Talk:Liverpool: Difference between revisions

Semi-protected edit request on 23 March 2023

Please change official_name from Liverpool to Liverpool, United Kingdom Lace.her (talk) 01:57, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: Simple answer - no. Longer answer - see WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. I don't think anyone would argue that the city of Liverpool in the United Kingdom is the primary topic should anyone mention "Liverpool" without any sort of qualification. Everything else Liverpool related, derived its name from the city so it is right that Liverpool points to this article and everything else can be see at Liverpool (disambiguation). You are of course welcome to challenge this by requesting a page move - see WP:MOVE and read the instructions on how to do this. --10mmsocket (talk) 06:36, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Jones

Your list of surnames and their origins is incorrect. The surname Jones originated in England - it begins with a letter not even contained in the Welsh alphabet! Such articles as this are liable to be infiltrated by various nationalists who are eager to drive an artificially divided picture of the United Kingdom. Roberts is also not a surname of Welsh origin.

(81.129.126.104 (talk) 01:08, 11 May 2023 (UTC))

Thanks for the post. I have no opinion on what you say, but as it happens, the geographic origins were not referenced - the newspaper articles only listed the names, not their origins - and so I have removed them as original research. 10mmsocket (talk) 06:35, 11 May 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 July 2023

• The Pain Relief Foundation: 3 March 2010.

Please add website link to the Pain Relief Foundation https://painrelieffoundation.org.uk/ 85.255.237.220 (talk) 09:40, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

 Already done Lightoil (talk) 12:37, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

References

Semi-protected edit request on 28 August 2023

In the section headed 'Religion' the top photograph of Liverpool Anglican Cathedral has a caption with the word 'Cathedrals'. "Please change Cathedral's to Cathedrals" since it's not possessive. 82.71.17.250 (talk) 17:37, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

 Done M.Bitton (talk) 17:38, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Metropolitan area

@Liverpolitan1980, rather than WP:EDITWAR, it's better we discuss on here first and try to come to a consensus with others. I can see you feel passionately about it and I've nothing against a line that Liverpool has a metropolitan area of over 2 million. But we really do need a better source than an independent report from well over a decade ago. Especially given that the report was to recommend the creation of the Liverpool City Region LEP which has ended up with a population of 1.5 million. Formerly, the claim was based on the ESPON metropolitan areas in the United Kingdom of Liverpool-Birkenhead. But that data is from 2001 and the UK doesn't seem to use this category since we left the European Union. I think probably the nearest thing now is the travel to work areas. Dgp4004 (talk) 19:40, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

I've also just noticed you've added the line and reference twice in two separate parts of the lead. Surely once will suffice? Dgp4004 (talk) 19:51, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for confirming your position. I agree that there is no controversy over Liverpool's metropolitan area. That is the reason that this fact has stood the test of time through the consensus of other contributors. A better source has now been added from the Liverpool City Region Combined Authority which makes it clear that Liverpool's metropolitan area extends in to northeast Wales, Cheshire and Lancashire. Indeed, the Liverpool city region shares its boundaries with neighbouring areas including Cheshire West and Chester, Lancashire, Warrington, and Wigan. It is virtually one contigous urban sprawl. If you would like further proof of this, I can show you a night time satellite view from the international space station? Liverpolitan1980 (talk) 20:03, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for addressing it. It doesn't matter what I think - only that we can find decent sources to back it up. This second source is more recent which is good. But it still doesn't say that there's a Liverpool metropolitan area with a population of 2 million. What I can find is:

"Situated in the northwest of England, the Liverpool City Region covers an area of 724 square kilometres and has a population of around 1.5 million people. The City Region also has a much bigger economic hinterland extending into northeast Wales, Cheshire and Lancashire. It shares its boundaries geographically with neighbouring areas including Cheshire West and Chester, Lancashire, Warrington, and Wigan."

But if that's the best we have, leave it in until something better comes up I suppose. Dgp4004 (talk) 20:12, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I am sure it's out there. The metropolitan area isn't going anywhere in that time. The counties haven't moved since 2011 and neither has the population shrunk. I agree that we should leave it as it is now and add more sources if they can be found. Thanks for that, all the best! Liverpolitan1980 (talk) 20:15, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Also just a note to say that the second comma here makes it read that Liverpool has a population of 1.5 million, not Liverpool City Region. Without the comma, the LCR has a pop of 1.5 million:

'It is the largest district in the Liverpool City Region, the fourth largest combined authority in the UK, with a population of 1,551,722 in 2021.'

We could either do away with the second comma or perhaps rephrase it. Dgp4004 (talk) 20:20, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Of course, I agree come to think of it, youre right. Happy for the second comma to go. Thanks a lot! (Liverpolitan1980 (talk) 20:37, 10 January 2024 (UTC))

This source doesn't support the Met area without OR and SYNTH. Page 19 references an "economic" region, but this is specifically not a metropolitan area (which has a very specific methodology for calculation) and is instead a mishmash of travel to work zones. Even it's claim of an "urban area" does not align with the definition of an urban area. This is fine when talking in a general sense (such as in the Demography section) to talk about the different ways the region may be defined in different situations - but a stretch to assert that the definition is common or current.

This Article only tangentally refers to the metropolitan area, but it's specifically only in reference to the LCR (so excludes those other areas mentioned).

Reliance on an independent report from 2011 and a document about Rights of Way to support several of the new additions is WP:SYNTH and WP:OR in the current way it is structured.

Regarding ESPON, as the last formal measure of the Met Areas it is the one retained at the moment on wikipedia. There is a broader discussion (or multiple thereof) on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography trying to resolve the issue between BUA, BUASD, Met Urban Area and myriad other measurements that have come and gone without ever being formally updated.

Echoing DGP comment, the sentence around "It is the largest district in the Liverpool City Region, the fourth largest combined authority in the UK, with a population of 1,551,722 in 2021" isn't well worded and is conflating a number of things and combined with the Built Up Area, and so on, it means we're referring to 3 different ways of measuring largely the same area and its population based on different ONS or similar metrics and criteria. Koncorde (talk) 22:49, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

I don't agree. There is nothing incorrect about the fact that Liverpool is the largest district in the Liverpool City Region, the fourth largest combined authority in the UK with a population of 1,551,722 in 2021. It is fact and there is nothing wrong with the wording either. 3 different ways of measuring largely the same area is not wrong either. This is wikipedia - it is an encycolpedia where different measurements are displayed. Liverpool is a large city within a wider built up area within a metropolitan area. It's the same with all big cities around the world. Move on, nothing to see here. Liverpolitan1980 (talk) 22:55, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Also be careful to apply the precise same logic to every single city on wikipedia - paying particular attention to the core UK cities of Belfast, Birmingham, Bristol, Cardiff, Glasgow, Leeds, Liverpool, Manchester, Newcastle, Nottingham and Sheffield. Not that there is a separate logic for UK geography. Whatever you discuss here applies to every city on Wikipedia so you might as well start a very large discussion about all those cities. As far as I can see on first glance, pay attention to Glasgow, Belfast, Bristol and Nottingham who make reference to their built up areas and/or metropolitan areas. Perhaps remove them and make a talk conversation there. Or maybe we could just leave things as they have been for years where absolutely no big issue has been made about the fact that Liverpool happens to be in the middle of a large urban area. Liverpolitan1980 (talk) 23:05, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Happy to: you cannot both claim something was "abolished" at a census (it wasn't, the data just wasn't updated) while referencing the Liverpool Built-up Area in the third sentence of this article and also claiming other, older, data remains valid. The actual methodology has changed as they have functionally not created an updated version of the broader BUA concept, and instead simplified the BUASD as the BUA, but can find the relevant 2021 article here at the ONS and the dataset is here.

A battleground attitude isn't going to work with me, I suggest you re-read my words. Koncorde (talk) 23:10, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Are you referring to the Greater Manchester Built Up Area - yes that was abolished at the 2021 Census. It is now the Manchester built up area - DGP above updated the statistics accordingly and correctly. The Liverpool Built-up Area still exists. Check your facts. The other, older, data remains valid - it is not coming from outdated ONS methodologies. On the other hand - any double standard applies to you. If you wish to keep outdated ONS methodologies then you must keep information which you claim to be outdated. You can't have it both ways. A battleground won't work me either - I don't do rubbish arguments that are biased to one area. I see you haven't started a discussion on every single city page on wikipedia?

Liverpolitan1980 (talk) 23:15, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

They don't "abolish" things in the ONS, they change methodology or change definitions which makes historic measurements less relevant (or easier to compare with). This: Liverpool Built-up Area and this Greater Manchester Built-up Area use the same methodology that was only updated in 2011 and not 2021. In 2021 they defined the BUASD (previously the areas known as Liverpool, St Helens, Huyton and so on) as BUA. The "Liverpool Built-up Area" is now solely E63001374, just as "Manchester Built-up Area" is E63001295 for the purposes of arguing that one or the other has been abolished. Again, if can you please read my words (and yes, I have engaged repeatedly at wikiproject geography about the correct definitions used). Koncorde (talk) 23:32, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

I will clarify. 'Abolish' to mean that the methodology is no longer used. Abolish means to formally put an end to a system, practice, or institution. Which the ONS has done because they no longer calculate the Greater Manchester built up area. But that is rather splitting hairs. You are welcome to re-instate the figure if you wish so long as you apply the same logic to other older sources from the exact same year - 2011. I don't see what your problem is here. Liverpolitan1980 (talk) 23:47, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

You picked a fight because you failed to read my original message, and instead have gone off onto other stuff. If you actually read my comments I have not demanded any changes, I have pointed out issues with sourcing, I pointed out the reason the ESPON figures have been used on wikipedia and directed conversation / question to the main wikiproject talk board for more information, and I agreed with DGP's criticism of that sentence - and expanded on the conflation of subject. These were entirely neutral comments on the topic with absolutely 0 personal animus and yet the response was clearly not AGF. I "have no problem", I am contributing to an article I have contributed to for over a decade. Koncorde (talk) 00:02, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

There is absolutely no reason why cities can't be measured in 3 different ways. That is the whole point that we measure built up areas and metropolitan areas in the first place. I am afraid you have no argument there. And there is nothing wrong with the sources.

The RT Hon the Lord Heseltine and Sir Terry Leahy refer to an urban region "centred on Liverpool" that spreads from Wrexham and Flintshire to Chester, Warrington, West Lancashire and across to Southport with a population of some 2.3m in October 2011.

The Liverpool City Region Combined Authority refers to the city region having "a much bigger economic hinterland extending into northeast Wales, Cheshire and Lancashire." That source is from 2018. I am happy to find more sources that refer to this exact same area because I am certain that they are out there. And the concept of Liverpool's metropolitan area has been on the article for quite some time - without any controversy.

It is precisely the same geographic area in both sources whatever way you try to twist it.

So I will ask you again. What is it that you have a problem with. Is it the population? Shall we calculate that here by adding up all the various local authorities in this area? I have no issue with the population being "over 2 million". It is merely a guide.

Could it be that Liverpool is recognised as being part of larger area with a 2 million strong population perhaps?

Or is it wikipedia experience that you have a problem with, I am not sure why you brought that up.

I have contributed over 97,000 bytes to this article. Also from an old username that I retired some time ago. By far and way the single biggest contributor to it. But I am sure neither of us wish to claim ownership. No-one has caused any controversy over the subject of Liverpool having a metropolitan area before, however, I have come across your username before over the years though and I seem to remeber you being focussed on Liverpool's population for some time. Particularly withn the context of it being in a larger area. I am not sure why you find that strange.

I am glad to see that you are not demanding any changes here. Perhaps we should let this rest. Liverpolitan1980 (talk) 00:32, 11 January 2024 (UTC)