Talk:List of smallest cities in the United Kingdom

Cities - size or population figure?

Small, or large, should be classed on area. Population figures signify the number of people living there, regardless of size. A city, or a country, might be much larger than another but less populated. (Unsigned comment as of 21:23, 28 April 2017 (UTC))

untitled

shouldn't Canterbury be on this list? I'm not sure how exhaustive this list is but at any rate the page for Canterbury gives a population of less than Salisbury, and is listed on City_status_in_the_United_Kingdom 82.3.91.188

Hi. I created this page by going through the list of cities on the City status in the United Kingdom page and checking their individual pages for the populations stated. Then I checked the council websites for more up-to-date census information. What I should have done is put my sources up here, sorry about that. Can't do that right now as don't really have an hour free but will get around to it in a while, in the meantime if anyone wants to do this instead it would be very much appreciated. Thanks. --Sachabrunel 19:07, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Oh, also I notice quite a few of the populations have been changed, wouldn't know where those came from. --Sachabrunel 19:11, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Smallest cities in the world

If you want small cities - try Golovin, Alaska, supposedly a city with 144 inhabitants. The rest of the settlements around the Nome area also claim to be cities and are nearly all under 600 inhabitants. Can this be correct? Jack 21:30, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

In the USA pretty much any settlement can be called a "city". In the UK it has a formal definition dependent on the grant of city status by the crown. Hence, it's not surprising there's a massive difference between the smallest "cities" in the two countries. Cheers, DWaterson 00:16, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Contradiction

This article is about areas with city charters. Indeed, its utility may be in exposing and exploiting the fact that some very small settlements are officially classified as cities (St David's and Wells are famous for being so small). There is the use. However, the population numbers are not for the official definition of the city, as City of Durham, City of Carlisle, City of Canterbury, City and District of St Albans etc don't conform with the boundaries of the towns to which the population numbers refer. Hence, to use the populations of the towns contradicts the purpose of this article: to detail the smallest official cities. Bastin 12:10, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Of particular note here is that the population of Durham district is just over double that of Durham city, any reason why the district number is taken as the population? (BHG) — Preceding unsigned comment added by BHGobuchul (talk • contribs) 23:50, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Population of Wells?

So unless there were two separate 2001 censuses in the UK (there weren't) either this topic or Wells' own is incorrect. This puts it at 2nd in England, 3rd in the UK with 10,000 inhabitants; whereas its topic buts it at 4th in England (linking to this topic) and 7th in the UK with C.15,000 inhabitants. Any particular reason? Has someone included outlying areas in one of the statistics, or a typo made? Either way, both cannot be right. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.242.64.97 (talk) 15:57, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Population of Wells recorded by the 2011 census is 10,536. This is for the civil parish of Wells, which quite precisely covers the urban area. Argovian (talk) 15:45, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Overseas territories

Should this list not include overseas territories? The city of Hamilton, Bermuda would then surely be the smallest? Owain (talk) 16:11, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

No, because overseas territories aren't part of the United Kingdom. Bastin 16:17, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, yes as the page is currently constituted that is true, it doesn't belong here. Might be an interesting footnote that there is a British city smaller than St. Davids though... Owain (talk) 19:31, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Both Canterbury and St. Albans are listed as cities elsewhere in Wikiepdia and meet the size criteria listed here, but are missing. Suggest they should be added for consistency. 213.105.184.218 (talk) 10:45, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

The 2001 population of Lincoln too is given as 85,595, smaller than Worcester. Draggleduck (talk) 17:48, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

London/derry

I've noticed that Derry is used in this list however I'm thinking, as the lead mentions chartered cities and since Londonderry is the name used in that city's charter, should we follow the consensus currently on City status in the United Kingdom and use Londonderry in context of the chartered and official name? The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 14:41, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Oh just stop—everyone knows what it is referring to. Sans culottes (talk 01:27, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

What do you mean by that? The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 07:30, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

I mean stop trying to provoke problems. It was long ago decided that Derry should refer to the City, and Londonderry was to be used to refer to the County, in its present form at least. Being on the wrong side of history might be fun for you (although to be honest your time on this earth would be much better spent doing more productive things), but it is just annoying for everybody else who has to deal with it. Sans culottes (talk 15:59, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Wrong side of history? What are you on about? I was simply making a suggestion of context. Theres no need for that accusation abaout provoking problems when I'm not. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 16:47, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Everyone knows the context of Derry as a city, without the artificial London prefix tacked onto the original name. Also the consensus you cite is in the extreme minority—the vast majority of Wikipedia pages use Derry. Sans culottes (talk 17:19, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Update... and land areas

Populations really should now be updated to the 2011 census, at the very least.

Also - would it be possible to include the land area of the cities? Might be interesting. Argovian (talk) 15:45, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

2011 update

Have done this - work in progress as some 2001 numbers are wrong such as ward counts etc.

Where I haven't put refs those counts are from the settlement wiki page, which usually has an 2011 count and a ref to back those up.

The figures with refs aren't perfect, a few are estimates or no straightforward count for 2011 so used an extrapolation of ward counts etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Equalizer (talk • contribs) 12:02, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Now added area sizes using 2 methods, with explanatory notes. The Equalizer (talk) 10:17, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of smallest cities in the United Kingdom. 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/20090326085841/http://www.hertsdirect.org/infobase/docs/pdfstore/tabKS01sett.pdf to http://www.hertsdirect.org/infobase/docs/pdfstore/tabKS01sett.pdf
• Added archive http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20110927170901/http://www.bathnes.gov.uk/BathNES/councilanddemocracy/statisticsandcensusinformation/default.htm to http://www.bathnes.gov.uk/BathNES/councilanddemocracy/statisticsandcensusinformation/default.htm

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 11:18, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of smallest cities in the United Kingdom. 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/20100922091920/http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/viewFullDataset.do?instanceSelection=03070&productId=779&$ph=60_61&datasetInstanceId=3070&startColumn=1&numberOfColumns=8&containerAreaId=790560 to http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/viewFullDataset.do?instanceSelection=03070&productId=779&$ph=60_61&datasetInstanceId=3070&startColumn=1&numberOfColumns=8&containerAreaId=790560

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 12:12, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Merge

@The Equalizer: Unclear why this needs to be a separate article when you can just sort the population column of List of cities in the United Kingdom. That article is much more useful than this one, which does nothing to establish this set of smaller cities as distinct from the list as a whole. Reywas92^Talk 03:29, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Reywas92, firstly, yes quite aware of sortable lists, indeed this very same article contains several of the columns configured as such which I added.

Secondly, the page gets quite a decent number of hits, which indicates there is a demand for this info - they can't all be bot hits.

Thirdly, this article has existed since 2006, that's 13 years - and the List of cities in the United Kingdom one is hugely lengthy and already quite wide, however as I explain in the notes and in other UK city articles, population isn't the official measure of a UK city and to add the area detail to the table would make it even more unwieldy. The talk page here is a hive of activity with no previous suggestion that it is duplicating that article. It is a subset of the first article yes, but it expands on that detail for the purposes of clarifying what is the smallest city using the right definition.

--The Equalizer (talk) 09:30, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

None of this justifies such duplication. Simply having escaped scrutiny for years does not mean this should continue to copy the same material. The additional inclusion of area here does not require a separate page when that is not the focus of the article, and that would be welcome at the main list anyway. The footnote for population can also be the the main list. I renamed this section to invite others to comment. Reywas92^Talk 18:40, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

As to the focus, yes area does matter when you have a 'smallest' cities list. The very first comment and others on this talk page states sizing should be classed on area, not population, and I agree on this. The physical area of the local government boundary is an official measure, see ref 27 in the article for this. For you to not consider that initially means you have little understanding on what entails a UK city. Also I've seen no mention of you willing to actually contribute that detail to the list of cities table. I don't like 'quick wins' for bragging rights, especially as you attest in your profile to deliberately merging lists and mention of your number of edits. I want factual articles only. I suggest then that you research what truly makes a UK city and their nuances (hint: not population), as I fear you will ruin the article by omitting key understandings.

--The Equalizer (talk) 01:30, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

• Support Merge — Really, I do not see why a list of the smallest cities in the UK should be a separate article at all. As Reywas92 has pointed out, you can just sort the population column of the List of cities in the United Kingdom article, entirely defeating the purpose of this article. VibeScepter (talk) (contributions) 20:48, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Many have the mistaken view that population is the official measure of the 'size' of a UK city - alas, no. That statistic simply explains how many residents live within the city limits, and both can vary hugely so they aren't relative in any way. The number of residents is at best a very cursory guide as to its expanse, although it adds to the overall perspective - because the urban and rural areas within cities vary so widely. Why does St Davids only have 2,000 residents when physically the same area as Oxford which has 150,000. Carlisle is over 50 times the size of those making it the largest by area in England yet only has just over 100,000 residents.

The physical area of the local government boundary is the key measure, see ref 27 in the article for this. Suggesting population alone be sortable is not good. Maybe a read of the Smallest and Largest Cities subsection might help.

--The Equalizer (talk) 01:30, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

• Oppose. Currently the articles present significantly different information about the cities:

Field	List of smallest...	List of cities
Rank by 2011 population	Yes	No
City name	Yes	Yes
Population (2001)	Yes	No
Population (2011)	Yes	Yes
Nation/Region	Partial	Yes
County	Yes	No
Area (body)	Yes	No
Area (locale)	Yes	No
Area (body as % of locale)	Yes	No
Year city status granted	No	Yes
Cathedral	No	Yes
Council type	No	Yes
Image	No	Yes

So it's clear that we two separate articles here. I could see benefit in a reorganisation of this article to be a complete list of cities by area and population for all cities, maybe adding population density as well if that is available, but that's a separate discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 10:23, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Thryduulf, thanks for your succinct analysis of the articles, neatly summed up into the table. After 2 months (which is well beyond the advised time of a week for discussion @ WP:MERGECLOSE) with 2 nays against the merge, and 2 ayes which after my clarifications have gone quiet. 4 responses alone in that time would imply there is little interest and to maintain the status quo, however I think it would be progressive to edit the lead to reflect on area rather than population, as that is the primary measure of size. I also propose we change the default sorting of the table to area rather than population. Then it will be much improved and have less question on its purpose. Regards, --The Equalizer (talk) 13:40, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

The pages LIST OF SMALLEST CITIES IN THE UNITED KINGDOM and CITY STATUS IN THE UNITED KINGDOM should NOT be combined. The pages address VERY different subjects. The physical land size of a city or it's population has NO bearing on a place's designation of CITY STATUS. CITY STATUS is a decree by the monarch and is of historical importance and significance. <<It has always been the prerogative of the monarch to bestow city status>>. If accuracy is a concern in Wikipedia's standards, the merger should not take place. See: http://www.ukcities.co.uk/status/ (Unsigned comment as of 13:52, 4 August 2020‎ (UTC))

I stopped it being merged at the time, but the editor trying to do so pointed out that this table was utilising a similar layout to the List Of Cities table. I agreed to change the sort from population to area so that the 'smallest' claim is more rigidly defined to stop it having similar aspects as the table in that article (the discussion is just above.) I will shortly upload a new smallest table with a default sort on area (for the reasons mentioned at the top of the talk page) that will stop any future attempt to remove this table as this article will have a different purpose to the List of Cities. The Equalizer (talk) 15:08, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Expanded table now added including area. The Equalizer (talk) 22:09, 8 August 2020 (UTC)