This level-4 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
See talk:megalopolis for discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daran (talk • contribs) 22:27, 4 October 2003 (UTC)
TakuyaMarata, could you explain the paragraph you just added? It doesn't seem to make any sense in the context. What is "The area"? Are you claiming that the trends you note are necessary characteristics of all metro areas? At the very least the writing needs clarification. VV 00:33, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)
What an absolutely crap article about metropolitan areas. Where are the explanations about the various methodes used around the world etc?
Metro Manilla isn't even a metropolitan area based on commuter statistics, at least get that one right... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.246.51.145 (talk) 14:42, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
In Japan, there are 7 major Metropolitan Areas (MAs). They are Tokyo MA (34.5million), Osaka MA (18.6million), Nagoya MA (8.7million), Fukuoka MA (5.4million), Sapporo MA (2.5million), Sendai MA (2.2million) and Hiroshima MA (2.0million) (the numbers are populations of 1.5% Urban Employment Areas in 2000). Some major individual cities in each MAs are designated by government ordinance as the Government Ordinance Cities(GOCs). For examle, Osaka MA includes GOCs of Kyoto, Osaka, Kobe and Sakai.
Moved above text from article. It would be better if instead of listing specific metropolitan areas, the criteria for what is included in a metropolitan area in Japan be put in the article instead. Polaron | Talk 13:30, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
As documented in talk Sydney the statment "Both Statistical Divisions and Districts are equivalent to metropolitan areas." is disputed. John Dalton 09:57, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Barcelona's Metropolitan Area is 5.150.000 (updated 2006) in 3.925 km2 (1.515 ml2), as is observed in... http://bcnip.blogsome.com/2006/04/22/la-region-metropolitana-de-Barcelona (data 2005) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.50.148.173 (talk) 02:17, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
I've noticed that many editors from quite a few countries familiar with the English language have become quite endeared with the term "metropolitan area", but in many cases the term cannot apply, as it is neither an official translation for the existing demographic/administrative regions of those countries, nor a term used there. The "Japan" clarification mentioned above is a good example of this. France is yet another example, as, although neither its government nor its INSEE statistical bureau has ever used this term as an official translation, a few insist on imposing it on relevant articles here as though it were one.
In fact, the confusion grows further when the official translation for the areas described is another term altogether: as indicated above, what this article insists is the French equivalent of a "metropolitan area" is in reality translated as "urban area", so it should not even be mentioned in this article. In short, it seems that the application of the term in many cases here stems from opinion, mistranslation, an effort to "group" a schema between all countries for the sake of a single demographics study, or perhaps endearment for foreign terms, but indicating it as a "translation" in many cases is simply not fact.
Yet "metropolitan area" can be used as a descriptive term, but where it is used I think it should be made clear that it is used as such; in other words, it should be clear that it is a term included as a description for better understanding, but not as an official term or officially translation when it is nothing of the kind.
I think it would be useful for this reference to clarify this difference somewhere in the article, and gate the same to all concerned articles. I have already tried to do the same where France is concerned. THEPROMENADER 21:04, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Note: The external link for metrofyi.com is more of an advertisement for that website in that many major metro areas are excluded and some listed are clearly incorrect. At the very least, it should be noted as a partial list. Perhaps excluded in that it contains more advertising about places to go than data on the area.
Also, the abbreviation "MSA" should be included in the commonly used abbreviations used for this topic due to the fact that it covers standard conventional references used in most all industries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.153.111.254 (talk) 15:44, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Are Surat, Ahmedabad and Pune included in the list of Metropolitan cities in India? There are no proper citations in the article to support this. I hope someone will provide citations failing which the cities will have to be deleted from the list. Thanks. Swaroop (talk) 16:49, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
According to the German Wikipedia [1], the Metropolitan area had been officially defined in 1995 as the Rhine-Ruhr (German Rhein-Ruhr) Metropolitan area in 1995, officially having 10,168,321 inhabitants on 30 June 2008, and thus forming the largest metropolitan area in the EU. According to the German Wikipedia (see link), the official definition of the "European Metropol Region Rhine-Ruhr" is contained in North Rhine-Westphalian development laws and - to be exact - stems from the "Development Plan of the State of North Rhine-Westphalia (part A), where it was defined in terms of space, and had been treated as a subject matter in form of verbalized 'goals' in section B.I.2." (in German: Landesplanungsrechtlich wird die Europäische Metropolregion Rhein-Ruhr im Landesentwicklungsplan Nordrhein-Westfalen (Teil A) räumlich bestimmt und sachlich in Form von textlich formulierten "Zielen" unter dem Abschnitt B.I.2. behandelt.) It might be of some importance to know that matters of regional development, to a large part, fall into the competencies of the German Länder (States, literally: "countries").
Perhaps someone would like to consider whether the reference to the Ruhr area alone should be changed to a reference to the larger Rhine-Ruhr area. --85.179.67.148 (talk) 22:13, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
And it is probably more trouble than it is worth to try to fix it, as the boosters will always come back for another go. What we need as permanent warning tag saying "This concept should not be taken seriously". Wimstead (talk) 16:40, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
"according to the Far Eastern Economic Review, Asia alone will have at least 10 hypercities"
I'm not sure why "hypercities" link to Sky city 1000 of if "hypercity" even a real term. Someone who knows what he's doing please edit 114.75.1.18 (talk) 15:14, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Ive changed Torontos population back to its actual population of just ocer 2 million, the person who had it at 8.1 million might be a little to patriotic or just stupid lol —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gargabook (talk • contribs) 02:48, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
It is intimately related but I believe that a LMA should have it's own article. --C9900 (talk) 12:38, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
The article contains this sentence:
" However the most ambitious metropolitan area population figures are often better seen as the population of a "metropolitan region" than of a "city".[citation needed]"
And someone thinks a citation is needed for such a vague statement that it is useless to anyone trying to understand the idea of a "metropolitan area" ???
What this sentence needs is not a citation but a deletion. Because sentences are supposed to convey information, but this one doesn't.Daqu (talk) 16:44, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Megalopolis: why such a focus on Canada?
How high is it for Mexico, for South Africa, for North Korea? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alphachap (talk • contribs) 14:36, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
An image used in this article, File:Levent financial district in Istanbul.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012
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.
This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 06:29, 4 January 2012 (UTC) |
The caption under a picture of Istanbul incorrectly states that the Istanbul metropolitan area is the only one that spans two continents. As noted explicitly in the article on Port Said, "Port Said's twin city is Port Fuad, which lies on the eastern bank of the canal. The two cities coexist, to the extent that there hardly is any town centre in Port Fuad. The cities are connected by free ferries running all through the day, and together they form a metropolitan area with over a million residents that extends both on the African and the Asian sides of the Suez Canal." The caption should perhaps be edited to say, "Istanbul, one of only two metropolitan areas that span two continents, the other being Port Said in Egypt." --Wbush89 (talk) 16:49, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
There is a lot of images on this article, and some of them just show skylines of cities, not the metropolitan area of the city. Shouldn't these be removed? Rob (talk) 10:05, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
I have inexpertly tried to fix a couple of the thousand things about it which are horrible. It should be drastically shortened because it already has its own article, and metro- is different from megalo-! I don't want to remove it completely because obviously the concepts are related. Domrivers (talk) 17:36, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
The second image on the page has the caption:
But if you click on the image you get a bigger version of the image with the caption:
Fholson 01:29, 5 January 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fholson (talk • contribs)
Now that you've added skyscraper-skylines to (most) all of the sections, Castncoot, the 'United States' section looks a little less Murica-centric-non-sequitur, but these additions to an article outlining each country's definition of the term 'metropolitan area' is, for sure, 'pretty', but still arguably off-topic. TP ✎ ✓ 12:26, 18 March 2018 (UTC)
Castncoot, you're either 'misinterpreting' the intent and scope of this article, or are attempting to change it. Until now, it was but a description of of how every country defines/uses the term "metropolitan area". Again. adding pictures of skyscrapers to this just adds a 'pretty factor' to it, and nothing more, and distrating attention to 'sections that need more material' is non sequitur and does nothing to change that. Now, if one wanted to add maps of metropolitan areas to sections, that would be a more informative and useful illustrative addition, but you seem more intent on promoting your affinity with skyscrapers ; ) TP ✎ ✓ 22:43, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
maps would be more informative.
I know that the concept of metropolitan area is popular in the US because of post-1950s deurbanisation. However, it is a marginal concept in some other countries. For example, I never encountered it being used in Russia - e.g., something like Mozhaysk or Serpukhov are not definitely not considered a part of Moscow socially. Likewise, I don't think e.g. Oxford is considered part of London in the UK, and the London commuter belt is also a distinct entity. German cities also seem to be considered distinct from one another, though don't take my word on it. It would be good if somebody could highlight the differences in the cultural perception of the concept. --Humanophage (talk) 12:43, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
I've started a discussion at Primate city#What is a "city", what a "metropolitan area"?, which is more relevant here and for the city and conurbation pages.
I see it as a matter of self-definition, which can be ideologically or politically driven, so not objective in any way. See for instance Jerusalem municipality vs. Tel Aviv & Gush Dan aka Tel Aviv metropolitan area. There must be many examples, but this one is arguably within the same country and therefore more poignant. The "city" might have less contiguity of its built-up areas than the "metropolitan area" or "conurbation", but being called a (or one) city makes it be at least perceived as more unitarian and compact. Conundrum. Arminden (talk) 06:29, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
This edit by User:107.127.46.35 adds a citation template to this article. I don't understand the justification for the edit, which is summarized in edit history as "Tagged". In order to improve the article, I'm asking for some guidance about what specifically needs to be improved. A number of editors have put effort into including reliable citations. However, reading the article now, most statements are factual and supported by legitimate sources. So I'm at a loss as to why the citation template would apply here, or what would need to be changed to justify removing it. Clarification would be appreciated, and absent any clarification I will WP:BEBOLD and remove it. Cleter (talk) 17:04, 18 January 2024 (UTC)