Talk:List of cities in China by population/Archive 1

Edit this page!

see Wikipedia:WikiProject Chinese cities/Prefecture navigational templates for a Prefecture-by-Prefecture list of the major cities. Also, think about editing List of cities in the People's Republic of China by GDP per capita if a city page lists the GDP per capita. Cheers! 202.129.0.182 06:22, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced pictures

We have a problem with Wikipedia:Copyright violations on this page. A lot of the cityscape pictures have been deleted from Wikipedia because they violated the Wikipedia:Image use policy, and are now dead links. All images need Wikipedia:Image copyright tags. Heroeswithmetaphors (talk) 09:40, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Centimiles

"Metropolitan Area [centimiles]" What does "centimiles" mean here? Reads as a unit: "44,294,245 centimiles" which is confusing if someone is looking for the number of people in a city. People per hundred miles square (=density) or 100ths of a mile? Or is it the name of an organisation? Search the web for "centimiles" wasn't very productive too, seems not a common unit.

Hong Kong not listed?

Why are Hong Kong and Macau not listed? They ARE in the PRC.ErikRydbert (talk) 11:29, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

They are territories of the PRC. Neither is statutorily a city. The definition of city, as provided by Article 30 of the 1982 Constitution, does not apply to special administrative regions, which is separately provided by Article 31 of the 1982 Constitution. 218.250.143.16 (talk) 22:09, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Should they not be included anyway but with an asterisk to denote their special status, for the purpose of clarity and avoiding confusion by providing information about their population relative to the rest of China? ThomasHallNotUnawesomeAtAll (talk) 11:55, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the table

Thanks to whoever cleaned up the table format, making the list clean and neat. Good work! 115.138.0.72 (talk) 01:56, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

tangshan

tangshan 唐山 is missing on this list —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.39.1.41 (talk) 19:17, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Order

Some of the cities are not placed correctly in the list. The Urban Area Population should descend continuously from the top. Heroeswithmetaphors (talk) 06:31, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Incomplete

This list lacks a lot of major cities with significant populations in China. Really have no idea how to provide enough info to fix it. Ccyber5 (talk) 14:30, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Foshan

I can only agree with Ccyber5 above. There seems to be many glaring omissions to this list, Foshan (prefecture-level population 5,4 million) being only one of them. How can this be sorted out? And is there some satisfactory way of listing these cities without mixing up the categories ("prefecture-level", "city proper", "urban area", and so on)? User: Guest 05:39, 14 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.62.249.144 (talk) [reply]

Special adminsitrative regions

Special adminsitrative regions aren't cities per se. If Taipei were to accept the offer (which is highly unlikely) the whole island of Taiwan, together with the Pescadores, would be one special adminsitrative region. There's no law defining the existing two special administrative regions, namely Hong Kong and Macau, as cities (neither PRC law nor HK / Macau law). 218.250.143.16 (talk) 22:06, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Urban vs suburban vs rural

I noticed the shenzhen has only 3 million people when Shenzhen is classified as a megacity. After digging a bit i noticed that number is derived from only the urban core population and excluding the suburban population. I agree that rural populations should be excluded but suburban areas do count as part of the metropolitan area by definition. Plus, the header says "Metro Area" which means urban + suburban. Other cities may be like this too.steve chiu (talk) 07:04, 07 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure what the term "Built up area" actually mean here, but apparently those numbers in the column "Built up area" are related to the those alleged remarks. Wo.luren (talk) 19:31, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Built-up area means "built areas joined ba less than 200 meters (exluding rivers, highways or airport) as its explained by INSEE in France (ie agglomeration), by the search center e geopolis (an agglomeration is a space built in continuous where leave at least 10 000 inhabitants. This methodology gave its proofs since more of 15 years: the data of Geopolis served references to innumerable researches and publications) are in great britan or India.

Though these built-up areas are adjusted taking account Local Governement Authorities (LGA) limits. In China, the level where statistics are available is the Prefecture divided in : Qu (urban districts, several "Qu" making a City or "Shi" in chinese), coulty-level "Shi" (cities) and "Xian" (counties). We do our best so that these statisticals be comparable between cities in China, and elsewhere in the world.

For the moment, only "urban population" is available officially referring to "administrative urban areas" within Prefectures. Unfortunately, some of them includes large rural areas which make the population data greater than they are. In some cases, the data are underestimated because they don'take intoaccount the real built-up area overpassing each Prefecture limit. The "built-up area" notion (ie Guangzou-Shenzhen built-up area, Shenyang, Fushun etc...) includes these numerous cases. Franck MICHEL — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.157.231.40 (talk) 18:12, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yet another unreferenced list

I do not find a single reference in this list (the topographic features of Shanghai don't really help.)

Cite your sources! It says at the bottom of the edit window: "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable."

I assume the population numbers for the administrative area are from the 2010 census. But it would help immensely if sources would be given.

The "Built up" and "urban area" numbers appear to be pulled from thin air. I am not aware of any census data that list those. If they exist, then I would be highly interested what and where they are. Xie xie ni. BsBsBs (talk) 16:01, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Built-up Area vs. Urban Area

I understand seperating out the administrative boundaries of "Chinese" cities from "city" in the traditional sense of the world, but what is the difference between a "buil-up area" and an "urban area", here? I'm not sure I understand, and I don't think it was explained in the article. Is the "built-up area" kind of the equivalent of a settlement, and an "urban area" a "built-up area" plus adjoining built-up areas? --Criticalthinker (talk) 03:36, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Built-up area means "built areas joined ba less than 200 meters (exluding rivers, highways or airport) as its explained by INSEE in France (ie agglomeration), by the search center e geopolis (an agglomeration is a space built in continuous where leave at least 10 000 inhabitants. This methodology gave its proofs since more of 15 years: the data of Geopolis served references to innumerable researches and publications) are in Great Britain or India.

Though these built-up areas are adjusted taking account Local Governement Authorities (LGA) limits. In China, the level where statistics are available is the Prefecture divided in : Qu (urban districts, several "Qu" making a City or "Shi" in chinese), coulty-level "Shi" (cities) and "Xian" (counties). We do our best so that these statisticals be comparable between cities in China, and elsewhere in the world.

For the moment, only "urban population" is available officially referring to "administrative urban areas" within Prefectures. Unfortunately, some of them includes large rural areas which make the population data greater than they are. In some cases, the data are underestimated because they don'take intoaccount the real built-up area overpassing each Prefecture limit. The "built-up area" notion (ie Guangzou-Shenzhen built-up area, Shenyang, Fushun etc...) includes these numerous cases.

Franck MICHEL — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.157.231.40 (talk) 18:13, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The huge white space and string of IP edits

What happened to this article? What's with the images? Shouldn't they be in a column in the table? And this string of IP edits changing all the figures. Comments? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:29, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, we now see the IP's source is http://www.geohive.com/contact.aspx which doesn't look reliable at all. I'm so sorry IP. I know you put a lot of time into this, but we need a better source than that, as far as I'm concerned. Do others agree? Anna Frodesiak (talk) 19:01, 18 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(I resolved the huge white space issued by moving images to gallery below. Consider removing them all together.)

As he is persisting against community consensus, please, let's please centralize discussions at the IP's talk page from now on. Many thanks, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 01:48, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have serious doubts that the figures in the list have ever been properly referenced. A spot check at the citipopulation.de website referenced in the article [1] shows that website's figures for Anhui's two largest cities, Hefei and Huainan, are almost a factor of 2 lower than are in the article's list, both before and after the latest spate of edits (perhaps because it is from the 2000 census?). The other cited source seems to only go down to the province level, and its figure for Beijing's population, at least, is different from the article's, both before and after the recent edits, though not significantly so. Neither of these cited sources appears to give a break down by built up area, urban area, and administrative area. I checked a couple early versions of the article and didn't find evidence of good sourcing either. The geohive site that 83.157.231.40 has cited claims to reproduce the 2010 census figures. Leaving those figures in the article and citing geohive might be a good temporary solution until a better source can be found. (A note in the article on how the populations are calculated for built up area, urban area, and administrative area (if they are not simply listed in this form in the source) would be useful to have in the article as well.) (A copy of the above as been put on the IP's talk page per Anna Frosdiak's request to discuss there.)--Wikimedes (talk) 03:29, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fine by me. Thanks for the feedback. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 10:56, 19 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

The article List of cities in China by urban population contains information that seems to duplicated the content of this article, List of cities in China by population. Both articles try to define an urban core or built up area and create a list based on this. However, each article seems to use a different definition and different sources or they are updated at different rates. Thus we have duplicated but conflicting and confusing information. The two articles should be merged so that there is one definitive source and no confusion. Rincewind42 (talk) 06:38, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That makes pretty good sense. Maybe we could even have a column at the List of cities in China by urban population for built-up areas, provided we're happy with the source. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 06:43, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Or better, for not doubling the huge work done for each built-up area, completing urban population (which I've done and updated for most of them in the "List of cities in China by population"), figures available easily here ("Communiqué of the National Bureau of Statistics of People's Republic of China on Major Figures of the 2010 Population Census". National Bureau of Statistics of China ; at Geohive.com or cytypopulation.de, even though not totally updated for China cities). The aerial observation I've done for defining about 200 built-up areas in China is not directly available provided for these kind of statistical still doesn't exist for China. Once done, I'll checked the actual built-up areas for each new cities included and thus would complete the figures.

Franck Michel — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.157.231.40 (talk) 18:26, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Census 2018? - The last census in China was 2010, the next one should be 2020. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:72:EF1C:1524:D9CF:F368:7DB6:A67 (talk) 10:14, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Although I can't find the source for this list in the article, I believe I recognize it. If I *do* recognize it: This list is notable because the Built-up area of Guangzhou is inclusive of most of the PRDEZ cities and their immediate suburbs, and because it is an official census or official census projection from China. The current list at List of cities in China by urban population does not use China's own definition of Guangzhou: so the "built-up" areas here would be a relevant number. — I would vote against getting rid of this list, especially without doing research to see of an earlier version of the page does include a source for the list.108.48.94.153 (talk) 04:29, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think 108.48.94.153 has misunderstood this proposal. The notability of this list is not in question. Nor is anyone suggesting "getting rid of this list". Rather, it is suggested that we merge two lists that are covering the same topic but showing different information. This page would continue to exist and the page at List of cities in China by urban population would become a redirect to here (after relevant info was copied over). Rincewind42 (talk) 14:58, 23 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, no need for separate lists. Eldumpo (talk) 21:09, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Strongly opposed: Need to be fixed first

Before these lists get merged, a serious assessment of their respective quality is in order. Both lists have serious issues. Merging them would turn two big problems into a huge problem.

List of cities in China by urban population simply is utterly unreferenced. According to citing sources, “citations are used to identify the reliable sources on which an article is based.” WP:SOURCES says that “any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source.” The article stands challenged since January 2013, no change was made. According to WP rules, the article may be subject to deletion.

Other issues:

“TABULATION OF THE 2010 POPULATION CENSUS OF THE PRC BY COUNTY,” which the article mentions in a note, is nowhere to be found.
"Urban core" is unreferenced.
The list says it excludes the “floating population.” If you move from Boston to New York City, you become a New Yorker. Move from Harbin to Beijing, you become a member of Beijing’s floating population, even if you live there for the rest of your life, because your hukou is in Harbin. Since the 2010 census, China counts the de facto population, not the de jure population, which excluded the so-called “floating population.”
The list has no active discussion.

List of cities in China by population is the all-around better job, but it is not unproblematic either. Its biggest problem is that it is admittedly based on original research. Franck Michel, apparently the principal author of the list, says above that data on the built-up area "is not directly available," and that it "still doesn't exist for China." He explains that for "about 200 built-up areas in China," he himself compiled the data by "aerial observation" (probably using Google Earth.) While this is a laudable effort, it is original research, cut and dry, and original research simply is not allowed at WP. This had been challenged, several times, and no change was forthcoming. According to WP rules, this article should not be here. To make the work admissible in WP, Franck Michel needs to publish his work in a book, or a journal, then it can be cited here. Without that, sorry, it must go.

Other issues:

The title says it is a List of cities in China by population, however, in fact it attempts to be a list of built-up areas in China. This is misleading. WP:Lists requires that “the list title should not be misleading.“
The article erroneously uses “municipality” where it should use “direct controlled municipality.”
The article talks about a “city in the strict sense.” There is no such thing, the term remains undefined and unreferenced.
The article says that “the "urban core" would be roughly comparable to the US term ‘city limit’.” Unreferenced, not true. “City limits” are synonymous with “city proper.”
The list delivers no definition for “urban core,” and finding one would be a hard job. UNICEF says on its Definitions page: "The definition of ‘urban’ varies from country to country, and, with periodic reclassification, can also vary within one country over time, making direct comparisons difficult. An urban area can be defined by one or more of the following: administrative criteria or political boundaries (e.g., area within the jurisdiction of a municipality or town committee), a threshold population size (where the minimum for an urban settlement is typically in the region of 2,000 people, although this varies globally between 200 and 50,000), population density, economic function (e.g., where a significant majority of the population is not primarily engaged in agriculture, or where there is surplus employment) or the presence of urban characteristics (e.g., paved streets, electric lighting, sewerage)." If “urban” alone is hard to grasp, “urban core” would be even harder.
While trying to bring big Chinese cities down to their core, occasionally, the list creates huge “cities” that don’t exist. For instance, it merges Guangzhou with Shenzhen, Dongguan, Macao and part of Foshan, Jiangmen, Zhongshan, Zhuhai and Huizhou. This would be the first "city" where people need a passport and a visa to get from one part (China) to the other (Macao).
None of the population numbers have an in-line reference. They cannot be verified. As above: No citations, no reliable sources, no WP article.

Many authors take issue with the size of Chinese cities. It is their right to have that opinion, but it is not their right to adjust the size of the Chinese cities to make them comparable to a “city in the strict sense” – which is nothing but a city according to the author’s WP:NPOV personal point of view. It is even more disturbing that lists of Chinese cities are not immune to this disease. It is understandable (although it should not be done) that someone tries to bring a Chinese city down to a size that makes it comparable to their “city in the strict sense.” It is not understandable at all when done in lists of Chinese cities. They are all big, they should be left alone, and their official numbers should speak for themselves.

In short: Both lists require serious work. Both clash with the most basic of Wikipedia rules. Unless the lists improve seriously, they should both be deleted, not merged. Frankly, I am amazed that both lists are still here. BsBsBs (talk) 17:01, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled Comment

This list is intended to be a list of municipal jurisdictions... Not a list of built up areas, which is the main ranking criteria for the other list. This list should not be merged... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.132.128.26 (talk) 00:32, 21 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No it isn't intended to be a list of municipal jurisdictions and it isn't a list of municipal jurisdictsion. Read the page it says, "The cities are listed by built-up area adjusted to Local Government Authorities encompassed by built up area (ie Districts, Cities or Counties). Thus, these built up area can be made of several cities (ie : Guangzhou - Dongguan- Shenzhen, Shanghai - Suzhou, Shenyang - Fushun, Anshan - Liaoyang etc.)" You're probably thinking of List of prefectures in the People's Republic of China. Rincewind42 (talk) 14:35, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple Instances of Hengyang, Hunan Province

There are two instances of Hengyang in Hunan province. The Hanzi are identical, and both link to the same Wikipedia entry, but have different populations listed. It's possible that there are two cities with the same pinyin spelling in the same province, but it seems unlikely that they'd have the same Pinyin, and they almost definitely shouldn't have the same Wikipedia entry.

Can someone please explain what the difference is. Otherwise, I suggest the smaller one be removed. These are the entries:

City _{2010 census}	Chinese	Built-up Area	Urban Area	Level	Administrative Area	Province-level division	Remarks
Hengyang	衡阳	1,075,516	1,135,166	Prefecture-level city	7,141,462	Hunan	Nanyue urban district not yet in built-up area.
Hengyang	衡阳	886,424	936,789	Prefecture-level city	7,141,462	Hunan

Wiki vandalism

Vandalism on this page. I need to figure out how to remove it. 87.92.95.6 (talk) 03:21, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Guangzhou

The "built-up area" is misleading. The article Guangzhou says it has 14 million inhabitants and the province Guangdong has about 100 million inhabitants. Now the "built-up area" states 44 million for Guangzhou. So half the people of the province is considered Guangzhou? If other big cities like Shenzhen have their own entries, why are the numbers added to Guangzhou? Either seperate the numbers or delete cities like Shenzhen from the list. Besides, if you ask someone about the biggest Chinese city, the answer would usually be Shanghai. The default ranking should be at least by "urban area" or the 44 million should be adjusted. --2.245.179.189 (talk) 18:15, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You raised a fundamental point that cannot be ignored. It has now finally been addressed. —Loginnigol (talk) 12:13, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate of Zhangzhou

As with another city mentioned above, there are two entries for Zhangzhou with significantly different populations but otherwise identical information. Both link to the same article. Is there a difference between the two, and if so could it be clarified? If not, the incorrect duplicate should be removed. (Far from my area of expertise or I'd do it myself.) B.Rossow · talk 13:49, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Notwithstanding the OR concerns with its methodology, I've removed the figure that is less consistent with the rest of the table, which is the lower figure representing the population of Xiangcheng District, Zhangzhou. The higher figure that remains is the sum of Xiangcheng and Longwen Districts. Cobblet (talk) 08:56, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Urban Area"

What are the components of "urban areas" for Chinese cities? Are these simple comprised of district-level entities into which the urban area exists? Is it a spatial measurement indpendent of district-level administrative boundaries? --Criticalthinker (talk) 07:07, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not all urban areas in China above half a million feature in this list. Is there a source, that can be used for this purpose?Sarcelles (talk) 18:39, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Metropolitan Statistical Area

Does China have anything analogous to the United States Office of Management and Budget's Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA)? kencf0618 (talk) 22:02, 29 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No Area Units

There are no area units in the column titles — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.21.0.98 (talk) 20:56, 21 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Problems With All Sources on Population Numbers

The cities for population numbers use a Chine Picture of the rail lines from the German Wiki. Alcibiades979 (talk) 13:57, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Guangzhou

The city is missing from the article. Lxxl2 (talk) 16:14, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]