Jump to content

Talk:London/Archive 13

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12Archive 13

London, Greater London, and the city of London, duplicate articles of the first two?

It seems that Greater London and London are the exact exact same thing, same population with a square mile difference of just one (yes one) square mile. Does that make the City of London like the equivalent to the American concept of downtown, and why would Greater London and London have two articles when they are 99.99% geographically the same? 47.152.145.95 (talk) 14:45, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

I suggest that you look though the archives of this page, where there have been countless discussions over the years. One example is at Talk:London/Archive 11#Greater London?. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:53, 5 March 2020 (UTC)
They are not the same thing as one includes the City of London and the other doesn't. The American concept of downtown would most closely apply to the West End which is Westminster plus a bit more. The City of London is the traditional financial centre. London also is used in more general senses to include some areas outside greater London. This broader definition predates the formation of Greater London or, for that matter, the County of London. —  Jts1882 | talk  16:32, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

The truth of the matter is, nobody actually knows where London is and isn't. What's the point of having a name for somewhere when nobody uses the place name or doesn't know where it is? This is one big, crazy mixup. There's Greater London, a created county (ceremonial or not, a county none the less). Component 'boroughs' of Greater London. There's the City of London, which is 'London', that's what it says on the tin. The City of Westminster, which is 'Westminster'. Westminster isn't London. Chelsea isn't London, neither is Wembley or Hammersmith. All are in Greater London. People just generalise. Some think Portugal is 'in Spain'. And Niagra Falls are in New York, but I wouldn't like to walk there from Manhattan. With a hole in my shoe! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.25.94.142 (talk) 21:55, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

It makes perfect sense. London is a large city in England that has subsumed smaller districts, boroughs and market towns as it has grown. Greater London was created as an administrative act to segregate parts of London that historically fell into other boroughs in order to create a centralised government for the region. They both cover the same region, but are distinct concepts. This is the same for a lot of Met Boroughs in the UK. Koncorde (talk) 17:40, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

It makes NON-sense. Let me point out your mistake. You say - "London is a large city in England" - WRONG! - London is a 'small' city. You say - "has subsumed smaller districts, boroughs and market towns as it has grown." - WRONG! - The 'city' of London (London) is totally different entity than the 'boroughs' of the Metropolitan County (Greater London)

Is it true that London is a popular city ? London is know to have a population of 9 million but is that really true ? Some have said that some peole were born there but moved out but the government still count there population ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.26.1.207 (talk) 09:07, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

One of us uses history books and popular nomenclature. The other uses obscure definitions of things that aren't. The idea that "London" is both the boroughs and the city at the same time is very normal. One name, many things. Koncorde (talk) 02:52, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

The 'controlling' city is Westminster. CLOWN! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.25.94.142 (talk) 23:20, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Sister Cities

Beijing, China
Berlin, Germany
Bogotá, Colombia
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Moscow, Russia
New York City, United States
Santiago, Chile
Shanghai, China
Tehran, Iran
Tokyo, Japan

--2601:643:8101:64E1:50B0:5BDA:E0D2:280A (talk) 22:50, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

London vs Istanbul

Hi, @Danloud: reverted this edit where I compared the population of London to Istanbul. Danloud's argument is that a part of Istanbul is geographically in Asia. And yet, the two articles linked in the introduction are List of urban areas in Europe and List of metropolitan areas in Europe: both of them mention Istanbul. The article Europe also mentions Istanbul as one of the largest European cities. So there's no reason to exclude Istanbul because some parts (the most recent ones) of the city are in Asia. And even if you consider the numbers: according to Demographia.com the Istanbul Urban area had 15,154,000 inhabitants vs 10,979,000 for London, with about two-third of the population of Istanbul in Europe which means that the European Urban area of Istanbul would have about 10.1 million inhabitants, so almost as much as London. So Istanbul being a European city (culturally, historically, politically, and for the vast majority of its area and population), it should be added back. Another option would be to add a note to mention that part of Istanbul is in Asia, like in List of urban areas in Europe, List of metropolitan areas in Europe, and Europe. What do you think? Best, Antoine A455bcd9 (talk) 21:02, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

@A455bcd9: Hello, i reverted your edit because Istanbul geographically partly lies in the Asian continent, and that about a third of its population reside in the suburbs of the Asian part. So, its urban and metropolitan area also includes the population of its Asian part, with the population of the European part only, it would be the third-largest city by both urban and metropolitan population, after London. But yes, it was a European city before its expansion into Anatolia, and is still considered European culturally and politically. Istanbul can be added back with a note to mention the fact that Istanbul partly lies in Asia. Danloud (talk) 22:12, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
@A455bcd9 and Danloud: Can I suggest: Do we need to mention these comparison cities at all? This is the article about London after all, with a very crowded lead, and we are currently mentioning Moscow (or its Metropolitan Area) three times, Paris twice, and proposing to mention Istanbul twice with a note. All of these "most X" comparisons have their own lists linked, which readers can consult for the details of which cities are higher and all the associated caveats. the wub "?!" 18:12, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
Hello. Yes this list of "most X" is long and I'm OK to make it shorter. I just wanted the current version to be at least accurate. Regarding the population we could for instance only mention the metropolitan area population (instead of city proper, urban area + metropolitan area), and compare it to other European cities (Moscow and Istanbul). I still think the comparisons are useful and many readers are probably looking only for that. A455bcd9 (talk) 08:08, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 August 2020

London population is outdated (from 2018), an update has been released on the official website - link below.

Change 8,908,081 to 8,961,989.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/datasets/populationestimatesforukenglandandwalesscotlandandnorthernireland 78.98.247.47 (talk) 01:06, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

 Done. El_C 01:09, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 August 2020

//In the subsection about education in London, a number of schools are listed which are examples of very good private schools in London. Among these I believe there should be added:

Dulwich College Godolphin and Latymer School King's College School Wimbledon Latymer Upper School Alleyn's School

//With links to the aforementioned schools 71.125.54.220 (talk) 20:28, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. — Yours, Berrely • Talk∕Contribs 16:40, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

NOT A CITY

London has been called the largest city in this article in the first line, but it is not a city. It is thought of by some but that doesn't make it true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7F:B00D:8B00:7073:3B00:E29:D7C2 (talk) 14:42, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Sister cities - where did they go?

I recall an earlier version of this article listed London's sister cities around the world. That list doesn't seem to be here any more, nor does the phrase "sister city" appear even once. What gives? Shouldn't that list be reinstated? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 09:34, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

How long ago? Looking back in 2017 I don't see it, although it might have been there briefly. In 2017 and earlier versions there was a link to List of twin towns and sister cities in the United Kingdom § London in the "see also" section. It can now be found at List of twin towns and sister cities in England. —  Jts1882 | talk  09:56, 20 November 2020 (UTC)
I don't know, probably before 2017? But as to when it was (or even whether it was, I could be wrong) might be beside the point. Should the list be there now? --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 10:01, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Sunshine hours look off

There is no way London gets more sunshine per year than Warsaw, Krakow and even Prague. 78.90.63.158 (talk) 00:34, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Pronunciation

Per MOS:PRON, I don't think a pronunciation guide is necessary. All (or nearly all) English speakers know how to pronounce the word London.

I also want to note that the recently added pronunciation /lʌndʌn/ is incorrect. It should be /ˈlʌndən/. --Un assiolo (talk) 18:25, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Agree Roger 8 Roger (talk) 18:39, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
I checked the page, but I added it for multiple reasons. Not only is it not intuitive, it's also linked to the history. They're advised against if they're being only being added as a pronunciation guide. GliderMaven (talk) 18:46, 1 February 2021 (UTC) What?? Roger 8 Roger (talk) 18:51, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
I'd say "add it back". For a hypothetical reader who knows nothing about "London", it's a non-intuitive pronunciation. A reader who's never heard it spoken could easily assume it's pronounced "'lɒn-dɒn" instead of "'lʌn-dən". Paintspot Infez (talk) 19:13, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
How likely is it that someone understands IPA transcriptions, but doesn't know how to pronounce London? --Un assiolo (talk) 14:35, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

Actualise collage

Hi all,

The collage in the infobox has an outdated picture of the skyline – so I suggest this collage instead:

Clockwise from top: City of London in the foreground with Canary Wharf in the far background, Elizabeth Tower and the Houses of Parliament, Tower Bridge and The Shard, the London Underground, and Piccadilly Circus.

Let me know what you think.

Yo Pierre (talk) 18:26, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Infobox imagemap

On mobile, the infobox imagemap is awkwardly left-justified instead of centered. You can see this on desktop here: [1]. — Goszei (talk) 19:00, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

I fixed this for now by using <div style="display:inline-block;">. — Goszei (talk) 23:59, 4 May 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 May 2021

98.114.254.117 (talk) 05:37, 23 May 2021 (UTC) Where is London coat of arms and flag
 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. Run n Fly (talk) 06:04, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

"Lundúnir" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Lundúnir. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 August 4#Lundúnir until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 15:56, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

"Lundene" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Lundene. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 August 5#Lundene until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 13:01, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

"Lundein" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Lundein. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 August 5#Lundein until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 13:02, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 September 2021

In the section "Demography" please delate "the most populous city and metropolitan area of the European Union and" as the UK has left the European Union so this is no longer true. Cdbarling (talk) 16:59, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

 DoneInteresting Geek (talk) 19:15, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Top picture of City of London skyline needs updating

A new photo of the City skyline is needed as the current one is missing recently constructed skyscrapers such as 22 Bishopsgate Fhd34521 (talk) 16:13, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Greater London is linked right below it in "counties", adding to the confusion.

England is split into nine regions, including "London", which contains the ceremonial counties of Greater London and City of London. The "Regions of England" page also just links to "Greater London", because an article for the region of London as an independent entity does not appear to exist, which I suspect it should. I would create it myself, but I am not autoconfirmed, so I wouldn't be able to do a lot of the actions required to integrate it.

Edit: Further reading has clarified that the page "Greater London" is intended to refer to both the County of Greater London and the Region of London - which is already a topic of controversy on the talk page. This is therefore not an issue with this article and rather an issue with that one. 

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Fyrin (talk • contribs) 22:29, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

"伦敦" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect 伦敦 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 11#伦敦 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. signed, Rosguill talk 16:40, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

London is not a megacity

London is not a megacity. A megacity is typically defined as a city of 10 million people or more. London has ~8 million. If London is a megacity, New York is one too. [User:ComplainingCamel|ComplainingCamel]] (talk) 10:14, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

"Typically defined" by whom? -- Alarics (talk) 20:18, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
The United Nations ComplainingCamel (talk) 20:41, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
The UNESCO website lists both London and New York as megacities. See also our WP page Megacity, which says the same thing and quotes one estimate of the population of the London Metropolitan Area at 14.8 million. -- Alarics (talk) 19:41, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
Thanks Alarics, if we're going by metropolitan areas, should New York be classed as a megacity on its Wikipedia page? | ComplainingCamel (talk) 12:35, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
It's already mentioned at both New York City and New York metropolitan area. -- Alarics (talk) 21:44, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

London is a capital of England and the United Kingdom

London is a capital of England and the United Kingdom 46.251.213.12 (talk) 16:59, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

We know. | ComplainingCamel (talk) 18:12, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Photo collage

Hello, I recently tried to put a new collage of photos with the main landmarks in the city. However, I was reversed by the editor Subtropical-man for not reaching consensus before making such changes. That said, I come here to formally make this proposal. Thanks in advance. Cordial greetings. Chronus (talk) 17:54, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Why to many images....best try to limit image spamming in lead MOS:LEADELEMENTS.Moxy- 01:16, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

'Largely makes up Greater London' in lead

What does this mean? Is it trying to say that there are parts of Greater London that are not in London, just because they are not contiguous with the 'metropolis' in terms of housing? If so, that is not accurate and should be changed. Surely anywhere in a London borough or the City of London is part of the wider 'city' called London, even if it's surrounded by countryside, because that is the definition of the city called London.

Also, I would like to know whether 'Greater London' ceased to exist as an administrative area after the GLC was abolished in 1986, and whether the administrative area called Greater London now exists again since 2000, or whether the GLA actually covers a region called London (which is also the city defined as being the London boroughs plus the City of London) and 'Greater London' only refers to the Ceremonial County (the London boroughs without the City of London). If the latter, then this article and the Greater London article as they stand are inaccurate. Uakari (talk) 23:47, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Reply

That is your definition of the city called London. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 10:22, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Actually, having re-read it, I think 'largely' in the lead is referring to the City of London not being part of the Ceremonial County of Greater London, but then it calls Greater London a 'region', which is indisputably inaccurate, given the region is simply called 'London'.Uakari (talk) 01:31, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

The sentence structure's become unclear, as a lot's been packed in. In ""London" has also referred to the metropolis around this core, historically split between the counties of Middlesex, Essex, Surrey, Kent, and Hertfordshire,[12] which largely comprises Greater London,[13] governed by the Greater London Authority,"
  • "has also referred" should be "also refers" - it is current usage
  • "which" refers to metropolis, but is too far away and too many other candidates intervene
  • "comprises" should be "consists of".
It would be clearer if it said """London" also refers to the wider metropolis, most of which is also called Greater London and governed by the Greater London Authority, Much of Greater London was previously in the counties of Middlesex, Essex, Surrey, Kent, and Hertfordshire, and parts of the Greater London Built-up Area still are." This being the lead, it should be a summary of properly referenced material in the article and not require references itself, which would also make it easier to read. NebY (talk) 21:53, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
I think "comprises" here may actually being used in an incorrect sense to mean "constitutes" (the correct form is: A comprises B and C; B and C constitute A). I think the intended meaning may be that the "wider metropolis" largely constitutes the "administrative area" of "Greater London", but that part of this administrative area is the "City of London" and not the "wider metropolis". In either case, the sentence is trying to do to much and its meaning is not altogether clear. I don't want to get into the whole historic counties debate on here, but do we even need to know about the historic counties or even the County of London in the lead? I tried to add something less confusing to the effect that "since 1965, London has referred to the 32 London boroughs and the City of London", but some users thought that was a subjective definition of "London", even though that definition matches with the infobox and with the "London" region, and includes everywhere that is either in the "London Borough of X" or the "City of London". Is the implication being made that "London" doesn't have a fixed or formal current definition? If so, what is this article actually about, as User:Ergo Sum asks in a section below? Uakari (talk) 18:27, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Why are some prices in Euros?

There are a series of economic figures which use Euros throughout the page, including London's GDP in the introduction, whereas most of the page uses pounds, as it is the local currency. Is this an error, or is there a good reason? Benjamin Bryztal (talk) 09:33, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

London vs Greater London (+ City of London)

As many others have pointed out, what is the purpose of having a page called London when we already have Greater London and City of London? Isn't that rather confusing for our viewers? 2A00:23C7:B011:4001:68CD:3E7E:86D4:B317 (talk) 17:53, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

The terms 'London' and 'Greater London' are for the most part used interchangeably, however Greater London has its own article to cover the history of that specific entity. G-13114 (talk) 18:09, 24 March 2022 (UTC)

London isn’t a city

The first line states that london is a city. This is incorrect 86.2.15.200 (talk) 20:47, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

If it isn't a city, what is it? -- Alarics (talk) 12:28, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
A region / urban area. It isn't an incorporated city and has separate towns and settlements contained within. | ComplainingCamel (talk) 18:11, 18 February 2022 (UTC)
Greater London is run as a single city and is recognized as a city internationally. Unlike other countries, city status in the UK is purely ceremonial.2600:1700:EDC0:3E80:9D66:D0C0:5FCC:7774 (talk) 07:57, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
Agreed. The lead should be changed to reflect that 'London' does not have city status (only the City of London). City doesn't have the same meaning in the UK as it does outside the UK. Jèrriais janne (talk) 15:55, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
It depends on the definition being used. Wikipedia's article on City defines a city as a large human settlement, and a permanent and densely settled place with administratively defined boundaries whose members work primarily on non-agricultural tasks. That's the general international definition, and London fits that definition. Official city status in the United Kingdom is a purely ceremonial title, often granted for plabes which were important centuries ago, but are now tiny, and often doesn't fit any logical criteria based on size or importance, for example tiny St Davids in Wales (population 1,600) is a city. G-13114 (talk) 16:15, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
Reliable sources describe London as a city, so regardless of its official status, so should Wikipedia. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:51, 8 April 2022 (UTC)
Of course London is a city in the commonly understood meaning of the word. This is nitpicking. -- Alarics (talk) 20:46, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

City status in the United Kingdom is a purely ceremonial thing that doesn’t grant any specific area of the country special powers like it does in countries like the United States. While the tiny, ancient City of London has some independence from the GLA, and serves as a separate county with its own police force, the City of Westminster is a London borough treated no different than the other London boroughs. Enough with these arguments.2600:1700:EDC0:3E80:78BE:5CF8:FB2:7A0 (talk) 00:21, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

London Population in Lead Section and Megacities

I have added the current population of London according to the UK's Office for National Statistics. The addition of a city's population in the lead section is recommended by Wikiproject Cities guidelines so I'm guessing this should be an acceptable addition. I would also like to draw attention to the fact that London is not a megacity because its population is under 10 million. It probably will not reach true megacity status because population growth in the city has plateaued. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kabiryani (talk • contribs) 20:34, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

We are going by the population of the London Metropolitan Area, which is nearly 15 million. As stated further up this page under "London is not a megacity", the UNESCO website lists both London and New York as megacities. See also our WP page Megacity, which says the same thing. -- Alarics (talk) 11:21, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

What is London?

As a non-Londoner, this article confuses me because I don't know what it's about. As far as I can tell, there are two and only two political entities that bear the name London: the City of London and the ceremonial county of Greater London. Since we have separate articles for both of those things, I don't know what this article is about. Perhaps it covers some more informal thing which people commonly think of when they hear the term "London," which is larger than the City of London but smaller than Greater London? If that is the case, then I would think it would correspond to something like Inner London or an even smaller area like Central London, both of which we have separate articles for. Presumably, it doesn't refer to the area that historically was designated County of London because we have another article for that. So, I am left asking what is the subject of this article?

If I'm missing something obvious, please do point it out. If I'm not, then I think we should probably merge this with one of the above mentioned articles or otherwise make very clear in this article what it covers as distinct from what the others cover. Ergo Sum 00:07, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

I guess what you would call Greater London is a de facto city. It’s somewhat similar to the regional municipalitys of Canada, such as present-day Halifax, Nova Scotia and the former Metropolitan Toronto. 2600:1700:EDC0:3E80:78BE:5CF8:FB2:7A0 (talk) 18:45, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

No mention of slavery?

I do not see any mention of slavery in the article. Given London's history with the trans-Atlantic slave trade, this is a rather major omission. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 20:14, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Add mapframe

I suggest to add mapframe to the infobox settlement with this code:
| module = {{infobox mapframe|zoom=8}}
| footnotes = Click the map for an interactive fullscreen view
Agreed? Ruedi33a (talk) 18:21, 26 May 2022 (UTC) Done.Ruedi33a (talk) 15:30, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Linking of cities

I say there should be consistency within one and the same article, which is why it is only logical to link either all cities or none at all.

It seems completely arbitrary to link certain cities and others not without a clearly apparent reason.

Either you think it is legitimate to link cities and then apply that way of thinking to the whole article, or you think linking cities is inappropriate according to MOS:OVERLINK and don't link them in the article.

But applying two different standards in the same article is irrational and nonsensical.-- Maxeto0910 (talk) 19:30, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

This is here because Maxeto0910 wkilinked "Moscow" in this sentence in the second paragraph of the lead: "In 2019 it had the second-highest number of ultra high-net-worth individuals in Europe after Paris and the second-highest number of billionaires in Europe after Moscow." I reverted, citing MOS:OVERLINK, which says (my emphases)
An article is said to be overlinked if it contains an excessive number of links, making it difficult to identify those likely to aid a reader's understanding. A good question to ask yourself is whether reading the article you're about to link to would help someone understand the article you are linking from. Unless a term is particularly relevant to the context in the article, the following are usually not linked:
The names of subjects with which most readers will be at least somewhat familiar. This generally includes major examples of:
...locations (e.g., New Delhi; New York City, or just New York if the city context is already clear; London, if the context rules out London, Ontario; Southeast Asia)
Moscow is a major example of a location with which most readers will be somewhat familiar, and our Moscow article won't help someone understand this article, London. Yes, this article does already have a massive number of links, but that does not mean we should add to them - quite the opposite.
Wikipedia does not have a principle of consistency that we should link all or none, not in Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking or elsewhere. What we do have are tests for whether or not we should link, and linking Moscow here fails them. Far from being "irrational and nonsensical", we serve our readers best by being judicious in our linking. NebY (talk) 20:04, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
I agree with @Maxeto0910. Consistency across articles is important, but consistency within an article is more important. If there is evidence that readers are more familiar with Moscow than Paris then this would be a fair argument, but I doubt such evidence exists. By that argument, you would quite fairly suggest Europe or England shouldn't be linked because any familiar with London would be familiar with the continent and the country in which its located.
MOS:LINK says that, "Appropriate links provide instant pathways to locations within and outside the project that can increase readers' understanding of the topic at hand." I would argue that links to other major capital cities does help with that. SamWilson989 (talk) 20:20, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
First, as I've outlined below, dealing with issues as they arise isn't dependent on first dealing with all pre-existing issues; if an article already has overlinking, that's no justification for making it worse. As for consistency, London does not contain wikilinks to every term within it on which we have an article and we should at least be consistent in not going any further down that road by adding more links to familar terms, locations, etc without particular contextual relevancy.
Indeed, most references to Moscow in this article aren't linked, which conforms to the Manual of Style. That's not a problem for any reader that is taking a general interest in capital cities; they can type "Moscow" into the box at the top. Can you say how linking to Moscow is particularly relevant to the context in the article, "the second-highest number of billionaires in Europe after Moscow"? NebY (talk) 18:38, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Then I have to ask why you leave the links to the Paris and Istanbul articles in the lead section if you think links to city articles are inappropriate, because every aspect you mentioned applies to those cities as well.

That's exactly what I mean by applying two different standards, and of course, that's irrational because it doesn't follow a discernible logic.-- Maxeto0910 (talk) 20:19, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

The argument that I shouldn't deal with new issues as they arise if I haven't already dealt with any pre-existing issues is rather an ad hominem one that deflects from the actual issue, that linking Moscow here is contrary to the Manual of Style. But in case it helps, I'll explain that like so many other editors, any page that I edit is added to my watchlist by default. This means that I see a wide variety of edits. Sometimes an edit may contain a typo, sometimes it may be badly sourced, sometimes it may be contrary to the Manual of Style, sometimes it may be vandalism, sometimes it may be very interesting and worth expanding on. My response to such edits doesn't depend on first reviewing the entire article for typos, sourcing, MoS, vandalism, or interesting points that bear expansion. That's not how we volunteer editors maintain and improve the encyclopedia, and it would not merely be "irrational and nonsensical", as you put it, to require that, it would be harmful to the project. NebY (talk) 18:14, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
I think we all need to take a step back. NebY, please could you give your opinion on whether you think all the capital cities should be linked, or if none of them should be linked? I think that'll get to the crux of this issue. Thanks. SamWilson989 (talk) 18:17, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
I haven't reviewed the entire article. I agree that it's equally inappropriate to link Paris in that sentence, and I would have delinked it except that I would rather not make such changes during a discussion like this, as it could seem prejudicial or provocative. NebY (talk) 18:42, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Thanks NebY, appreciate the reply. Personally, I don't have a strong opinion, but I think there is some logic that on a page about a European capital city it would be sensible to direct readers to other articles on European capital cities, especially where direct comparisons are being made. SamWilson989 (talk) 18:46, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Inline links in a large article are probably the worst way to help readers compare similar things, whether other European capital cities, artworks or units of measurement. By the time the poor reader's gone back and found an instance that's wikilinked in this article, they could have typed the name into the box at the top and be well into reading the desired article without all the faff and distraction.
Sometimes too they'll find a navbox at the side or the bottom, like {{World's most populated urban areas}}, but navboxes take work to create and maintain, and really it's the more complex ones like {{Northeast US}} that are worth it. We do have {{Capital cities of European Union member states}}, but it seems no-one's found it worth making a capital-cities one that includes London.
Far better, if they want to read a selection of articles about capital cities, then at the foot of the article, clicking Capitals in Europe provides a comprehensive list, straightforwardly created and maintained – and Wikipedia has some brilliant wikignomes who do just that.
It's so apposite that MOS:OVERLINK uses New Delhi, New York and London as examples – and without any "except in articles about each other" rider! NebY (talk) 20:32, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
As I say, I have no strong opinion. I think you make a good argument and I'm happy to support unlinking all of the capital cities listed. SamWilson989 (talk) 21:12, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Thank you! I'm happy to tackle that, just not tonight. NebY (talk) 21:25, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

"The argument that I shouldn't deal with new issues as they arise if I haven't already dealt with any pre-existing issues is rather an ad hominem one"

I have already drawn your attention to this issue in the edit summary ("Either you link all cities or none at all."), where upon you said:

"No, we do not have to link everything just because we already link a lot, nor every city because we link some."

And even if I didn't mention the issue in the edit summary, I explained it in detail here on the discussion page, so coming up with such an insinuation to me now seems rather like a pretext.-- Maxeto0910 (talk) 03:25, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

You wrote "Then I have to ask why you leave the links...." I answered. (I did wonder if I should wikilink ad hominem.) NebY (talk) 18:13, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
There is no basis for the none-or-all approach. Generally don't link the names of well-known cities/countries/states. Tony (talk) 07:21, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Merger proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was to not merge. PlatinumClipper96 (talk) 17:58, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

The scope of Greater London and London is exactly the same, with a lot of duplicate information. The content of Greater London is a mix of information already in London and some that is already in Greater London Authority or can be moved there. The list of sections is:

1) History. It can be moved to Greater London Authority, which doesn't have a history section.

2) Geography. Better covered in London#Geography and Geography of London.

3) Governance. Better covered in Greater London Authority.

4) Demography. Better covered in London#Demography and Demography of London.

5) Economy. Better covered in London#Economy and Economy of London.

6) Religion. Better covered in London#Religion and Religion in London.

7) Education. Better covered in London#Education and Education in London.

8) Twin cities. Could be moved to London. Vpab15 (talk) 09:56, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

After the merge, Greater London could become a dab page with links to London and Greater London Authority, or it could just redirect to London. Vpab15 (talk) 10:00, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
They are distinct. One is about the city, the other is about the administrative area. See other articles on (major) cities for reference as to how they are covered. This article is no different. PD Rivers (talk) 10:08, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
Can you give some examples? In the Paris and Grand Paris case, both cover different areas. On the other hand Delhi covers the same area as the National Capital Territory of Delhi and they are not separate articles. In any case, it is worth discussing. I don't think you should have removed the merge notices just because you don't agree with it. You should let other editors participate in the discussion. I am re-adding the merge notices. Vpab15 (talk) 10:23, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
Two more examples: Berlin and Hamburg are both cities and states in Germany, but there are no separate articles to cover both aspects. Vpab15 (talk) 11:40, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
I should have been clearer. When I said other city articles, I’m referring to the subsections they cover (history, geography, demographics, economy etc.), which is similar to London. Each subsection gives a brief overview, the parent article goes into more detail. Admin (local, national) is covered in London, but it’s brief, with the Greater London article going into more depth. The two articles are distinct, as are geography of London, Economy of London, etc. PD Rivers (talk) 12:01, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
Are you saying the admistrative areas of other cities have separate articles, even if the area they cover is the same? If so, do you have any examples? Also, can you please re-add the merge notice you removed? You cannot just make the decision on behalf of the whole community that this discussion should not proceed. Vpab15 (talk) 12:30, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
In those cases the city and state have the same name while with London's the state is "Greater London", see Wikipedia:Separate articles for administrative divisions to settlements#Settlements with different names in division. Also the German ones don't look like they have had significant boundary changes while Greater London is much larger than the County of London before 1965. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:35, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
I am afraid I didn't understand the section you linked, even after reading it three times. However, on a the section "Different names", it says: If a division and a settlement have different names but they cover (more or less) the same area it may be desirable to cover them in 1 article such as Washington, D.C. (settlement) and District of Columbia (division). That could be applied here. Vpab15 (talk) 19:36, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
Also the German ones don't look like they have had significant boundary changes. Berlin was literally split into two for quite some time. Vpab15 (talk) 22:20, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
No, Greater London is a distinct modern administrative area; London's a two-thousand-year-old conurbation the governance of which has changed many times and the extent of which has changed greatly and continues to have several definitions. It's untidy and messy in real life, but fortunately Wikipedia accepts that and doesn't try to impose an absolute uniformity on its settlement articles, even within a single country or continent, let alone worldwide. NebY (talk) 16:30, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose London, the city and Greater London are 2 different things and should probably be separate even though there is a significant overlap. A major global city and a county created in 1965 which includes rural areas should probably remain separate. If anything I'd consider splitting the region to London (region) since Greater London county doesn't include the City of London. Crouch, Swale (talk) 16:52, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
Concur with the comments above. London is in the ceremonial county of Greater London. There is a difference. As the hatnote states this article is about the city, a major global one, while Greater London, under other uses, deals with the City of London and the 32 London boroughs. This from the Visit London site which I had been reading earlier on museums; London is located in the county of Greater London, an administrative area that includes 32 boroughs plus the City of London. There will be some overlap hence Greater London is covered here, but the focus on the Greater London article is on the entire region, this on the city. Gabriella MNT (talk) 17:13, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
You got that backwards, the ceremonial county of Greater London (the 32 London boroughs) is inside London (City of London and 32 boroughs, as the infobox mentions). In other words, London is bigger than the ceremonial county of Greater London, which excludes the City of London. Vpab15 (talk) 19:39, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
However the administrative area of Greater London, as correctly stated in that article, includes the City of London (and the City of Westminster too), while as the London article states, the metropolis or conurbation extends further, having significantly expanded in the last couple of hundred years (unlike Greater London, a modern invention). NebY (talk) 21:45, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
You are right in that the administrative area of Greater London includes the city of London, which means it covers the exact same area as London. That is, the City of London and 32 boroughs. Not sure I understand your reference to Westminster, which is just one of the 32 boroughs. You are also right that London has expanded in the past, like pretty much any other city in the world. The conurbation is refered to as the Greater London Built-up Area, which is a different topic with its own article. Vpab15 (talk) 22:02, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
London only covers the exact same area as the administrative area of Greater London if you define London as the area encompassed by the administrative area of Greater London. Westminster is not merely one of the 32 boroughs, it is the City of Westminster and governed by Westminster City Council. It has its own Lord Mayor but only a deputy Lieutenant. NebY (talk) 22:24, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
  • Oppose Vpab15, you are falling into the trap of assuming London and Greater London are the same, which they are not. The solution to the duplication problem is to improve both sections, mainly Greater London, to better reflect that difference. Incidentally, I refer to the 1965 GL authority, not the urban sprawl Greater London metropolis. Before you can improve something, you need to know what it is you're trying to improve. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 22:09, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
    Per Greater London: The administrative area, which has the same extent as the London Region. The infobox gives the are of the region as 1,572 km2. In London, the infobox gives the area of London as 1,572 km2. Must be a coincidence. Since you seem to know so much, can you explain it? Vpab15 (talk) 22:22, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
As I said, Greater London and London are not the same. That is my explanation. What is difficult about that to understand? You have replied that Greater London and the "London Region" has the same extent. I agree. How does that address my comment that Greater London and London are not the same? Once again, before you can improve something, you need to know what it is you're trying to improve. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 22:35, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
As I said, Greater London and London are not the same. That is my explanation. That is the best explanation I have ever seen, lol. Vpab15 (talk) 22:39, 27 July 2022 (UTC)
There's four London articles. London, Greater London and the Greater London Built-up Area. As well as the London Commuter Belt article. Wouldn't they be better merged to Greater London? DragonofBatley (talk) 21:59, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
  • Strong oppose. London has never been exactly defined by the ever-changing set of administrative boundaries devised around it. This fact has always been part of the very nature of the city (except the period when "London" only referred to the ancient City of London). The County of London was created for the same purpose as Greater London, but it did not encompass anywhere near all of the area referred to as "London" - many definitions of London existed even then. There are parts of Greater London that are often not considered part of "London", including small rural villages. There are places outside Greater London that are fully within the metropolis and are often considered part of "London". The varied definitions of London and the statistics for London that use these are outlined in the London article. Strongly agree with points made by fellow editors. London is an informally defined, ancient metropolis. Greater London is a modern administrative entity. PlatinumClipper96 (talk) 21:21, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
    It is true that London wasn't precisely defined in the past, but it is quite well defined now. In the article, there are specific numbers for the population, area and GDP that exactly match those of Greater London. Furthermore, many of the bodies that manage different areas of the city have London in them: such as the Mayor of London, London Assembly, London Fire Brigade, etc. That means that the common name of the administrative area is London rather than Greater London. It has been more than 50 years since the London Government Act 1963 clearly defined the area of London, and more than 20 since the Greater London Authority Act 1999 established all the bodies for the unified administration of London as a single city. I think that is long enough to consider London an established city with established boundaries. Vpab15 (talk) 22:13, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
    @Vpab15, Greater London is not the only set of boundaries used when gathering such statistics for London. Some of these are actually used in the London article, as I mentioned earlier. The purpose of the London Government Act 1963 was not to "clearly define the area of London" - it created an administrative area called "Greater London". The name of that area is still Greater London. The GLA Act 1999 established the Greater London Authority, of which the office of "Mayor of London" and the London Assembly form part. Nothing in this Act provides an exact definition for London. Many bodies have been created over the years for "the unified administration of London as a single city", whether it be the authorities behind London Transport, the Metropolitan Police, the London postal district, the London Traffic Area or London Fire Brigade, just to name some. These long predate Greater London, and had boundaries that were not aligned with administrative areas designed for more "unified administration" i.e., the Metropolitan Board of Works, the County of London and Greater London. The definition of "London" remains as varied as ever, and Greater London remains nothing more than another set of administrative boundaries. PlatinumClipper96 (talk) 00:40, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
  • (edit conflict) Strong oppose. Greater London is a modern administrative area that encompasses the majority (but not all) of the conurbation commonly known as "London" plus rural areas and villages that not part of that conurbation legally, practically or culturally - the two are not at all the same thing. If you want examples, Loughton is part of London for practical purposes but is not in Greater London, Cudham is a village in Greater London which is not part of London. Thryduulf (talk) 22:23, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
    Cudham is part of the London Borough of Bromley, so it is part of London. You could say it is historically and culturally part of Kent, but today it is part of London. Not very different from many other cases where borders have changed. Bolzano is part of Italy, even if it is historically and culturally Austrian. Vpab15 (talk) 22:43, 29 July 2022 (UTC)
    No, Cudham is a village within Greater London but it is not part of London. Greater London is an administrative area whose boundaries were fixed in 1965, London is a city and conurbation whose boundaries are not fixed - the two are not the same. Thryduulf (talk) 00:14, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
    The fact the local authority district in which it is located has the status of London borough indicates nothing except that it is in Greater London. Most places in that borough are considered part of London. Cudham would not generally be considered part of London, mainly due to the fact it is unquestionably a rural Kentish village. As for "borders", London is a metropolis split between counties. It is incorrect to claim that a place cannot be in London if it is in Kent or cannot be in Kent if in London. Needless to mention the places beyond Greater London that are often considered part of "London", Greater London itself consists solely of places in the historic counties of Middlesex, Essex, Kent, Surrey and Herts. The entire Bromley local authority district is in that of Kent, along with areas such as Greenwich, Lewisham and Erith, but of course outside its ceremonial and non-metropolitan county (Kent County Council area), being in Greater London. PlatinumClipper96 (talk) 01:12, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
    I am struggling to understand some of the opposition to the proposal. I am not trying to change the scope of this article. Its scope is made clear from the very first sentence (population of just over 9 million). That is the population of Greater London, including Cudham. This is also shown in the area and GDP numbers and in various sentences in the text, like "The administration of London is formed of two tiers: a citywide, strategic tier and a local tier. Citywide administration is coordinated by the Greater London Authority (GLA), while local administration is carried out by 33 smaller authorities" and "London, also known as Greater London". Since the scope of this article is the same as that of Greater London, what should be the scope of Greater London? Right now, it is mostly duplicate sections with duplicate information. Also, it doesn't answer the crucial question of whether London and Greater London are the same. Even if you disagree, right now this article assumes they are the same, so we should be consistent and provide a uniform answer to that question. Vpab15 (talk) 08:54, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
    A similar case resulted in the merge of Istanbul and Istanbul Province (see Talk:Istanbul/Archive_10#Proposed_merge_with_Istanbul_Province). From Istanbul#Administration: Since 2004, the municipal boundaries of Istanbul have been coincident with the boundaries of its province. Vpab15 (talk) 09:08, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
    What you aren't understanding is that the scope of London and the scope of Greater London are not the same. The first is about a city, the second is about an administrative area. Unlike Istanbul the borders of the city and administrative area are not the same. The population figures are similar because the population of areas that are part of London but outside Greater London is broadly similar to the population of areas inside Greater London that are not part of London - especially when the precision is hundreds of thousands. I know this is repetitive but there are only so many different ways you can say black is not white. Thryduulf (talk) 09:18, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
    What is the scope of London then? Can you provide a definition? What parts are included and excluded for the population figures? I checked the population reference ([2]) and it refers to London region, which is the same as Greater London. It gives a nice breakdown of the 32 boroughs and the City of London, and the sum matches exactly the total population of London: 9,002,488. Do you have any references that give a different value for the population of London? Vpab15 (talk) 09:32, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
    As repeatedly explained the scope is the city. I don't have exact population figures because population figures are generally collated for administrative areas and London isn't one. As also noted multiple times above, London doesn't have formally defined boundaries but it includes places that are part of the contiguous built up area which are functionally part of London (e.g. Loughton) and excludes those places that are functionally not part of London (e.g. Cudham). Thryduulf (talk) 10:06, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
Vpab15, I suggest you take something useful from this discussion. No, it isn't that Cudham is in Kent, or London, or both, but rather how to use sources. Most of your arguments are not valid because they are effectively your opinion or they are based on a misunderstanding of what a reliable secondary source is. You say such things as "Because the Met police is called the London Metropolitan Police, AND it covers the area of Greater London admin county, that proves that London is defined as what is inside the area of Greater London. You have done the same for other agencies using the name London in their title. That is dangerous illogicality because it creates false information. Wikipedia is full of this sort of false reasoning. Take a good look at wp:RSS and CITE and other similar articles to see how and when to use references. I am not pretending I am perfect, far from it, but the more we stick to using only verifiable detail the better wikipedia will be. A vast amount of the detail about 'London' here is based on personal opinion masquerading as referenced fact. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 10:27, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
Partial support - I would personally merge both the Greater London Built-up Area and Greater London articles as they are not really distinguished. And I'd merge the London Commuter Belt into Greater London as it only takes in a few towns and At Alban's. But not as informative. @Vpab15:, thoughts?DragonofBatley (talk) 11:34, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
Vpab15, In reply to an earlier post, English has a habit of dropping superfluous words. Why say The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland' when Unitited Kingdom will do? (Do you) get it? This is obviously because the long version can easily be understood without those time consuming extras. Sometimes though, this can lead to confusion and talk about 'London' is a classic example of that, to the point where many people do not know what the speaker means when he says 'London', or he assumes one meaning when another was meant. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 11:38, 30 July 2022 (UTC)
Strong oppose - These articles are already very long, so it would be weird to merge them. Besides, London and Greater London categorically do not share boundaries. The Greater London Built-up Area is much larger than Greater London, which also lacks the City of London, so there is not a very good reason to combine them at all. And for many English cities it is common to separate cities from the administrative regions they are part of, even York and City of York are being split now. Benjamin Bryztal (talk) 09:44, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
London and Greater London categorically do not share boundaries. That is the key question to answer here. I thought it would be uncontroversial to argue that something with the name London borough is part of London, but I was wrong. I will try to get some evidence that sources use Greater London and London to mean the same thing. I would ask those opposing to also try to find evidence that support their view. Regarding the Greater London Built-up Area, there was a suggestion by DragonofBatley to merge that article too. But I agree it is probably better to leave it as it is, since it has a clearly bigger scope than London or Greater London. Vpab15 (talk) 10:27, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
Vpab15 This debate and others like it have been going the source of countless debates for many years, some quite heated too. I suggest you troll back through archived pages and take a look. Two of the main reasons for these repetitive discussions is that sources are ambiguous and there are very few truly reliable quality secondary sources. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 11:39, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
@Vpab15 The onus for providing evidence is on the editor who wants to change the status quo, but as Roger notes there are very few reliable secondary sources on the matter because for most purposes it doesn't matter - you will find clear definitions of "Greater London", "City of London" and other areas with administrative status but because "London" isn't one of them. "London" is a loose, cultural concept with ambiguous, fuzzy boundaries depending on context. Other examples of differences include North Ockendon ("a dispersed settlement within the Metropolitan Green Belt", the green belt is "a statutory green belt around London" (emphasis mine)) and Chigwell (the article is very unclear but the settlement is partly in Greater London and partly in Essex, the pedestrian crossing in this view is approximately on the county border) but it is all part of London for many practical purposes. Many people outside of London think of the M25 as defining the boundary of London even though it almost completely encompasses Greater London (and small parts are outside). Loughton has a London phone code, Ilford post code, is within the M25, is served by the London Underground Central line and the M11 junction allows access to and from London only. Those people whose job, social, family or friends are principally to the south and west generally think of it as being in London, while those whose ties are mainly to the north and east think of it as being outside London.
As proposer it is also your responsibility to explain what the benefits of merging the articles would be, and even discounting the many differences between them written on this page and in the archives, I'm just not seeing any. Thryduulf (talk) 14:31, 1 August 2022 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Dialect

Well, I live here, and can say with certainty that so-called Cockney accent is absolutely dead. And has been for the last 40 or 50 years. Not only that, but accents all over the country have moved towards standard TV English. Macdonald-ross (talk) 20:22, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

The article Cockney doesn't say anything about that. Do you have any reliable sources to back up your claim that Cockney is dead? Vpab15 (talk) 10:52, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

"Air Quality" subsection under "Geography"

I respectfully propose that a subsection of "Geography" be added and called "Air Quality." Under this subsection, please include the following:

"According to the 2016 World Health Organization Global Urban Ambient Air Pollution Database,[1] the annual average PM2.5 concentration in 2016 was 12 micrograms per cubic metre, which is 2 micrograms above the recommended limit of the WHO Air Quality Guidelines for the annual mean PM2.5.[2] Kings College London conducts daily research on the air quality of the city[3] and has reported that air pollution kills roughly 9,500 people in London on average every year.[4] Arod59881 (talk) 21:50, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "WHO Global Ambient Air Quality Database (update 2018)". World Health Organization.
  2. ^ "Ambient (outdoor) air quality and health". World Health Organization.
  3. ^ "Air Pollution Now". London Air.
  4. ^ "SILENT KILLER: IN LONDON, AIR POLLUTION HAS BECOME A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH". Pacific Standard.

New record temperature for March

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56579679
The record temperature in London has been confirmed as 24.5C
Can the weather box please be updated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thermohydraulic (talk • contribs) 11:45, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Population update

The population updates for 2020 have been published by the ONS: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/datasets/populationestimatesforukenglandandwalesscotlandandnorthernireland

Can somebody please update the total population here to reflect the latest data? (9,002,488) Row 222, Code: E12000007 in the mid-2020 spreadsheet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cardyak (talk • contribs) 09:09, 28 June 2021 (UTC)

Rail and airports

This section doesn’t make sense. For example Inverness Airport is not conveniently linked to London via Inverness railway station, which isn’t even near the airport anyway. The journey would be over 9 hours and then you would need to find your way to the airport by road which is at least 30 mins. There is only one train per day and then the sleeper. Same with the other examples except Birmingham.

London also has convenient rail connections with airports out of Greater London. These airports include Birmingham Airport (via Birmingham International railway station), East Midlands Airport (via East Midlands Parkway railway station), Inverness Airport (via Inverness railway station), Leeds Bradford Airport (via Bradford Interchange or Leeds railway station) and Liverpool John Lennon Airport (via Liverpool South Parkway railway station). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.23.25.205 (talk) 20:16, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. I have removed Inverness Airport. As you say, there is no convenient rail connections from London any way you look at it. I am not so sure about the others though. I think most are within two hours from London. Should any more airports be removed? Vpab15 (talk) 20:40, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
On second thoughts, I removed the whole paragraph ([3]) Vpab15 (talk) 20:54, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Rail

London#Inter-city and international currently has "linking London with the rest of Britain including" followed by a list of over 40 cities and towns, which doesn't look at all useful to the reader and is a WP:SEAOFBLUE. It grew slowly from the original 10 added in 2014 to over 20 in 2020, each addition being quite reasonable in itself, then to over 40 in those same edits that added Inverness Airport. Should we prune it back to about 10 again and maybe watch it grow again, or simply say something like "directly linking London with many of Britain's major cities and towns"? NebY (talk) 14:37, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

I'd vote to remove all of them and leave something like "directly linking London with most of Great Britain's major cities and towns". Failing that, I don't think we should have more than five destinations. Vpab15 (talk) 15:16, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
 Done Nice phrasing, far better than trying to pick a few cities. NebY (talk) 11:13, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Foreign born population ERROR

Demography
Main article: Demography of London

The 2021 census recorded that 3,575,739 people or 40.6% of London's population were foreign-born making it the city with the second largest immigrant population after New York City, in terms of absolute numbers.

This is correct, until the part 'the second largest immigrant population after New York, in terms of absolute numbers.'

Wikipedia has its own article on this topic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_born). It shows New York City having 3.2 million foreign-born while London has 3.5 million foreign born, which according to this webpage, makes London the city with the largest immigrant population - period.

Can someone please fix up this sentence by stating that London is the city with the largest immigrant population, in terms of absolute numbers? Cythreill (talk) 11:11, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Vivienne Westwood

Vivienne Westwood is stated as living in London. This is not the case - she died in December 2022 as stated in the (linked) entry dedicated to her. Requires updating. 88.97.106.170 (talk) 15:57, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks. Vpab15 (talk) 16:38, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Capital of England?!??!

Can this be removed from the opening or a reference added 92.13.229.192 (talk) 18:14, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

This has been discussed numerous times over the years and there are a lot of discussions in the talk page archives about this. DDMS123 (talk) 18:31, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

Tourism figures, most visited

Perhaps I missed something during my scroll down of Talk archives, but I counted two discussions on this about Paris vs London. First one 2006 (short and unimportant), and another 2011/12 that was interesting between two users, en-bateau and Rangoon11. I found en-bateau's arguments in favour of Paris convincing, and there are other RS that have Paris comfortably in front. For example, Statista is cited to give London's GDP as highest in Europe, but Statista has Paris as most visited. I'm mentioning it again because (again, maybe I missed something) the issue has not, I feel, been addressed conclusively and not mentioned for 10 years. Do others feel there is a discussion to be had? BowlAndSpoon (talk) 02:26, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Trivial junk usually source to more junk ..... not sure should be here at all ....but that said. Not sure what sources you're looking at but a quick search gives London. ...
Moxy- 02:43, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
I'd agree with the "not sure should be here at all", or alternatively we could go with the "one of the most visited" since all sources seem to agree on that. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:47, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Move request

Resolved

There is a move request discussion at Talk:Greater_London#Requested_move_13_September_2023 that might be of interest to editors of this article. Vpab15 (talk) 18:52, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 September 2023

change "As of 2007, one fifth of primary school across London were from ethnic minorities." to "As of 2007, one fifth of primary school students across London were from ethnic minorities."

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London#Ethnic_groups)

Schnitzel89 (talk) 14:52, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

 Done. Thank you. Nthep (talk) 14:55, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Voltaire

@Para Clark: It remains unclear why the Voltaire quote warrants inclusion in the Economy section. It is an interesting philosophical perspective, but contributes little to an understanding of the modern London economy. This is particularly true given that economic history more broadly is better placed within the History section. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:26, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

@Para Clark: ↑ Nikkimaria (talk) 04:34, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
Apologies for not responding sooner (only just seen this message now). Think it fits better in the economy section as the history section is more broader in scope. If you look at the other sections (architecture, travel, leisure, lgbt, literature, museums, recreation, sport etc.) they cover more history/development than a history section would. Economy covers the development of London as a financial center (still today being one of two) with finance being its largest industry. Para Clark (talk) 21:23, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
But why do you feel this quote in particular warrants inclusion? Is this a perspective broadly shared in the literature? Nikkimaria (talk) 00:50, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
Sorry for the delayed reponse (been on holiday this time). Yes it is a broad view, and one which I had first come across via the historian Jeremy Black on the BBC when he contrasted London with Paris. The unique economic condition in London saw commerce trump differences, which Voltaire summed up. I added an extra source on the quote itself which expounds on this; "Commerce, or shop keeping, established an arena within which people dealt with each other solely for economic benefit and, so, ignored extraneous factors such as the other party’s religious practices. On the floor of the London stock exchange, religious differences disappeared into background noise as people scrambled to make a profit from each other." Para Clark (talk) 11:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Okay, that would be better summarized as part of the preceding paragraph. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:30, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
hi thank you for showing me i am thank full 2601:3CB:800:E080:F1D3:C3B0:2683:984E (talk) 21:39, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 January 2024

Please revert this edit: the cited policy states If the name of the article has a pronunciation that is not apparent from its spelling, include its pronunciation in parentheses after the first occurrence of the name. 212.3.130.126 (talk) 20:05, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Looking at the archives, this issue has been discussed multiple times (1, 2, 3), and as far as I can tell no consensus was reached. Perhaps we should settle this dispute once and for all here (hopefully without getting to WP:DRN or, heaven forbid, a WP:RFC). My own opinion leans towards removal. The spirit of the policy is to help people who know English reasonably well to pronounce unusual words without cluttering every lead section with a pronunciation guide. London is a common enough city name that I think the vast majority of English speakers should know how to pronounce. Liu1126 (talk) 22:35, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
With my edit request answering hat on, I've set the edit request as answered as edits under discussion or which may be controversial exclude the request from consideration. Putting on my regular editor hat, I basically agree with Liu1126 and support removal / do not include pronunciation in lead. I'd argue that London falls under the spirit of Do not include pronunciations for names of foreign countries whose pronunciations are well known in English provision of MOS:LEADPRON, despite the fact London is not a country (or foreign). —Sirdog (talk) 06:21, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

The UK doesn't have a capital city.

London is the capital of England which is a country within the UK. Other countries within the UK also have capital cities. 84.66.191.171 (talk) 21:46, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Plenty of reliable sources establish that London is the capital of the UK. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:26, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
The constituent countries have their own capitals, but London is both capital of England and the UK. Jimthing (talk) 22:19, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

London isn't a city

Greater London isn't a city but an administrative area. Within London only The City of London and The City of Westminster have city status. This article on London incorrectly cites London as the biggest city in the UK. GabeDertzer (talk) 16:48, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Yes, it is a city and defined as that in reliable sources, such as [4]. Vpab15 (talk) 18:19, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
For WP usage it's a city, and is thus defined as one here, along with various text and citations/notes explaining the exact delineations, as required. Jimthing (talk) 22:23, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Largest Western metro area

Added this point in lede given its pertinence in such an article about a location on WP. Jimthing (talk) 22:25, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

I don't think it should be in the lede, since it is about the metropolitan area, which has it's own article, and not about London as such. I would vote to remove it, or at least move it to a separate section. Vpab15 (talk) 23:03, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 31 January 2024

Correction of "London is the capital of the United Kingdom". This is incorrect and misleading, the UK does not have an official Capital city. It is made up of 4 countries which each have their own capital cities. There is no official recognition or statement by any Government of the UK designating London as the capital 86.25.198.144 (talk) 21:31, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. Vpab15 (talk) 22:28, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

OpenStreetMap

@Tub st Hi, this map is not redundand:

Map

Why did you remove that? Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 16:24, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

This map can complement the fixed ones on the page, and it adds functions that those cannot perform. Regards, The Equalizer (talk) 17:47, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Wikimedia Map

I would like to suggest changing the Wikimedia map on the page as it is missing the City of London. "London" as defined by the London Government Act is a city consisting of both Greater London and the City of London. Felleno (talk) 12:36, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

Corrected. The Equalizer (talk) 21:30, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
Thank you. Felleno (talk) 17:34, 23 April 2024 (UTC)

Brutus of Troy

There is no mention in the article about Brutus of Troy. Did I miss a talk, or is that a mistake? Brutus supposedly was in London approximately 1,100 BC, and his descendants settled Iron Age Britain. New Troy was settled on the River Thames. Cltjames (talk) 17:43, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

What would you propose saying and where? Nikkimaria (talk) 03:56, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
@Nikkimaria The prehistory section of the article, which includes Timeline of London, and History of London all mention the settlement of London from after 5,000BC. But there is a gap in those 3 articles regarding the Iron Age of the city. With correct sourcing, the articles related to London and its history should all be updated with relevant information regarding Brutus and his settlement of New Troy, which became London. Cltjames (talk) 04:09, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
Given that that story is widely considered to be mythical, I don't think it's appropriate to present it as history. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:12, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
@Nikkimaria it just seems unprofessional, like something is missing after making comparisons to a web search about New Troy and the founding of London. Cltjames (talk) 04:16, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
I would argue it is most professional to focus on what really happened according to the most reliable sources, rather than perpetuate a myth. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:17, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
@Nikkimaria There is no consitency betwen the Trinovantum and London articles regarding the facts presented about Brutus of Troy. Cltjames (talk) 04:18, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
I agree. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:19, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
The source given is a travel accommodation website, the author is not a serious historian and Geoffrey of Monmouth is fantasy, not fact, as we have previously discussed on a number of Welsh history pages. We cannot possibly introduce an article on the UK’s capital city by stating it was founded by a fictitious Trojan. KJP1 (talk) 17:42, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
@KJP1 OK, no problem. Maybe it's one of those topics that isn't discussed enough, and perhaps one day, the history books will be rewritten. For now, it's a taboo topic, but probably the truth considering sources consistently mentioning Brutus to date. Cltjames (talk) 18:54, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Ctjames - Beyond supporting efforts to ensure you don’t present them as facts on here, there really is nothing I can do about your predilection for treating long-debunked sources as historically accurate. KJP1 (talk) 22:37, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

london bridge

Tower Bridge

a tall bridge in London crossing the river Thames 174.164.88.119 (talk) 23:17, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

London Bridge is not tall. You seem to be thinking of Tower Bridge. Enginear (talk) 23:04, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Status as Capital of the World

The wiki page for New York City states in its overview that it is sometimes referred to as the capital of the world; a similar edit is also warranted for London which has also been referred to as such many times

https://www.worldsbestcities.com/rankings/worlds-best-cities/

https://www.businessinsider.com/sorry-new-york-london-is-the-world-capital-city-2014-10

https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/tony-parsons-london-capital-world

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/12/london-top-world-city-poll-brexit-covid-19/ 45.150.146.111 (talk) 01:45, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

The articles linked are pretty sensationalistic and probably don't meet WP:RS. Vpab15 (talk) 16:47, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
Should be removed at the New York page. Moxy🍁 19:26, 21 March 2024 (UTC)
Agreed Enginear (talk) 23:07, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:London/Archive_13&oldid=1244713901"