Talk:Larger urban zone/Archive 1

Addition of Turkey a Blatant political move

This is a table of Eurozone cities. The inclusion of Turkey has no justification since it does not fall under the juristiction of Eurostat. In fact, this article misrepresents that organisation by implying so. Either you include all candidate states for the EU or none, not just one. This "pro-Turkey in the EU" group that goes around adding Turkey to all EU-related articles is growing rather tiresome.

Fully agree. All non-EU cities need to be removed.

Not quite related to the same point, but if it is a table of Eurozone cities, London should be excluded too, and I suspect you don't mean that. Postlebury (talk) 16:38, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

TURKEY IS NOT AN EUROPEAN COUNTRY, ISTANBUL IS NOT AN EUROPEAN URBAN ZONE, IT MUST BE REMOVED FROM THIS ARTICLE, I WILL DO IT PERSONALLY. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.48.36.205 (talk) 13:54, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

ALL THE TURKISH CITIES AS MUSLIM CITIES AND NOT EUROPEAN MUST BE REMOVED, INSTEAD THE EUROPEAN RUSSIAN AND CRISTIAN CITIES MUST BE PUT INTO THE LIST. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.50.105.115 (talk) 15:24, 12 June 2011 (UTC) TURKEY IS NOT A EUROPEAN COUNTRY: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_east EUROPE IS NOT MIDDLE EAST. TURKISH CITIES MUST BE DELETED FROM THE ARTICLE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.50.105.115 (talk) 15:37, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Part of Turkey (East Thrace) lies in Europe, including Istanbul. Subtropical-man (talk) 15:40, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

TURKEY IS NOT A EUROPEAN COUNTRY: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_east EUROPE IS NOT MIDDLE EAST. TURKEY MUST BE DELETED FROM THE ARTICLE.

WHY DO YOU DELETE? YOU'RE JUST A VANDALUS!YOU CAN'T DENY THE TRUTH! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.50.105.115 (talk) 16:12, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Europe is defined by geography, not religion. Kosovo, Albania, and Bosnia and Herzegovina are majority-Muslim countries in Europe. The scope of this list includes EU-candidate countries, which is why Turkey is included (and Russia is not, despite being partly in Europe). -- Beland (talk) 03:32, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Why only cities over 1 million?

Why are only cities with city population above 1 million included here, if it is an metropolitan area list? This way some important cities like Athens (LUZ 3,9 million) or Manchester (LUZ 2,5 million) are missing.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.10.253.80 (talk • contribs) 06:24, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

These have since been added. -- Beland (talk) 03:32, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Italian Cities - ONU data

http://www.un.org/esa/population/publications/wup2003/2003WUPHighlights.pdf Tabella A-12, PAGINA 130:

Country and agglomeration 2005

ITALY

Milan 4.007.000

"DEMOGRAPHIA-WORLD URBAN AREA" http://www.demographia.com/db-worldua.pdf PAGINA 21:

Italy Milan 4,250,000

Estratto da "http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussione:Aree_urbane_pi%C3%B9_popolose_dell%27Unione_Europea"

Stockholm

All sources point out that the city proper of Stockholm has about 788.000 inhabitants, but anyway Polaron does not agree with me and reverts. What can we do about this? Calle Widmann 06:58, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

All data here is from the Eurostat database and is harmonized for 2001. Please look at the cited source for the article. --Polaron | Talk 12:40, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

Marseille?

The population of Marseille's urban zone is definitely larger than 1 million, and the city should be somewhere in this list. Marseille has sometimes been considered larger than Lyon. (On the Lyon WP page Marseille is considered the larger pf the two, on the Marseille WP page Lyon is considered the larger.) Anyway, the last census, according to this page, had Marseille's population at "1,605,000 inhabitants in 2007". Something must be wrong. Wahlin —Preceding comment was added at 22:49, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, Marseille itself has almost 1 million and if we consider all the Urban Area like Berlin or Paris, it's sure that will be larger than Riga and enter in this list. Leonardomio (talk) 08:33, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I struggle to understand the mental processes of people who would put together a list like this, and omit Marseilles on such grounds. Postlebury (talk) 16:33, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

bump this up. The omission of Marseille, which has over a million within its city limits, is startling. -Krasnoludek (talk) 14:24, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Turkey

Why are Turkish cities listed? Turkey isn't a member state of the EU nor EEA. +Hexagon1 ^(t) 06:00, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

It's in the database. --Polaron | Talk 12:08, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

We should offer an explanation on the page somewhere. +Hexagon1 ^(t) 22:37, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes there certainly should be, the current edit war is pointless. Turkey is certainly in the database and as such statistics should be included, the other question is about the specific mentioning of Turkey alongside the EU and EFTA at every heading. A better solution would be a short paragraph on the inclusion of other countries and cities outside the EU and EFTA. Please establish a consensus on the specific mentioning of Turkey here so that the edit warring can cease. Mfield (talk) 17:37, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

TURKEY IS NOT AN EUROPEAN COUNTRY, ISTANBUL IS NOT AN EUROPEAN URBAN ZONE, IT MUST BE REMOVED FROM THIS ARTICLE, I WILL DO IT PERSONALLY.

I'm going to assume the reason for the yellow highlighting is to show that the city is not within the EU and add that colour to Oslo. If this is the case, please add some information to the top of the article explaining this. This just kept me wondering why only Turkish cities were highlighted until I saw Zürich and thought about it again. Without explanation the colour coding is both redundant and confusing. Skrofler (talk) 11:40, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Much Improved

(IMHO) The latest work on this page represents a major improvement in clarity and purpose. Bravo to all who've helped to improve it. Mapmark (talk) 00:10, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

Population Density

It seems a bit silly to compare urban areas with only 285 inhabitants per sq km with with areas with over 1000 (Napels even over 3000 inhabitants per sq km) For example it lists Stockholm as larger than Brussels, but considers an area 6 times larger then what it considers for Brussels, It gives a totally wrong image. 285 inhabitants per sq km (stockholm) is even less than the population density of the entire country of Belgium; let alone one city. I don't really mind, it's just a list, but you can't compare cities in this list using such different standards. --Lamadude (talk) 14:24, 8 May 2009 (UTC)

Very true. These may be official statistics but they're not representative of real cities. Anywhere with a population density less than 1000 inhabitants per sq km is barely suburban, let alone urban; and anywhere with a density of less than 500 inhabitants per sq km is predominantly rural. You could turn any village into a metropolis if you throw its boundaries far enough! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.148.134.44 (talk) 20:21, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

I would say that the people behind the list should either have worked harder, or not at all. Berlin is an egregious example. The area includes more remote and rural localities than are included for most other cities, so remote and rural as the render the word "urban" in "Larger Urban Zone" seriously misleading. It is absurd to claim to be consistent, and then give Berlin's LUZ a larger land area than London's. It must be possible to produce more realistically comparable statistics by delving into the data for a lower tier of subdivision. The people behind the list should know that when a public body produces such charts, some people will take them literally and treat the results as conclusive hard facts, even though they should not, and accordingly they should make more effort to produce the very best data possible. They simply haven't tried hard enough. Yet it's a sad fact that despite being a sloppy piece of work, this list is still better than most similar lists, many of which are simply comically misleading and inconsistent. Postlebury (talk) 16:36, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Is it real all data in this article?

As far as I know, Badajoz has not got such population. There are few Spanish medium-size cities which are not listed here and they clearly overpass Badajoz. This town is more known as a provincial one, located in Extremadura. How can it pass other Spanish metropolitan areas? Such as Alicante-Elche, Murcia, Asturias, Cádiz, etc... Even Alicante-Elche has got more population in the metropolitan area than Zaragoza, and it is not listed here.

http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anexo:%C3%81reas_metropolitanas_de_Espa%C3%B1a

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metropolitan_areas_in_Spain_by_population

84.120.141.88 (talk) 23:30, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

The response to this as to most other posts is - please ask the compilers of the Eurostat database. I'm fairly sure Lille and Marseille should be in the list - but they're not. Perhaps someone needs to write a caveat about possible missing urban areas?

Exile (talk) 19:33, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Badajoz is no longer listed. -- Beland (talk) 03:32, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Where is Marseille?!

It has an Urban Area of 1,418,481, and a Metro Area of 1,604,550.

Can someone please edit the article to include it please. It's one of Europe's greatest cities. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.110.161.219 (talk) 19:14, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Exact. For Marseille, No larger urban zone (LUZ) was defined for this city because the Communauté covers most of the 'economic functional region', as defined by the French concept of 'aire urbaine' and even goes slightly beyond it (aire urbaine = 1 601 095[1]). For Lille : The larger urban zone (LUZ) of over 1,1 million inhabitants covers an area of 981 km2, and is based on the French concept of ‘aire urbaine’ (aire urbaine = 1 164 716[2]). For Nice : No larger urban zone (LUZ) was defined for this city because the Communauté covers most of the 'economic functional region', as defined by the French concept of 'aire urbaine,' and even goes slightly beyond it (aire urbaine = 991 903[3]). See comments on Urban Audit website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.103.239.248 (talk) 10:22, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Well, this renders the definition of LUZ ridiculous, since cities which whose metropolitan boundaries would essentially coincide with their LUZ boundaries, are not considered LUZ. Still, this is an EU sanctioned definition, but I will definitely add an explanation to the lede about why certain cities are omitted from being considered LUZs. Thank you for the information, BoN. -Krasnoludek (talk) 14:30, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Marseille is now listed in the article. -- Beland (talk) 03:32, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Many errors in this article

Firstly, "Larger Urban Zones" should consider URBAN ZONES, so it means that urban zones with a population density lower than 1000 inhabitants/km2 should not be considered (example: Vienna is only 1,8 mio inhabitants, and that is the Larger Urban Zone! It is not the same than a Metropolitan area. This article is not consistent). Secondly, many cities have been omitted: Toulon (750'000), Basel (730'000), Geneva (810'000), some Spanish cities, etc.

In conclusion, this article should be revised and all data given checked... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.218.7.15 (talk) 09:58, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

• Read Larger Urban Zones for this term definition. Bogomolov.PL (talk) 10:46, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

basically a larrger urban zone is the central city its national subdivison its located in usally a county or small provine plus any county that borders it.theres no reason for izmit to be only 600,000 or so people or whatever thats not the larger urban zone thats the urbanized area i agree this list is completly wrong forinstant Izmit turkey's Larger urban zone is Kocaeli province and its 3,626 KM big and is 332 people to the kilometer. 99.51.212.6 (talk) 14:28, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Source of population data

It's not clear from this article what source has been used for the population figures in the table for most of the cities. We should ideally have a footnote for each. SP-KP (talk) 10:59, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

This is a single-sourced list. All population figures come from the same source (Ref. 6, as pointed out in the section "Ranking methodology"). There is no point in adding the same reference to each entry as they are all the same. --Polaron | Talk 14:13, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Can you give a worked example so that I can figure out how to get the population data from that source? I just clicked on it and all I get is a set of empty drop down boxes, with no instructions. There doesn't seem to be an obvious means to access the data this way. SP-KP (talk) 14:29, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

For 1, choose LUZ. For 2, choose spatial level (although either one would work). For 3, choose the particular LUZ you want to get data on. For 4, choose total resident population. For 5, choose alphabetical ascending (although any choice would work). For 6, choose the year for the figure. --Polaron | Talk 15:02, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Birmingham

This is another one I can't understand. The urban area has 2.3m people so how can the LUZ be the same? 92.6.43.169 (talk) 16:58, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Wolverhampton counts as its own LUZ for some unknown reason. Eopsid (talk) 21:56, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Leeds, not Leeds-Bradford

Where is the LUZ called Leeds-Bradford officially? I've only ever seen it written as Leeds. By changing it back to Leeds-Bradford you'd have to change all others to Manchester-Salford, Birmingham-Wolverhampton etc. --Tubs uk (talk) 11:49, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Cheers for editing it back to Leeds-Bradford without giving it any thought. Here's the list. http://www.urbanaudit.org/CityCountryPDFLongList.aspx Can only imagine the editor(s?) of this page have double standards, or they didn't know (in which case why are they editing?) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tubs uk (talk • contribs) 13:49, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

LUZ of Portugal

Why do you take the informations that I found in Wikipedia and in the site of Portuguese statistical institute: http://www.ine.pt/scripts/flex_v10/Main.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bernas Coimbra (talk • contribs) 20:23, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

Kingston Upon Hull?

I dont see how Hull can have an LUZ over half a million as this article and its source, List of metropolitan areas in the United Kingdom, which give figures higher than the ones used here for pretty much every other LUZ gives it a lot lower figure. The only thing i can imagine which gives Hull such a high figure is that includes the whole of Humberside with large towns such as Scunthorpe and Grimsby. I think a similar situation is there for Britstol which LUZ is the whole of Avon.

Other mysteries in this data is why it doesnt give data for a number of large english urban areas eg Bournemouth, Middlesbrough and Southampton. The urban audit also states that it doesnt include them all To ensure that large and medium-sized cities are equally represented in the Urban Audit, in some of the larger Member States not all large cities could be included. the above is from there. So does that mean you cant compare all cities properly because some large important ones aren't included.

Also they have an LUZ for liverpool and Wirral which have the exact same population just two different names. Eopsid (talk) 20:24, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

This appears to have been referring to a previous dataset. -- Beland (talk) 03:32, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

File:Nantes - Erdre.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Nantes - Erdre.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:33, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Armada Tower Ankara.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Armada Tower Ankara.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests December 2011 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 11:24, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

File:Aerial view of the City of Adana and the Seyhan River.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Aerial view of the City of Adana and the Seyhan River.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 16:05, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

File:BUTTIM Bursa International Textiles and Trade Center.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:BUTTIM Bursa International Textiles and Trade Center.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 02:04, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Lev Ist Tur 1.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Lev Ist Tur 1.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests January 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 06:55, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

File:Dublin City.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Dublin City.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do? Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Dublin City.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 22:01, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Updated data (2004 revision)

I just browsed the whole Urban data and found some minor data revisions on 2004 populations for a lot of cities (and one big revision for Dresden : from 900k to 1.4m !), plus you're missing cordoba, badajoz, toulon and montpellier that I found the LUZ data (new additions ?) and of course marseille, lille and nice which have no LUZ defined but they clearly say "the same as "aire urbaine", so you should add them too with the "aire urbaine" number as we did in the French page! See the French wiki page for complete and updated data.--Loup Solitaire 81 (talk) 10:41, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

These omissions from an older data set are now explained in the article. -- Beland (talk) 03:32, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Question

Why is Belgrade missing? FkpCascais (talk) 04:04, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

LUZ is for EU, EU-candidate and EFTA countries only. --84.151.33.33 (talk) 08:18, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Non-EU LUZs

this page should list non-EH cities in a separate list. I made the changes, but don't want to get into an editing war.

Can we agree that this will keep Turkish, Swiss and other cities on the page while avoiding confusion on what is ultimately about EU statistics?

I'll redo the changes if there are no issues.

Regards, (Stpaul (talk) 11:22, 21 February 2015 (UTC))

Simply. This article is about "larger urban zones", no matter whether they are in the EU or not. Areas for only EU? Ok, see: Largest urban areas of the European Union, including urban areas in the European Union and nowhere else. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 12:16, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Labeling UK Cities

Because of how many countries there are in the United Kingdom, I think it makes sense to label cities within the UK according to their individual countries as well as the UK itself. This is because of the common misconception that the UK=Great Britain=England. When a foreigner sees that a city is in the UK with no further details, they will naturally assume that city is in England. For this reason, when naming the country in which a city is located, I think it's important to display both the UK and the country itself. For example, with Edinburgh, it would be classified as being both in Scotland and the United Kingdom. London, within England and the United Kingdom, et cetera. This would help to dispel the UK=England misconception and make the whole situation clearer for people reading the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.134.253.113 (talk) 21:50, 20 July 2015 (UTC) Er...Scotland is in the United Kingdom. The list doesn't describe Munich as being in Bavaria or Turin as being in Piedmont... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.199.236.90 (talk) 16:43, 27 October 2015 (UTC)

No it would not. Rob984 (talk) 01:43, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Budapest

Why is Budapest ranked lower on the list than other LUZs with smaller populations? Article says Budapest has 3,303,786 people, but is ranked lower than, among others, Munich, which has 2,531,706. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.216.235.9 (talk)

Many other examples too. The list has been meddled with excessively since the figures were added in 2008. I have restored the original list. Rob984 (talk) 01:42, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Larger urban zone. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110727094822/http://www.statistiques-locales.insee.fr/Fiches/RS/AU1999/RS_AU1999003.pdf to http://www.statistiques-locales.insee.fr/Fiches/RS/AU1999/RS_AU1999003.pdf
• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://www.urbanaudit.org/CityCountryPDFLongList.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:58, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Larger urban zone. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110727094843/http://www.statistiques-locales.insee.fr/Fiches/RS/AU1999/RS_AU1999004.pdf to http://www.statistiques-locales.insee.fr/Fiches/RS/AU1999/RS_AU1999004.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110727094905/http://www.statistiques-locales.insee.fr/Fiches/RS/AU1999/RS_AU1999006.pdf to http://www.statistiques-locales.insee.fr/Fiches/RS/AU1999/RS_AU1999006.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120121192735/http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&language=en&pcode=tgs00080&plugin=1 to http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&language=en&pcode=tgs00080&plugin=1

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 07:20, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Source for 2014, and with names of cities

The data for 2014 is available here: http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=urb_lpop1&lang=en

It differs slightly from the data I coped from List of metropolitan areas in Europe (the source of which is now a dead link), but many figures are the same so I assume it is just a different revision.

The correct names used in the audit can be added from that source though, which I will amend soon.

Rob984 (talk) 00:01, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

The UK is still in the EU

Until Article 50 is enacted and then the UK officially leaves 2 years later, the UK is still part of the EU. Why has their background been changed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.232.56.222 (talk) 11:57, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

This is EU only; the article is about the Eurostat directive

This article is about the LUZ within the EU and candidate states only, as directed by Eurostat. So please, do not add any other urban areas (i.e. Japan, US, Mexico, etc.). There are other wiki-pages to compare the worlds largest urban areas. 217.120.219.67 (talk) 16:15, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Larger urban zone. 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/20141006122431/http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/submitViewTableAction.do to http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/submitViewTableAction.do
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130531065821/http://www.urbanaudit.org/index.aspx to http://www.urbanaudit.org/index.aspx

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) 16:53, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Larger urban zone. 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/20090206144738/http://urbanaudit.org/ to http://www.urbanaudit.org/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150924002318/http://www.espon.eu/export/sites/default/Documents/Projects/ESPON2006Projects/StudiesScientificSupportProjects/UrbanFunctions/fr-1.4.3_April2007-final.pdf to http://www.espon.eu/export/sites/default/Documents/Projects/ESPON2006Projects/StudiesScientificSupportProjects/UrbanFunctions/fr-1.4.3_April2007-final.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110719085823/http://www.staedtestatistik.de/fileadmin/urban-audit/pdf/EU_stateofcities_2007.pdf to http://www.staedtestatistik.de/fileadmin/urban-audit/pdf/EU_stateofcities_2007.pdf

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) 04:48, 17 December 2017 (UTC)