User talk:Nixer/Global city additions

Population and related

I changed population to metro area, which is more important than simpler jurisdictions. Many large cities can't be properly quantified except in this way—the City of London has a pop of 8000! You can find various sources for this. If someone has a better one, post it here and we can discuss. Marskell 12:26, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I will add information on population of agglomerations.--Nixer 12:48, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

And wht is metro area?... Please describe. A have data on number of metro stations is it the same?--Nixer 12:52, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Metro or metropolitan area is the agglomeration. New York has 8 million while it's metro area has 20+. "I will add information on population of agglomerations"—that's what I've just added. Marskell 13:00, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes--Nixer 13:12, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I don't think we need both Metro system by length and by passenger rides. Drop one and I'd suggest adding busiest airport. This will be a list of a half-dozen U.S. but so be it. Other potential replacements.

International airports mentioned in the criterias in the article, so we could add them. This will be useful information--Nixer 13:12, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Stock exchange by volume traded.

Dont know, is it necessary--Nixer 13:12, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I would replace GaWC repetition with this. M

Heh, may be then include overall turnover of casinos situated in the city? :-)--Nixer 13:37, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

City GDP

May be--Nixer 13:12, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely. It's an obvious indicator. M

HoHow to count - by exchange rates of by purchasing power parity?--Nixer 13:37, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Factbook uses PPP. I don't like that myself but perhaps that would be best. M

Percentage foreign born.

OK, but not only from foreign country, but migrants from another cities/settlements.--Nixer 13:12, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Impossible to track—and this doesn't necessarily indicate a Globalized city. M

Then this information is not indicative.--Nixer 13:37, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No, migrants from other cities within the country itself not foreign born in general is impossible to track. Miami, T.O., L.A., Vancouver. I'd then guess: N.Y., London, Sydney. The data for U.S. cities is somewhat skewed given that the foreign born overwhelmingly comes from Mexico for cities in the south. I think this is important for two reasons: first a large foreign born pop means internationalized influences in cuisine, art etc. and second it creates enormous name recognition given six-degrees of seperation ("hey my wife's brother's wife's cousin lives there!"). Living abroad I've noticed, for instance, more people have heard of Vancouver than Montreal. The former is smaller but it has more foreign which I take to be the reason. Marskell 13:50, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is or is not Unesco site. How you place this on list like this I don't know but it is important. Marskell 13:04, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am in question. By the way, there could be many UNESCO sites in a city. We could count them.--Nixer 13:12, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps but not often.

By the way, the WHOLE St.Petersburg centre is a UNESCO Heritage site. The number of sites is not indicative. :-(--Nixer 13:37, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Number of billionaires

I have the information only for five first places in the table :-\--Nixer 13:15, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This is really going to be a hard one to find appropriate summative and comparative sources for. Oh and please provide your sources under the headers as I did for metro population. Marskell 13:18, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have found appropriate information. :-) Unfortunately, only upto 9th place :-/... --Nixer 14:07, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

To be done/suggestions

Do you agree to drop one of the metro use lists and replace it with airports? Here is the list of busiest in order [1]: Atlanta, Chicago, L.A., London, Dallas, Tokyo, Frankfurt, Paris, San Francisco.

Heh. There are four international airports in Moscow (Sheremetievo, Domodedovo, Ostafievo, Vnukovo) and an internal airlines airport (Bykovo). How do you plan to do with it?--Nixer 18:10, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ya, same problem with New York. Maybe I can track down totals for cities. Marskell 18:13, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am adding foreign born from this source [2]. I can dig a little deeper and probably locate the United Nations report itself if you like.

Do you wat to say Moscow became more global when the USSR collapsed? :-) When many of migrants from Soviet republics became foriners ;-)--Nixer 18:30, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I actually think we should drop the first column. Again, taking the core jurisdiction really doesn't do justice to the topic. L.A. has just under four million people—it's greater area 17 million. When people talk about larger cities they are inevitably discussing metropolitan areas. Marskell 17:41, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and relisting the GaWC stuff in the fourth column would be totally redundant. If and when I track down stock exchanges or GDP we can put it in their. Marskell 17:44, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Do you wat to say Moscow became more global when the USSR collapsed? :-) When many of migrants from Soviet republics became foriners ;-)--Nixer 18:30, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well now, there's actually some truth to that in the sense of remittances leaving and so on. Miami, of course, will cease to be number one when the U.S. annexes Cuba and incoporates it into the union... Anyhow, if the U.N. thinks its important it has a place here (more, to be honest, than billionaires does).

What is the source for passenger rides? I note a wiki-page on the topic but it's unsourced itself. While they may not have underground metros, I can't imagine certain Indian cities not being on the list.

Regarding airports, I can't find anything that tabulates for cities with more than one. Newark and JFK together would place New York at 65 mil arrivals, departures and transfers; [3]; if La Guardia were added I expect NY would be number one. As for Moscow, if Sheremetyevo International Airport and Domodedovo International Airport are the two largest and process only 12 million and 13 million respectively [4], I can't imagine that together the airports would crack the top ten. Marskell 19:02, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Metropolitan area

I saw throug the your source and it seems extremly outdated.

For example, for Moscow population it indicates estimated (!) data for 2000 of 8300000 while present day data is over 10400000 ! So the difference is 3,5 million! --Nixer 19:16, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

By the way. In Moscow there are some 10,407,000 citizens. In Moscow Region there are living 6,618,538 people outside the city itself, which in sum constitutes 17,025,538 while the page List_of_metropolitan_areas_by_population describes the entire population of the Moscow metropolitan area as 14,440,000 :-\--Nixer 19:27, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I stated above: "You can find various sources for this. If someone has a better one, post it here and we can discuss." Change if you have a better source. Marskell 19:34, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

So can I write 17025538 insted?--Nixer 19:37, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No, of course not. The Moscow region is 47,000 km²! It's not synonomous with the city. Marskell 20:19, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A number of sources

This is a place where it could be found links to some useful data [5]--Nixer 19:48, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Top 10 most expensive office locations

Source: [6]

London (West End) - US$19,330
Paris - US$15,520
London (City) - US$15,280
Washington DC - US$14,250
Frankfurt - US$13,640
Tokyo (Central 5 wards) - US$13,400
Dublin - US$12,740
New York City (Midtown) - US$12,200
Munich - US$12,010
Stockholm - US$10,780

--Nixer 15:18, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

How about to replace the GaWC rating with this info?--Nixer 15:32, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Works for me. Do you agree that we don't need to metro stats? Which one should go?

Why????--Nixer 16:02, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Because it's overdoing it with two and the airport data is more relevant. Airport travel reveals international tourist levels and business activity. Riding the metro doesn't. "It's not Global City Transportation" M

I'm tempted to simply use the airport data as is. Marskell 15:53, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No, it will not work--Nixer 16:02, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Why???? ;) X city has world's largest airport. What's wrong with that? Makes perfect sense to me. I don't mind tabulating for cities with more than one. The only cities it will matter for are London and New York anyhow.

I was also thinking we need at least one or two cultural categories. Most widely visited museums and/or film festivals might be track-down-able (the last is a bit of Toronto boosterism as its ranks first ;).

Marskell 16:09, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]