Talk:Combined statistical area/Archive 1

Archive 1

Comment

Tampa-St.Pete-Clearwater, FL is missing -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by G.J.Jetson (talk • contribs) 00:30, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

I thnk you may be thinking of List of core-based statistical areas or List of primary statistical areas of the United States - Tampa is not a combined statistical area because it doesn't have any small statistical areas that are included with it. --Trödel 20:24, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Duluth-Superior is missing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.36.233.25 (talk) 17:20, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

see List of primary statistical areas of the United States for a list that combines the census defined CSA's with other types of city/town designations into a single list. --Trödel 17:44, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you! I now understand why Duluth isn't on the list. However, it may be helpful to indicate why the OMB classifies some areas as a single MSA, e.g. Duluth and Cloquet, MN (21.7 mi apart) and other very similar areas as an MSA and a separate μSA, e.g. Manhattan, KS and Junction City, KS (19.5 mi apart), or Eau Claire, WI and Menomonie, WI (23.6 mi apart) - hence making those areas CSAs but not the Duluth area. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.36.233.25 (talk) 16:04, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

That is decided by the Census Bureau based on economic ties and some other stuff - (employment interchange [whatever that is] of 25 for example is required to form a CSA). MSA's need to have a high population density at its core and close economic ties throughout the area. MicopolitanSAs need an urban cluster (urban area) with a population of 10,000 to 49,999. https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/omb/bulletins/fy2009/09-01.pdf Here is the guidance] in the form of a OMB (Office of Management and Budget) for the US bulletin. --Trödel 18:00, 1 September 2015 (UTC)

---

Why is the Miami metropolitan area (Miami-Ft. Lauderdale-West Palm Beach) not included in this list with its 5 million+ residents?

As of July 13, 2015, the metro of Phoenix is not included on this list. It probably belongs among numbers 10-15. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.199.47.229 (talk) 23:25, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Is Windsor, Ontario included in Detroit's CSA? If not, it definitely should be, seeing as it's about an hour closer to Detroit than Flint.

The Miami MSA is not in a CSA. 01:05, 21 February 2006 (UTC)TCC Windsor is not in the Detroit CSA. The Census Bureau does not count non U.S. populations. The UN may, I'm not sure.01:05, 21 February 2006 (UTC)]TCC

It would be interesting to say some more about these areas' populations such as: density, avg. income, etc...all in a table.

Truckee, California does not belong in the Sacramento-Arden-Arcade metropolitan area. Truckee is 100 miles east of Sacramento, and it is on the eastern side of the Sierra Nevada near Lake Tahoe. Truckee is only 32 miles from Reno, Nevada, but it would be a stretch to say that it is a suburb of Reno.

Truckee is probably considered part of Sacramento under the definition CSA. Like how OlympiaWashington is considered part of Greater Seattle despite being 70 or so miles from Seattle.

Please see the Table of United States primary census statistical areas for the combined list of all 123 Combined Statistical Areas (CSAs), plus the 186 Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) and 409 Micropolitan Statistical Areas (μSAs) that are not a component of a CSA. --Buaidh 21:34, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

CSA/CMSA

I think there should be a separate entry for CMSA. Currently, a search for CMSA directs to CSA, but they're not the same thing. CMSAs and CSAs cannot be directly compared. CSAs may serve a similar function, but they do not necessary provide similar data. Many MSAs previously included within CMSAs are not included in CSAs for various reasons. CSAs often do not reflect the true extent of metropolitan markets. For instance, the Atlantic City MSA, previously part of the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City CMSA, was not included in the Philadelphia-Camden-Vineland CSA. Yet, Reading, not included in the CMSA, is included in the CSA even though its economy also shares borders Lancaster and Harrisburg. It is also not considered a core jurisdiction of Philadelphia's media market as other major network affiliates based in nearby towns provide overlapping coverage. (For reference, AC's sole major network is considered a Philadelphia market station. It is not as popular as Philadelphia broadcasters.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.45.181.162 (talk) 21:21, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

CSAs plus MSAs that are not part of a CSA

This is the natural, intuitively expected definition of US conurbations. CSAs and non-CSA MSAs are in fact combined as a single list in some official statistics, for example [1]

I am removing the table of MSAs since MSAs are not comparable to CSAs. From the OMB Bulletin (page 10 of the pdf file):

2. Guidance on Presenting Data for Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas, Metropolitan Divisions, Combined Statistical Areas, NECTAs, NECTA Divisions, and Combined NECTAs

Because Combined Statistical Areas represent groupings of Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas (in any combination), they should not be ranked or compared with individual Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas. --Polaron | Talk 06:54, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

That sentence says CSAs should not be ranked at all. --JWB 17:27, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Why do this CSA state that Charlotte CSA is still 2,120,745 when Charlotte states As of 2005, Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord region (once referred to locally as "Metrolina"; however use of the word has been discouraged) had a combined statistical area (CSA) population of 2,420,745. --(08:04, 4 January 2007) 208.104.231.252

Please see the Table of United States primary census statistical areas for the combined list of all 123 Combined Statistical Areas (CSAs), plus the 186 Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) and 409 Micropolitan Statistical Areas (μSAs) that are not a component of a CSA. --Buaidh 21:34, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

This data is incomplete

Missing is Phoenix, AZ, and I agree with the poster that population density per sq. mile would be a good stat. For example, it has been said the density of downtown Washington DC during lunchhour on a weekday approaches and surpasses some of the densest parts of the world, including India and China. An example of city density: Cairo, Egypt has 18000 people per sq. km, or about 3 people per living room sized room.

This is not a list of metropolitan areas in the US. Please see List of United States metropolitan areas. Phoenix is also not part of any CSA which is why it is not here. Density figures are also not a good measure for these areas since they would not reflect the actual urban density. Most CSAs have large rural territory within them. See United States urban area for urban area densities of various places. --Polaron | Talk 14:47, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Please see the Table of United States primary census statistical areas for the combined list of all 123 Combined Statistical Areas (CSAs), plus the 186 Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) and 409 Micropolitan Statistical Areas (μSAs) that are not a component of a CSA. --Buaidh 21:34, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

2006 Census Estimate Available

The 2006 Census estimates are now available for counties, meaning that 2006 population estimates can now be added for CSA's and MSA's.--Criticalthinker 05:19, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Why does this page exist?

It seems utterly redundant with the full table of CSAs. There are only 121 of them to begin with, so a separate page listing the 25 largest is unnecessary and confusing. The information on the two pages really ought to be merged. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.215.221.87 (talk) 06:17, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Please see the Table of United States Combined Statistical Areas for a sotable table of all 123 Combined Statistical Areas. --Buaidh 21:34, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

What is a CSA?

At no point does the article explain what a CSA actually is, or what is the rationale behind their designation. It just says that MSAs can be combined into CSAs, according to some unstated criteria, with a brief hint at the end about overlapping media and employment markets. Dricherby (talk) 13:18, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Tell me about it. I just re-read the page and haven't a clue what's going on. Everyone in this talk page is acting like their isn't a problem. No normal person reading this wiki page has the slightest clue of a) who came up with the CSA definition? b) what this designation is used for? c) What would any normal person use this for? TrackZero (talk) 19:04, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

Single List matching any county to its Combined Statistical Area

Hello, Thank you for your work in the Wiki Universe. I hope you can help me. I need a single list of all counties and their associated state and Combined Statistical Area. There is a list for each one, but that requires me to open all 100+ sites and cut an paste and reformat every one.

Can you provide or point me to such a list?

Thank you for you help.

Wiki Username: NewAccount2468 —Preceding unsigned comment added by NewAccount2468 (talk • contribs) 04:34, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Statistical area which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 17:54, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

2014 updates

Is anyone available to update this article to 2014 numbers? Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 17:27, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Listing MSA's revisited

Although not a Combined Statistical Area, I think that we should include the large MSAs which would be in the top 50 or have a population more than 1,000,000 (at the least). It is confusing to view this list and then realize that Phoenix or San Diego is missing and wonder if there is something wrong with the list.

• Example 1 is one way to list the areas - where one can click Rank and the MSAs would fall to the bottom in order
• Example 2 is another way - listing them at the bottom and adding to the note about MSAs not listed

I'm open to alternate suggestions (eg which MSAs should be included, etc) but I think it is clearly misleading to anyone who is not a up on the census measuring techniques to go here and expect to see a list of the largest US cities but not see any of them. (Another solution would be to separate page called List of 50 Largest US metropolitan areas (and including the top 50 - the top 44 from this list and the 6 largest MSAs that are not part of a CSA. Thoughts? --Trödel 13:05, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Nevermind - just found this list - List of primary statistical areas of the United States but there needs to be some kind of change to make it easier for a casual reader of one of the statistical lists to know that "primary statistical areas" is the one they want. --Trödel 13:08, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

The reason Phoenix & San Diego are missing is because CSAs are just instances of when two or more metropolitan/micropolitan statistical areas have a certain (15%) degree of commuting interchange. Because no other metro/micro statistical areas adjacent to the Phoenix and San Diego metro areas have that relationship, there is no CSA. I'm not sure I understand how linking someone to the list of "primary statistical areas" is helpful. That is a list that wikipedia users have created which ranks metro/micropolitan statistical areas along with CSAs, which, as I mentioned, I are just agglomerations of metro/micro areas that have a small degree of commuting interchange but do not rise to the level of being a single metro area. We should link someone looking for a list of metro areas to a list of metro areas, namely, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Core_Based_Statistical_Areas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jim0101 (talk • contribs) 15:51, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

Capitalization of statistical area terms

Here's a section to discuss whether these United States-oriented statistical area terms should be capitalized. All I can say right now is that everywhere I've seen them, they tend to be capitalized. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 09:11, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

This [government doc that defines them] only capitalizes in the context of defining the acronym, and not otherwise (my bold):

A Combined Statistical Area (CSA) is a grouping of adjacent metropolitan and/or micropolitan statistical areas in the United States and Puerto Rico. The United States Office of Management and Budget defines combined statistical areas based on social and economic ties measured by commuting patterns between adjacent Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs). The areas that combine retain their own designations as metropolitan or micropolitan statistical areas within the larger combined statistical area.

Dicklyon (talk) 16:54, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Other books, such as the Statistical Abstract of the United States, also use lower-case throughout. I see no case for caps here. Dicklyon (talk) 18:32, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

I suppose these are workable examples. Jumping before we had an exchange is poor form, though. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 18:54, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Was I too WP:BOLD? Dicklyon (talk) 19:18, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 30 December 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. Jenks24 (talk) 12:16, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

---

• Combined Statistical Area → Combined statistical area
• Micropolitan Statistical Area → Micropolitan statistical area
• Core-Based Statistical Area → Core-based statistical area

– Generic terms should not be capitalized; official government docs don't capitalize them except when defining their acronyms; there is no case for interpreting these as proper names. See discussion section immediately above. Dicklyon (talk) 18:37, 30 December 2015 (UTC)

• Support—I was just about to oppose, but read the openings more carefully. They're generic things. Tony (talk) 02:33, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
• Support - If government documents do not capitalize it, neither should we. Meatsgains (talk) 04:13, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Table has incorrect title: "The 169 CSAs..." but lists only 166 CSAs (1-167 with #116 missing)

The title of the table is "The 169 Combined Statistical Areas of the United States of America", using the name of the country as a whole. But the table only covers the 50 individual states, and lists only 166 CSAs, not 169. This is because it leaves out parts of the country not included within those states -- namely, Puerto Rico. If combined with the 3 CSAs on the separate table for Puerto Rico, that does make 169, but the title of the first table is still incorrect (166, not 169) and misleading (the 50 states, not the USA as a whole).

Additionally, there is no CSA associated with the rank number 116. There is some confusion that I'm still researching around whether the Claremont-Lebanon area of NH/VT constitutes a CSA or a µSA (the individual state pages list it as such, but according to the OMB this is incorrect - see https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/bulletins/2013/b13-01.pdf). However, I don't think this is the source of the problem, because if the Claremont-Lebanon area were a CSA, then its population would place it at about 131, not 116.

I hesitate to make the edits necessary to fix this problem, as the edit page contains the warning "THIS TABLE WILL BE BATCH UPDATED WHEN NEW CENSUS BUREAU DATA BECOMES AVAILABLE. DO NOT ALTER CENSUS BUREAU OR OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET DATA." and it's not clear to me whether the rank numbers or the table title are part of the area that should not be altered. AnneTG (talk) 19:30, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

Hatnote

Currently reads: "For a list of all US metropolitan areas see List of primary statistical areas of the United States, this article only includes those metropolitan areas which the census bureau defines as a Combined Statistical Area"

1) the linked list contains CSAs, MSAs, and µSAs. Only one of those 3 things is a "US metropolitan area." How can this be better worded?

2) this article doesn't include "metropolitan areas which the census bureau defines as a CSA." It includes CSAs. These are not metropolitan areas. And yes, I know, "metropolitan area" can be used generically. But 'metropolitan areas' here are parts of the whole (CSAs) so it's helpful to keep the terminology distinct.Jim0101 (talk) 20:10, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

List of Metropolitan Statistical Areas has a similar problem. Maybe the common description is "U.S. Census Bureau-defined agglomerations of populated places within the U.S.", but that's kind of clunky. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 13:57, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

I do like "agglomerations" though.Jim0101 (talk) 10:43, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

2015 updates

Anyone going to do the 2015 update (2014 numbers) ? I'm not sure if we're using a table to get this data from instantly, or what. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.160.2.42 (talk) 23:33, 25 January 2016‎ (UTC)

I asked this above under "2014 updates". I might have to break down and do it myself in the near future, if nobody beats me to it. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 23:43, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

In "Table has incorrect title" above someone has said that the table is set up to update automatically. I'm not smart experienced enough to figure out if that's true though.Jim0101 (talk) 08:57, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Hrmmm. The 2014 data has been available for months so I wonder when this batch update is going to happen. Dtcomposer did the updates for 2013, but hasn't made any Wikipedia edits since November. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 15:07, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

I have updated the list with the 2015 estimates. Dtcomposer (talk) 22:27, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

Land area

Where can I find land area data for the CSAs without having to just add up the values of each county?--Prisencolin (talk) 18:41, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Phoenix, AZ is missing

I see Tucson, but Phoenix is one of the largest cities in America and it isn't listed anywhere. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.66.87.76 (talk) 22:15, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

There is no Phoenix CSA, therefore it's not missing. Check out the map. There is only a Phoenix MSA. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 10:50, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

There should be a note that Phoenix does not have a CSA somewhere on the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:602:9501:2F2B:2009:AD1E:ACAE:4BE2 (talk) 00:34, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Note: Phoenix-Payson, AZ CSA was defined in September 2018 as a CSA and has been included in this table. StillWatchesCartoons (talk) 04:41, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Combined statistical area. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140815134909/http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk to http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100320084325/http://2010.census.gov/2010census/ to http://2010.census.gov/2010census/

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:17, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Combined statistical area. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150810214511/http://www.census.gov/popest/data/metro/totals/2012/tables/CBSA-EST2012-02.csv to https://www.census.gov/popest/data/metro/totals/2012/tables/CBSA-EST2012-02.csv

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:51, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Phoenix

Someone added Phoenix, "creating" a CSA for it including MSAs for Mesa, Chandler, Phoenix and Glendale (which is impossible since they're all in the same county, and MSAs are built from counties). If you don't understand why a city or region is not on this list (such as Phoenix, San Diego, San Antonio, Austin, etc.), please assume there's a good reason and do some research on the listed sources before making stuff up - thank you! Dtcomposer (talk) 03:10, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Note: Per OMB 18-04 (September 14, 2018), newly qualifying CSAs including Phoenix-Payson, AZ CSA (429) and San Antonio-Pearsall, TX CSA (489) were added to this article. While other folks were appropriately concerned about Phoenix and other large areas not being included, as of this date, they have been added. Of course, these new CSAs may be removed in a subsequent OMB bulletin. StillWatchesCartoons (talk) 04:54, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Map out of date

Hello fellow Wikipedians! I just updated some information and fixed citations on this article. I noticed the map is from 2013, and there have been five CSAs added since then. I wanted to upload this image to Commons, but since the government now uses PDFs instead of GIFs, I don't know how to proceed. Any help would be great, thanks! –Daybeers (talk) 00:25, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Number of CSAs

The number of CSAs in the table is incorrect. It should say 174, as shown here. I don't want to touch the table, as it says it's batch updated, but I'm a little confused at why it was already updated for the 2016 estimates, but the new CSAs weren't added. Any help would be much appreciated, thanks! –Daybeers (talk) 01:01, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Here's the list from the official OMB bulletin (starts on page 120): https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/omb/bulletins/2017/b-17-01.pdf

--Criticalthinker (talk) 01:40, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! I've updated the citations with that new link, but that still doesn't solve the issue of the table being out of date. Also, if you could help out with the map (I started another section above for it), that would be great too! Thanks! –Daybeers (talk) 04:42, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes there's a lot out of date. Most of the Missouri statistical areas have changed in one way or another for instance. I should note that the next estimates come out in April, so maybe we should hold off on updating the population till the. Grey Wanderer (talk) 02:37, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

I was just thinking about that yesterday. Yes, when the new estimates - with the newest delineations which came out recently - come out, it will be for the new delineations, so it makes sense to wait until next month. --Criticalthinker (talk) 11:04, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

2018 Delineations

I'd suggest leaving this alone until the new delineations become official, and they obviously haven't because when the Census released estimates this year, they did it under the under the previous delineations. Otherwise, you're manually changing these, and will miss things. It'd be better for you, too, to sign up an actual account here so that we could discuss this on your own talk page. --Criticalthinker (talk) 22:39, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

--Paul's response: Yes, I do have a Wikipedia account, and my login and pw are somewhere around here. Anyway, to address the concern, the 2018 OMB delineations are official as they should be effective on the date released (September 2018). Also, check out the Census Bureau's own release (https://www.census.gov/geographies/reference-files/time-series/demo/metro-micro/delineation-files.html) for additional confirmation.

But to CriticalThinker's point, I intended to leave the article alone, as reasonably suggested. However, a week ago, another Wiki editor updated the San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland CSA, with both the September 2018 delineations as well as the 2018 pop estimates, adding Modesto and Merced's MSAs with their 600,000 residents. Because the Bay Area editor jumped the gun and updated this CSA--and only this CSA--and did so without being commented on having his (or her) edits "undone," I believe others will do the same with their favorite CSAs. So I see no reason not to be thorough and finish the work for all of the CSAs.

On another note, after completing the 30 largest CSAs, I noticed some interesting initial results. Most notably, the addition of Lakeland-Winter Haven to the Orlando, FL CSA, shot it to 15th in the nation. In fact, I think this jump triggered CriticalThinker's reasonable concern that the Wiki article was being "vandalized." Another big jump I already mentioned was the San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland CSA delineation, adding the Modesto and Merced MSAs, which gave that CSA an additional 600,000 people. The Bay Area's recent consolidation and the more organic growth in the Washington-Baltimore region have started a race for third largest CSA, which is up for grabs due to Chicago's rather anemic growth--and the unlikelihood it and Milwaukee are going to be consolidated anytime soon.

Other interesting developments are the addition of new CSAs for Phoenix and San Antonio--ironically putting to rest a commonly held misunderstanding about why these large metropolitan areas were originally not listed here. (Of course, that may cause some resident of Tampa, Austin, or San Diego to understandably but mistakenly want their fair cities included on this list as well, but that conversation for another day.) The third interesting result is the (temporary?) deletion of Allentown-Bethlehem from the New York CSA which caused New York to "lose" over 800,000 people and the loss of Mojave County, AZ from the Las Vegas CSA. That's a drop in the bucket for the nation's largest megalopolis, but Las Vegas lost a rank over that update.

Now all edits here are directly traceable to OMB and Census Bureau sources. Those sources have been properly cited. As for making mistakes, I sincerely appreciate the concern, but I always start off each CSA by reconciling the starting 2010 census number to the existing Wikipedia entry's, so no counties are missed in my initial tabulation. And after I reconcile the starting census figure, I then add or subtract the counties or statistical areas to meet the new delineation. I have reviewed Wikipedia's guidelines and don't see any violations, even though my process is time consuming.StillWatchesCartoons (talk) 14:08, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

You forgot to leave you signature. Still, I'm seeing incorrect listings for my home state of Michigan right out of the gate. Lansing lost it's CSA status, Kalamazoo had a major reconfiguration which dropped at least two counties; I believe it's only Kalamazoo and Calhoun counties, now. Not sure if you did Grand Rapid's correctly, but it also had a pretty major reworking as is often the case with it. This is a major reason why I was suggesting to leave this alone until the Census Bureau used the new delineations next year, because you've already missed some pretty major changes. --Criticalthinker (talk) 01:22, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the reminder on the signature. The only Michigan CSA I completed so far is Detroit. I am pretty much starting at the top and working my way down the list because I didn't want to keep changing the rankings over and over again.StillWatchesCartoons (talk) 14:07, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

The edits for 2018 including the following: Adding newly qualifying CSAs, Removing CSAs that no longer qualify, and Adding 2018 population estimates. While great time and effort was expended in this process, it is not reasonable for me to completely guarantee every single edit. As always, I recommend folks to verify my data. More importantly, I ask that other editors not change the data presented here unless those changes can be cited to a more recent OMB bulletin or U.S. Census estimate. Thanks! StillWatchesCartoons (talk) 04:45, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Las Vegas CSA

Shouldn't it be bigger and also include Mohave county from Arizona? It's what's shown in the official US Census map that's in this page, and also what's in Las Vegas–Henderson, NV–AZ CSA, which has a reliable source, but this page only considers the Nevada counties --Ngfsmg (talk) 16:51, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Nope. I'm not sure if maybe it did at one time, but the only other county added to make up the CSA is Nye County (Pahrump) as of the most recent (2018) delineations: https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/Bulletin-20-01.pdf --Criticalthinker (talk) 07:32, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Austin TX CSA

Not sure why Austin is missing from this list? Quite possibly the fastest growing region in the nation and it is omitted. Please see wiki on statistical areas. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statistical_area_(United_States) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.128.132.38 (talk) 12:25, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

What you are not understanding, it seems, is that Austin doesn't have a CSA. Not every MSA has a wider CSA. --Criticalthinker (talk) 05:20, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

2020 or 2019?

Hey! I'm a little confused. This article states that the latest numbers for these CSA's are from the 2020 estimates, however it references numbers from 2019, here: Combined_statistical_area#cite_note-PopEstCSA-4 What am I missing ;o ??? Thanks much ^^ ! Hanyou23 (talk) 15:44, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

No Tampa

The Tampa Bay Area is not on the list 2601:42:C103:25F0:E033:4692:B97B:78B6 (talk) 00:23, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

As same to the post asking about Austin, above, Tampa does not form a CSA with any other metropolitan nor micropolitan areas. Not every major cities has a CSA. --Criticalthinker (talk) 09:24, 18 March 2022 (UTC)