seeing the disagreement. The introduction doesn't refer to any one city in particular. Rather it's stating that it's difficult to create a list of largest cities in the world, hence the reason why there are multiple lists on the page. Elockid (Alternate) ^(Talk) 15:19, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Redirect from "Smallest city in the world"

A person who would want to find the smallest city in the world would definitely not want to go the the list of largest cities. --99.20.128.154 (talk) 22:29, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Same question in 2015… I wanted to know if there was a smaller commune than Castelmoron-d'Albret (tricky question) but I wasn't really expecting an answer but I surely didn't expect to get the exact opposite of what I was looking for! VIGNERON * ^discut. 23:15, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Chongching

There is debate as to whether the list is correct. For example if you look at the wiki entry for Chongching in China it is much larger (28 million) than the cities on this list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rustygecko (talk • contribs) 17:08, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Largest cities by land area?

I have no problem including the most populous cities in this article to cater to everyone, however, just because most people are not bright enough to search for 'most populous cities', we shouldn't be penalised by having no info about land area since technically that's what largest city means. 'Largest population' are the terms one uses when describing the largest population. 'Largest cities' are the terms one uses to describe the cities with the largest city limits. This is an encyclopaedia, we don't need to be supporting people's misuse of the English language. At worst, I'd expect to see a table listing the largest cities by land area. Defined by the land the particular city has control over. Forget all this nonsense about the distance commuters travel and blah blah blah, we're here to find exact numbers, not how each city ranks in a bunch of lists. I'm sure this info could be obtained from each country's respective government website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.104.78.159 (talk) 03:59, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Zany Zanhe

I am sorry that I have to disturb the peace of this discussion with these comments, but a persistent editor does not leave me much choice.

Zanhe again removed a link to World's largest municipalities by population, a link that lived in peace until Zanhe became bothered because he thinks that it is a link to an "article nominated for deletion." As so often, Zanhe is wrong. The article is not nominated for deletion. The article was nominated for deletion, on 24 September 2010. Unsuccessfully, otherwise it would no longer be here.

The article has the honor to be on the long list of articles that once had been nominated for deletion. It's easy. Anybody can do that. Whether it is successful is another question.

Again, Mr. Zanhe has a difficulty discerning what is from what he wishes that should be. Also, Zanhe's wishes are highly selective. If former nomination for deletion would exclude an article from being linked to, then several links in this article would have to go as well.

• List of metropolitan areas by population had been nominated for deletion on 9 June 2007
• List of cities by surface area had been nominated for deletion on 30 March 2008

As a matter of fact, this very article World's largest cities had been nominated for deletion on 2 May 2008 (under it's old name List of cities by population.)

Honestly, at this point, I stopped looking. The search tool goes only back to 2005 anyway, and I don't have too much time on my hands.

Anyway, I don't know what to think. Several possibilities:

• Zanhe is confused
• Zanhe does not know the difference between "is" and "was"
• Zanhe does not know the difference between "nominated" and "deleted"
• Zanhe is vindictive and engages in Wikistalking
• Zanhe engages in revisionist editing and simply wants pages to go away that contradict his erroneous claim that Shanghai is the world's largest city proper by population

Be is as it may, having once been nominated for deletion is no grounds for removal. If it is, then Zanhe would have his hands full and could start right here. BsBsBs (talk) 14:47, 23 September 2011 (UTC)

BsBsBs, while I admire your knack for imagining conspiracy theories, you really need a good read of WP:Civility.

I'm well aware of the difference between nominated for deletion and pages that are actually deleted. The decision on World's largest municipalities by population was merge or redirect, meaning it should only stay as a redirect to the main article List of cities proper by population. The decision and the discussion that led to it are archived on WP:Articles for deletion/World's largest municipalities by population and I'm not going to repeat them here. Zanhe (talk) 18:15, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

You need to address your selective attention. You have problems with that. "Merge or redirect" does not mean "merge." It means "Merge or redirect." If you would take the time to go through the discussion archives, then you would find that an attempt to merge failed due to a lack of enthusiasm to do the work. Now, where is the official proof I had asked you for? I'm not holding my breath. BsBsBs (talk) 18:44, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

In other words, nobody deemed any content on World's largest municipalities by population worth merging into the main article List of cities proper by population, which is exactly why the page was nominated for deletion to begin with. And that leaves us with redirect. Whether that article is eventually merged or redirected, I don't see any reason why we should link to the low-quality content from this page. Zanhe (talk) 20:29, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Again, you suffer from selective attention, to avoid stronger language. You need to be aware that nothing is lost in WP, and everything is documented.

There had been a first attempt on a merge before the AFD. It fizzled. Nobody wanted to do the work.

After the AFD was denied, nobody wanted to do the work either. Even the nominating editor was "happy to take part in a discussion about what to merge if anyone in favour or merging would put forward such a suggestion." No suggestion forthcoming, nothing was merged, because again, it was work.

When a few months ago you asked "How to implement the decision to merge/redirect World's largest municipalities by population?" you received exactly no answer. Nobody was interested.

Your assertion that nobody deemed the content worth of merging falls flat on its crimson-read face when an editor who originally wanted the article to be killed suddenly is "happy to take part in a discussion about what to merge."

You are flogging a long dead horse.

If that's how you do your research, no wonder that the result often is fantasy, or, to put it charitably, misunderstood facts. BsBsBs (talk) 21:37, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Tehran

Nytimes article today [1] cites Tehran as having 22 million people in the greater metro area. should it be on this list? Ronboid (talk) 13:34, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Paris

Paris is not listed in the top 20 of any of the lists, so why is it even on the chart? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.214.139.45 (talk) 16:31, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Removed. -- ferret (talk) 19:43, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

VANDALISM There has been vandalism, and where is placed "Buenos Aires" should be placed "Mexico, D.F.", obviously.--83.32.84.197 (talk) 13:27, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

São Paulo is wrong

São Paulo is bigger than Rio. It's wrong on this list. --FML ^{talk - me at pt} 15:54, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Why alphabetical listing?

90% of the people coming here will want to know the largest cities in the world in order of population. I get that there are different ways of counting the population, but please, save us time and give us the basic 1-2-3 largest cities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.14.170.177 (talk) 23:53, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

moreover, I think the list needs to be greatly simplified. Population is the primary comparative element. It should be foremost in the statistics, and should follow the example of how we've done similar lists for the US. I can tell a lot of work went into this, but honestly, it's a bit incomprehensible. Tokyo seems to be at 1 million people? Several US cities should be listed if the list were down to cities of a million people, including Chicago and Houston first and foremost. I hate to recommend scrapping and starting over, but it may be at that point.204.65.34.128 (talk) 17:35, 4 December 2013 (UTC)

Photo caption

Should the picture of Tokyo in the template be captioned? --SchutteGod (not logged in) 76.174.139.1 (talk) 16:42, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

World's largest city should be synonymous with largest city proper

The other qualifications added to determine the largest city seems arbitrary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.111.88.66 (talk) 03:00, 18 June 2014 (UTC)

Numbers seem completely wrong by ANY source

Tokyo's population is not 1 million by any measure, and Bogota's population is not 37 million by any measure. This article was vandalized at one point and nobody caught it. I have not corrected anything but it seems as though the whole thing should be rewritten from scratch; it is a fairly poor article for its importance level (currently Top). AstarothCY (talk) 14:28, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Is it vandalism that has made this article completely useless? Are any of the population figures right? The city proper population of Los Angeles is 3.8 million, not 47 million, which is more than in the whole of California. And how did New York City's metro area population end up at 4 million when, according to this article, its city population is 13 million? And both figures are way wrong. Rio's population is not 2-4 times larger than Sao Paulo's - it's considerably smaller. So far you can find the real populations by clicking on the city names, but how much longer will that last? People work hard on these articles, and people rely on them too. I guess whoever is vandalizing it is having a great time. But then, sociopaths have fun at other people's expense - it's, like, their job.Wlegro (talk) 22:17, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

The numbers are their ranks, not the population. But I concur that the table is not very useful and should be removed. -Zanhe (talk) 00:09, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

I completely disagree. The subject with the wide variety of potential sources and points of comparison is confusing, maybe it needs better explanation. But with a little understanding of what the ranks are talking about, the table explains it better than the specifics of the article would without the table. Trackinfo (talk) 00:35, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

The confusion between ranks and populations keeps on recurring. We should think of a better way to make this more obvious. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arif Zaman (talk • contribs) 17:18, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

"city proper" is notorious for not telling you how big a city actually is

why is there a city proper column? its as if its there just to pull kids and lazy journalists in. im surprised, their boundaries are useless and capricious. an urban or metro area definition is invariably much closer to giving you the real sizeof a city — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flapski (talk • contribs) 15:55, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

i am not attacking the person who made the list, im simply querying what is clearly a highly flawed way of measuring city size — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flapski (talk • contribs) 16:13, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

The Numbers don't Match

The ranks in the table given here don't match the ranks in the table of the List of cities proper by population.

According to the table on this page the cities are

1. Shanghai
2. Islambul
3. Mumbai
4. Delhi

But according to the List of cities proper by population page, they are

1. Shanghai
2. Karachi
3. Beijing
4. Lagos

So which one is right? --Arif Zaman (talk) 17:29, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Same question as Arif 3 years ago. When two WP pages show different values (for example, the Urban Area column here vs the List of urban areas by population) is there a protocol for picking the "correct" one (other than "use your judgement")? - Frankie1969 (talk) 16:29, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Assuming both figures match their sources, I'd also check the value on the article for the city/urban area itself, and use the most recent. Batternut (talk) 17:09, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Urban areas in Southern Europe

As a Southern European, I'd like to know why the Nordic urban areas are given more relevance than the Southern European urban areas (most of them are actually much larger and significant than the Nordic ones, apart from Stockholm and Copenhagen): Lisbon, Porto, Sevilla, Madrid, Barcelona, Valencia, Bilbao, Milan, Torino, Florence, Venice, Rome, Naples, Athens, Marseille, Nice, Toulouse, Istanbul, etc... It looks like this English WP is really biased (and it is), and this situation must be changed, absolutely.Viet-hoian1 (talk) 05:47, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

New Format?

There has been lots of discussion, especially on the List of cities proper by population talk page, about the difficulties in maintaining these three separate lists, and the confusion surrounding the multiple definitions. I propose merging the lists into a single list using all three definitions of cities, as defined by the UN. If we list the metropolitan, urban, and municipal boundaries in a single list, it should mitigate the confusion between these definitions, and make it easier for editors to maintain accurate and well sourced population estimates. The next step would be to encourage more reliable sources, many are from newspapers or third party sites.

I will begin the list, and am of course open to any changes and criticisms. Help filling it out would be very welcome. Regardless, the way we have now is confusing and difficult to maintain, so some form of change is needed. Thanks for your input. Mattximus (talk) 16:38, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Just so people who are maintaining this list are aware: with the release of the US Census Bureau estimates today, Largest cities in the Americas and List of metropolitan areas in the Americas are fully up to date as of 2015. Cobblet (talk) 18:56, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on World's largest cities. 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.http://www.webcitation.org/6gpGlyhlr to http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk
• Added archive https://web.http://www.webcitation.org/6gpGlyhlr to http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151129094649/http://www.singstat.gov.sg/statistics/latest-data#14 to http://www.singstat.gov.sg/statistics/latest-data#14
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140815134909/http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk to http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20141129082905/http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=CF to http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=CF

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

• 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 02:28, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Sao Paulo metro population does not match source

Sao Paulo metropolitan area shows a population of nearly 37 million on this page. The referenced document actually shows 20,935,204 for that figure.

There seem to be a ton of complaints about wildly inaccurate figures. Maybe there was some confusion around sorting of data? The 37-million number seems more likely to have referred to Tokyo at some point since no other city approaches that size in other sources I've seen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.52.51.32 (talk) 12:16, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Metropolitan should be the number seen by default

Some people have already mentioned that "city proper" is not the most informative number at all. For example Paris and London have been "twin" cities for centuries, nowadays they are both in the 10-12 million range, but Paris-proper is 2 million and London-proper is 8 million. Also, many figures have zero reference. It comes as a surprise for a page with that much visitors, and a topic covered so many times in books and documents LinguisticStudent (talk) 00:54, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Baku is not included

Hi Guys, Baku has a population of more than 2.1 Million putting it above Perth but it is no included in the list? Could someone fix this please Thank you 37.210.185.129 (talk) 08:30, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Vienna is missing!

It is the 6th largest city in the EU now! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.81.97.102 (talk) 20:07, 23 January 2017 (UTC)

Don't worry, because Vienna (and Budapest) are added! - Nin-5H (talk · contributions) April 29 2017, 14:14 (UTC).

Iran cities

Hi guys I can see only Tehran in the list but there are some other cities in Iran which could be included in this list. Mashhad 3,372,660 Isfahan 2,243,249 Karaj 1,973,470 Shiraz 1,869,001 Tabriz 1,773,033 Ahvaz 1,302,591 Kermanshah 1,083,833 Orumieh 1,040,565

RezaCh1974 (talk) 09:57, 25 March 2017 (UTC)RezaCh1974 source : Iran census 2016 http://irandataportal.syr.edu/census

Australian cities

The Australian cities are all wrong. None of the quoted populations are for their 'city propers' (which would be the council aresa, ALL well under a million!) I will move them to the correct column if nobody objects. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.228.3.204 (talk) 08:29, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

I took the initiative and corrected this list. On second thoughts, only brisbane belongs here because it's the only 'city proper' with more than 1 million in Aus, and the others wouldn't meet this list's criteria. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.228.3.204 (talk) 13:10, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 22 external links on List of largest cities. 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/20100822053414/http://esa.un.org/unup/index.asp?panel=6 to http://esa.un.org/unup/index.asp?panel=6
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160301050709/http://www.bjstats.gov.cn/xwgb/tjgb/ndgb/201502/t20150211_288370.htm to http://www.bjstats.gov.cn/xwgb/tjgb/ndgb/201502/t20150211_288370.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140310101546/http://www.bjstats.gov.cn/xwgb/tjgb/ndgb/201402/t20140213_267744.htm to http://www.bjstats.gov.cn/xwgb/tjgb/ndgb/201402/t20140213_267744.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151208044832/http://www.bbs.gov.bd/WebTestApplication/userfiles/Image/National%20Reports/Union%20Statistics.pdf to http://www.bbs.gov.bd/WebTestApplication/userfiles/Image/National%20Reports/Union%20Statistics.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151018094514/http://www.lagosstate.gov.ng/pagelinks.php?p=6 to http://www.lagosstate.gov.ng/pagelinks.php?p=6
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140419145824/http://www.sztjj.gov.cn/tjnj/sqsl2014.pdf to http://www.sztjj.gov.cn/tjnj/sqsl2014.pdf
• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6gpGlyhlr?url=http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk to http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140314132337/http://www.geohive.com/cntry/cn-44.aspx to http://www.geohive.com/cntry/cn-44.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150523021109/http://www.cqtj.gov.cn/html/tjsj/tjgb/15/03/7345.html to http://www.cqtj.gov.cn/html/tjsj/tjgb/15/03/7345.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111025103716/http://www.whtj.gov.cn/Article/ShowArticle.aspx?id=6417 to http://www.whtj.gov.cn/Article/ShowArticle.aspx?id=6417
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140302020749/http://www.geohive.com/cntry/chile.aspx to http://www.geohive.com/cntry/chile.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110930175700/http://www.chengdu.gov.cn/govAffairInfo/detail.jsp?id=425258 to http://www.chengdu.gov.cn/govAffairInfo/detail.jsp?id=425258
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131201022443/https://www.cdsi.gov.sa/yb47/Pages/MixChapter2.htm to http://www.cdsi.gov.sa/yb47/Pages/MixChapter2.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140806162701/http://www.geohive.com/cntry/afghanistan.aspx to http://www.geohive.com/cntry/afghanistan.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090325102712/http://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic/sources/census/2010_PHC/North_Korea/2008_North_Korea_Census.pdf to http://unstats.un.org/unsd/demographic/sources/census/2010_PHC/North_Korea/2008_North_Korea_Census.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140314132337/http://www.geohive.com/cntry/cn-44.aspx to http://www.geohive.com/cntry/cn-44.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101220143832/http://www.censo2010.indec.gov.ar/preliminares/cuadro_totalpais.asp to http://www.censo2010.indec.gov.ar/preliminares/cuadro_totalpais.asp
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140329071215/http://sowf.moi.gov.tw/stat/month/m1-01.xls to http://sowf.moi.gov.tw/stat/month/m1-01.xls
• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6gpGlyhlr?url=http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk to http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk
• Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6gpGlyhlr?url=http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk to http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140409210017/http://www.indec.mecon.ar/nuevaweb/cuadros/2/estimaciones-serie34.pdf to http://www.indec.mecon.ar/nuevaweb/cuadros/2/estimaciones-serie34.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131029192858/http://www.indec.mecon.ar/nuevaweb/cuadros/4/EPH_cont_2trim12.pdf to http://www.indec.mecon.ar/nuevaweb/cuadros/4/EPH_cont_2trim12.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

• 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:16, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Would anyone oppose a merger?

This list contains exact copies of the three lists that are linked to in the body of the text. I don't see why we should have 4 pages showing the exact same concept. It's rather important we maintain a single high-standard list for "largest cities" using all definitions (to reduce arguments) since this page is one of the higher viewed pages on wikiepdia. More eyes on one page should help ensure higher standards.

I also think we should have a population cut off as the list is getting a bit too long. Would anyone disagree with the need for at least one of the definitions to exceed 3 million to be considered on this list? If we keep it at the present 1 million, we will need to add many dozens more... Mattximus (talk) 18:00, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Mattximus, on the one hand I agree with your concern about the proliferation of pages. On the other hand don't you think it's kind of useful to have a sortable table with all three values? On the first hand again the current page seems to wrongly list Karachi as the world's biggest city proper, twice citing a single source which doesn't distinguish between city proper and metro, and which actually says Karachi "is the third largest city in the world by population within city limits"!! Errors such as these are no doubt abetted by the redundancy you identify. groupuscule (talk) 07:23, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Oh I completely agree, my proposal was to merge the other one into this one so we just have 1 page with 1 list which has all 3 sortable values. Isolating them doesn't make sense for reasons you say above. Mattximus (talk) 11:03, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

You know what, that makes more sense and it's clearly what you wrote the first time. I guess the argument against a single page is that not every reader can or will easily operate a table and some will miss out on the sorting by metropolitan size. (Maybe the metro size listing should get foregrounded somewhat by mentioning the biggest five or something.) I won't be too sad to see List of urban areas by population go, as it's based only on Demographia and hardly differs from the metro area list.

By the way, also in the currently top-ranked entry for Karachi, here, the listed population of the city proper exceeds that of the metro area, which is really quite impressive. groupuscule (talk) 15:27, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

The big list already does have the sorting by urban areas and metropolitan area so it should have the best of all three worlds. I don't think we lose anything. And I don't really care which one goes first on the list, just that everything is available on one page. Mattximus (talk) 19:52, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

• Support merger per Mattximus. There are way too many poorly maintained, poorly sourced city lists. Better to keep them in one place and redirect others. -Zanhe (talk) 17:39, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

Ok it seems we have unanimous support. I don't think it's controversial as the data is 100% exact copy, so I will try to merge now. Mattximus (talk) 17:28, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

• Missed this debate, I thought the article on the list of largest urban areas was great. I loved the table that has countries with number cities over a certain size. Can you point me to a historic copy of this at least? Harburg (talk) 18:23, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Sure, the entire list of urban areas is replicated here. But I see what you mean with the second list. It was mostly unsourced, but I think it may deserve it's own article. I've made one here: Number of urban areas by country and will link to it in the text. Mattximus (talk) 19:06, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose. A) Wikipedia:Merging wasn't followed - notices were not placed on the other pages; B) Urban and metro areas are in many cases very different from cities, the picture is too complicated to represent with a single list (eg Pearl River Delta, Keihanshin, Dallas–Fort Worth–Arlington metroplex), Ruhr, San Diego–Tijuana; C) Look at the set of other Metropolitan area list articles linked by the "World's largest cities" nav template at the bottom of this article. Batternut (talk) 08:43, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Someone deleted my entry of Tel Aviv

They wrote that cities under 1,000,000 aren't allowed. Where does it say so? The point is that Tel Aviv's metro area is almost 4 million people, but the "city proper" of Tel Aviv Yafo is less than half a million. Shouldn't such a big metro be on the list? Yarenn Šagor (talk) 19:22, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Should we decide on a population cut off?

I see that someone added some very small cities that I don't think anyone would include on a "list of largest cities". Does anybody know of a cutoff that would be reasonable? Mattximus (talk) 17:42, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

The cutoff for the old city proper list was 3 million, which sounds sensible to me. I guess for the metro area, the cutoff should be higher, maybe 5 million? -Zanhe (talk) 22:33, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

Sounds reasonable to me. I wonder if there is a non-arbitrary cut off that could be employed. Otherwise, I agree with those two figures. Mattximus (talk) 01:31, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

I agree the list is too long and needs to be trimmed. The figures above seem reasonable. I guess if a city hits the one cut-off and not the other it should remain on the list, and this would need to be suitably explained. Eldumpo (talk) 07:17, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes, too long. I would aim for a list of about 100 cities - which a city proper 3 million threshold gives. Batternut (talk) 11:16, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

As for large metro areas not centred on one big city, eg Keihanshin, Dallas–Fort Worth–Arlington metroplex, it would be misleading to include them in the same list. Batternut (talk) 11:16, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Another large metro area that is not centred on a big city would be Sydney, Australia, that has 208,374 people, but in a metro of several million. It should absolutely be on this list. So we do need a separate cut off for city proper and metro area. Mattximus (talk) 23:05, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

The approach taken in List of cities by GDP is to give combined names for such metro areas, eg "Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington", "Osaka–Kobe", "Minneapolis–Saint Paul". Also the lead section "This is a list of cities and/or their metropolitan areas" describes the scope of the article, being broader than the title would suggest. Batternut (talk) 08:49, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Yeah we don't need to have everything and the kitchen sink. It's a list of cities. We should stick with the most common city term for the area. For example "Dallas" instead of "Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington" and "Manila" or "Sydney" instead of the many cities that make them up. Mattximus (talk) 02:23, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

I'd presume the Dallas–Fort Worth–Arlington metroplex article has the WP:Commonname. Batternut (talk) 08:05, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Not Dallas? Mattximus (talk) 22:58, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Well it's policy to name article's with wp:commonname. The lead does though say "Residents of the area refer to it as the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex, DFW, or The Metroplex"! You could always propose a renaming of it, if you don't like the current name. Batternut (talk) 23:38, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

No, I think both names are appropriate for their respective articles. They are for different entities so it makes sense. I think this list should just use Dallas though, since that's the name of the city. Mattximus (talk) 00:33, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

"Different entities" indeed, hence misleading to associate the population of the Dallas/Fort Worth Metroplex as being simply that of Dallas. Batternut (talk) 08:30, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Redundant list

This largely list duplicates List of cities proper by population, List of urban areas by population, List of metropolitan areas by population. The other lists are able to do a better job.

I appreciate Mattximus's efforts to remove the redundancy, but I think a different solution might be sought. That might be just deleting this article. The pre-amble above the list is OK, maybe this article should just provide an overview of large cities, and link to all the city/urban/metro list pages, including List of cities by GDP and the like. Batternut (talk) 09:49, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

That is a possibility. The reason behind the amalgamation of lists was that there is no single definition for what makes a city. This is the best effort (but of course not perfect!) to reconcile 3 different definitions used by the UN. It's very important to have them on one page, as there will be people complaining about why Sydney is not included in list of city proper for example. I can tell you that over the past 5 years, the city/urban/metro separate lists do not work, and just lead to endless confusion. Do you know of a better way of presenting different definitions on one page? I'm always open to hearing alternatives...! Mattximus (talk) 03:26, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

The main problems I have seen with these lists is poor state of maintenance, and vandalism by local patriots keen to show their city bigger than the neighbours. A single page would improve maintainability, but listing different types of entities together seems too problematic. I don't quite understand the Sydney issue - your figure of 208,374 is not in the article, where did it come from? Batternut (talk) 10:10, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes I agree, having it in one page will increase the quality, and reduce local patriot problems (I've been fighting these for years across all three pages, in 1 page will be a lot easier). And I'm not sure what you mean with the figure 208,374, it's in the infobox: City of Sydney. Mattximus (talk) 11:06, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Oh, thanks, I didn't see the City of Sydney page - seems a bit like City of London or Mumbai City district, a bit of a relic from the past - but if that's how Sydneyites define the city, so be it. Batternut (talk) 13:18, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Two trends are apparent that are confusing the issue of what a city is: population growth/urban sprawl, and an economic pressure based on the belief that large metro areas see more economic growth, so governments are directing investment into their creation. The result being a boom in polycentric metro areas. Hence the Ruhr now being lumped in with Cologne as the Rhine-Ruhr metropolitan region, the so-called Northern Powerhouse, and of course the Pearl River Delta. Metro regions are popping up everywhere, and they are not just big cities. I don't see how they can be sensibly included in a city article. Batternut (talk) 13:18, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Zunyi

Zunyi is not a very large city, the population number 6,127,009 is for all the area of this Prefecture-level city, an administrative division area, not a human settlement.--xiliuheshui※MESSAGE BOARD 02:56, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes, appears to wrong to include Zunyi. Other "Prefecture-level city" entries exist, but they seem justifiable. Batternut (talk) 09:41, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

This is exactly why we should have multiple definitions of cities on one page. Prefecture-level city has a very high population using the administrative (city proper) definition, but often much lower if you consider urban area/metro area population. If they were separate pages you and only clicked on city proper, you would assume that Zunyi is a very large city, or that Syndey is very small (only 200k people in the administrative core). Neither is true. Having separate lists is very misleading. Mattximus (talk) 13:21, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

The OP says Zunyi city is "not a very large city", implying that it is out of place on this list. I agree. How would quoting its urban/metro populations resolve the issue, when it should just be removed? Batternut (talk) 19:38, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

This is a perfect example, so I will go into detail. The city proper of Zunyi is 6,127,009 people. So it should be on this list. Chinese cities have amalgamated their suburbs and rural lands around many major cities, inflating the number. If you just talk about the urban area it is around 1 million (there is no specific data for urban area), and the metro population will be around 1 million too since there are no other major cities nearby.

So:

• Option 1, keep it on this list, but users will never know that the 6 million figure does not reflect the urban area. This is confusing.
• Option 2, delete it, but this will be for arbitrary reasons, and hard to justify (if you delete this one, why not half the list?).
• Option 3, have a single list with both definitions so users will not be confused.
• Or if there is a fourth option, I'm open to hear it.

Which one works for you? Mattximus (talk) 20:15, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

For 'city proper' generally using the urban population figure within the city looks best (1,095,189 for Zunyi in 2010) - that would position it better in the list, or completely off the list if below a new cut-off. Batternut (talk) 22:14, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

By the way, these problems occur all the time. The other famous one is questioning why there are no Australian cities on this list. It is just a logistical mess having 3 separate lists. Mattximus (talk) 20:18, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Sydney etc are a different type of problem, (already mentioned mentioned in #Redundant list above). Batternut (talk) 22:14, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

For 'city proper' generally using the urban population figure is something that you cannot do. You are referring to the urban area which is another list found here: List of urban areas by population. In other words, you can't just arbitrary change the definition of this list (change what it means to be city proper) for one city without any justification. That's Wikipedia:OR. Are you seeing the issue? Mattximus (talk) 02:07, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Don't shout, Mattximus! I'm afraid you may be confused, but I'm not surprised. The List of urban areas by population actually lists urban agglomeration populations. (By the way, have you seen List of agglomerations by population? I think there's scope for merging List of urban areas by population with that).

Anyway, back to Zunyi, whose administration type is "Prefecture-level city", the 6 million figure is for the made up of roughly 1 million city dwellers, 5 million in the rest of the prefecture. I suggest, as the OP does, that there is no 6 million inhabitant city there. A prefecture is not a city, even if jointly administered. Batternut (talk) 08:11, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

But you just made that up, Chinese cities are centrally administered and so, in this case, the whole prefecture-level city would be the "city proper". Remember, city proper (according the the UN) is an administrative boundary definition for city. It has nothing to do with density, or urban continuity. That is urban or metro area which have their own lists. Your suggestion brings up several problems. First, there is no way to know how many people are in the "urban core" even if it did fit the definition, the Chinese statistics are for city proper (which includes subunits, but they are not divided between urban and rural). So you would, without exaggeration, have to make up a number arbitrarily. The second is, would you then go through the list and reduce the number of every other city to match what you did to that one city? Otherwise, it's inconsistent. Chinese cities are quite like Indianapolis, in which the core amalgamated with the suburbs. I'm not arguing it is representative of the city, I'm just saying it's very hard to apply one single definition to a city. Sorry for sounding like I'm yelling, I've had this exact conversation for over 5 years. Merging the lists would have stopped the confusion. Mattximus (talk) 22:04, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

I made up nothing - the figures are from Zunyi, (which upon closer inspection seems pretty thin on citations). Some countries do publish urban stats (eg Delhi), I don't know about China, but the UN's WUP put Zunyi's urban pop at 803,000 in 2015, so the article seems credible. Batternut (talk) 08:49, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Yes, you changed the definition for one city... but not others. Mattximus (talk) 11:08, 18 July 2017 (UTC)