| Revision as of 11:21, 17 October 2006 editDjr xi (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users8,996 edits →This is a joke? UK Edition: reply← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 13:06, 7 May 2024 edit undoRickinBaltimore (talk | contribs)Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators51,340 editsm Reverted 1 edit by 106.184.133.94 (talk) to last revision by ClueBot IIITags: Twinkle Undo |
| (984 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
{{talkheader}} |
|
{{Talk header}} |
|
|
{{Old AfD multi |
|
{| class="infobox" width="200" |
|
|
|
| date = October 16, 2006 |
|
|- |
|
|
|
| result = '''keep''' |
|
!align="center"|] |
|
|
|
| votepage = Global city |
|
] |
|
|
|
}} |
|
---- |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|vital=yes|1= |
|
|- |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Globalization |importance=high}} |
|
| |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject International relations |importance=Mid}} |
|
*] |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Urban studies and planning |importance=Mid}} |
|
*] |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Cities }} |
|
|} |
|
|
|
{{WikiProject Economics |importance=Mid}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Sociology |importance=Low}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{Archives|auto=long|search=yes}} |
|
|
<!--2160/24 = 90 days--> |
|
|
{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis |
|
|
| age=2160 |
|
|
| archiveprefix=Talk:Global city/Archive |
|
|
| numberstart=6 |
|
|
| maxarchsize=75000 |
|
|
| header={{Automatic archive navigator}} |
|
|
| minkeepthreads=5 |
|
|
| minarchthreads=1 |
|
|
| format= %%i |
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Schroeders Global Cities Index Missing From The Article == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
‘Schroeder’s Global Cities Index’ is missing from the article which is somewhat strange considering it is one of the more serious academic indexes. ] ]) 21:47, 25 September 2022 (UTC) |
|
==Global Cities Conference 2006?== |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Semi-protected edit request on 29 September 2022 == |
|
I've been hoping that this conference will lead to an update of global city rankings, or at least some new statistics. They haven't surfaced: the current summary paragraph is same as it was before the conference, with future tense changed to past tense. The doesn't show any signs of life either, nor can I find anything . |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{{edit semi-protected|Global city|answered=yes}} |
|
Why mention this conference at all if it didn't produce any new data?? |
|
|
|
I would like the protection template added please. ] (]) 15:59, 29 September 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
:{{done}}<!-- Template:ESp --> ― ]]<sub title="Discord Username" style="margin-left:-22q;">Blaze Wolf#6545</sub> 16:01, 29 September 2022 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Map lists Los Angeles as an Alpha+ city, but it's only Alpha in the 2020 rankings == |
|
== This is a joke. == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Map mistakenly lists Los Angeles as an Alpha+ city, but it's only Alpha in the 2020 rankings. This needs to be changed. ] (]) 15:25, 28 April 2023 (UTC) |
|
There is no way a globally famous city like Rio de Janeiro is less "global" than the much smaller cities of San Francisco and Montréal! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:Changed ] (]) 15:37, 28 April 2023 (UTC) |
|
==Montréal is as important as Madrid and Mexico== |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Johannesburg article calls it an alpha city == |
|
Stop deleting the photo of Montréal on the side and the changes I've made in the list since Montréal made an ascension since this page was made. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
But it is missing from all these rankings lists. Either the list needs updating, or the Johannesburg article needs correction. ] (]) 01:26, 7 January 2024 (UTC) |
|
:Not according to the source is hasn't. - <big><span style="color:#FF0000;">҉</span></big> ] <big><span style="color:#FF0000;">҉</span></big> 03:03, 29 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Requesting Guidance on Editing Misplaced Pages Pages as a New Contributor == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hello everyone, I'm new to editing Misplaced Pages pages and I'm interested in contributing to this page. Could someone please guide me on the appropriate editing protocol for this page? I want to ensure that any changes I make align with Misplaced Pages's guidelines and are beneficial to the page's content. Thank you in advance for your assistance. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(] (]) 15:37, 5 April 2024 (UTC)) |
|
== Where is Shanghai, Western Bias. == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:I'm not sure what you mean. Like in any other page, you have to cite trustful sources, present a neutral POV and avoid original research. Other than that, just take into consideration the context of what is already written. ] (]) 16:05, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::I just wanted to ask if I can edit this page? Because my account has been created only a week ago. ] (]) 16:12, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
Shanghai isn't on this list, yet places like Sydney/Zurich are? This doens'nt make sense at all. Shanghai has over 20 million people. It is one of the top three finincial cneters in Asia and is the busiest port in the world. Also it is one of the fashion and cultural capitals of Asia. Not to mention one of the worlds most impresive skylines (has twice as many skycrapers of New York) and IS LISTED ON ANOTHER[REDACTED] PAGE A WORLD CITY. Either add Shanghai or remove most of these other western citys. There is definitely some unjustified bias here. - <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) 14 August 2006.</small> |
|
|
|
:::It's a semi-protected page, which means it can only be edited by accounts that are at least 4 days old with at least 10 edits on English Misplaced Pages. ] (]) 18:48, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
:Both the lists on this page are cited from specific sources. If you can find another reliable source that lists Shanghai as a world city feel free to add it. We can't change the lists that are here though or they would no longer resemble their sources. - <big><span style="color:#FF0000;">҉</span></big> ] <big><span style="color:#FF0000;">҉</span></big> 04:57, 14 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
::::That's where I'm a bit confused. Can you please clarify on which page I can make those 10 edits? Although my account is a week old, I haven't been able to edit any Misplaced Pages articles yet due to their protection policies. |
|
|
|
|
|
::::{----} ] (]) 10:08, 8 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
You think ] qualifies as a global city, higher than Sydney...c'mon!!?? I agree with ], however. I think they should replace Zurich with Shanghai. But no higher than Sydney, I mean Sydney has one of the world's busiest ports, a thriving film industry (Superman Returns, Star Wars II, Moulin Rouge!, are among many films made in the city), it's sometimes considered one of the main fashion capitals, has a distinctive skyline that works (Shanghai is kind over the top, and a little trashy), Sydney's harbour is ALWAYS regarded as one of the finnest on earth, is headquaters to more 400 companies in the ] region, tourism sector is higher than Shanghai's, home to more than four world famous structures that have entered themselves into pop culture....the list goes on!!! I hope you understand now why Shanghai shouldn't go any higher/lower than Sydney, but maybe Zurich!!!<small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) 21 August 2006.</small> |
|
|
|
:::::There are perhaps millions of pages you can edit. To take this page as an example, the first two links ("city" and "world economy") should both be free to edit. ] (]) 14:06, 8 April 2024 (UTC) |
|
:Oh, Jack... <small><big><span style="color:#FF0000;">҉</span></big> ] <big><span style="color:#FF0000;">҉</span></big> 08:42, 21 August 2006 (UTC)</small> |
|
|
*this is not western bias, this is UK-US bias.--] 12:29, 22 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
:Please read the archives--] 17:18, 22 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
::Shanghai, as well as China in general, does not yet have a reasonably effective legal system. In contrast, a person arrested in any city in the top two tiers of the GaWC list has a reasonable expectation of some kind of due process or fundamental justice or its local equivalent. Without a good legal system, a city's economy cannot operate at its full potential, because both corporations and their employees are uncertain as to the extent of their property rights. That is, they are afraid that at any given time they could lose everything at the hands of corrupt government personnel or organized crime. This is also why Mexico City and Sao Paulo are not in the top tier. --] 02:47, 23 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
'Oh, Jack...' |
|
|
|
|
|
...Yes, what? You disagree, well why? I mean you seriosly think Shanghai is more of a global city than Sydney. Hmm, I wonder why Sydney is actually already more of a global city than Shanghai, why don't you try work that out |
|
|
|
|
|
:PLEASE READ THE ARTICLE PEOPLE. That list is part of research done by a University. You can't change that list because you disagree with that list. Don't you understand? If you think that this research contains Western bias, then look for academic research on this subject that doesn't contain the bias. DO NOT CONSTANTLY ADD THE CITIES YOU LIKE. ] 18:44, 25 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::I think the problem here is precisely because the article doesn't come across as a dispassionate description of one group of peoples views on what makes a global city, but rather as Misplaced Pages actually the peddling the concept. This isn't helped by the way some contributors like to add the fact that their favorite city is in this list to the lede of that city's article; so it all begins to look like this is WPs way of categorising cities. Clearly if a group of academics has invented this categorisation (and however lame I might personally think it is) we need to cover it; but we should be careful not to look like we are proselitizing it. -- ] 19:22, 25 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::Should we perhaps mark this as a NPOV dispute? --] 19:11, 28 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Who Cares? they're cities. |
|
|
|
|
|
== formatting issues == |
|
|
] |
|
|
|
|
|
This is what the bottom of the page looks like at high resolution (1920x1200). All the edit links are somehow clustered at the bottom. ] 01:21, 26 August 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Hello. It seems that the problem is based on the placement of all images in one single list. I think that if you split the images across the paragraphs, after the section titles, it should be solved. This will of course present the need for separate formatting parameters for each image. I will proceed to it right away. --] <sup>]</sup> 00:13, 11 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
: There was no necessary to screw up the article. The only thing was needed is adding two lines that was deleted by vandal. Reverted it to original state. ] 01:14, 11 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
Added width to bypass ] 9 bug. ] 11:28, 22 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== This is a joke: Part 2 == |
|
|
|
|
|
How about Philadelphia being lower than Houston or Miami? Philadelphia is a world class city once again. It has bounced back. It is a leader in the arts. No city, with the exception of New York, is as well known for its arts scene. No city in the US has more Public art for example. It is also the home to a burgeoning restaurant scene which includes the finest French restaurant in America. Also Philadelphia has many more historical sites than Houston and Miami combined. Philadelphia is a pioneer in its wireless network which is designed to bring internet connection to the masses. |
|
|
|
|
|
Answer: I think the research is about how important a city is in globalization, not how great my city is because we have arts. For example, many cities on the list are big harbour areas or big economic areas. And sign your posts. --] 00:35, 17 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== This is a joke: Part 3 == |
|
|
|
|
|
There's a little town in the Kalahari desert called Pofadder. Often the butt end of jokes in South Africa, let's add it to the new list for extra credibility. It MUST surely be a world city based on the info put forward by GaWC. Just because it was conducted by a university doesn't mean it's accurate or unbiased. Yes, where is Shanghai? Where is Dubai? And, of course, where is my beloved Johannesburg? One could just as easily argue that Jozi's contirbution to Africa is of such great economic significance for a whole CONTINENT that it automatically should feature (don't even think of dissing my continent, scumbag). You could always find evidence for why some city should be higher ranked than another one. In my mind's eye, there is no way that London tops New York, and Tokyo is a "global niche city." Bollocks. Down with the GaWC!!!!! Viva! Viva! Amandla! |
|
|
|
|
|
== Merge from Financial Centre == |
|
|
|
|
|
If you ask me, ] and ] are pretty much the same thing. Besides, the Financial Centre article is virtually linkless. I'd say a merge would be a a good idea. -- ] 01:08, 17 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
: No it is two completely different things. Just put a link in view also. ] 09:14, 17 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== City table at the bottom == |
|
|
The City Proper population rankings in the table are hopelessly wrong; where on earth did they come from?? ] 19:21, 17 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
: What exactly is wrong? ] 23:03, 23 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Airports by annual passenger traffic == |
|
|
|
|
|
Given that this is an article about cities, not airports, wouldn't cities by annual air passenger traffic be a more relevant measure than airports by annual passenger traffic? There's a source for this at http://www.iaurif.org/en/doc/studies/airports/INTRO.pdf giving the top 10 rankings, as at 2002, as being London, Tokyo, Chicago, New York, Atlanta, Paris, Los Angeles, Dallas, Frankfurt, Houston. This properly reflects the way that large cities may be served by multiple airports. ] 23:50, 22 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
:Thank you very much. I've searched for this info long time.--] 23:14, 23 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::Happy to help! I can't claim all the credit, though - this information came up on the ] page originally! :-) ] 23:52, 23 September 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
I've been reverting ]'s edits to this column of the table. He has a sourced reference from 2005 for the busiest airports by passenger, and has been updating the table accordingly. However, I think that this list of ''airports'' is not as appropriate for an article about cities as the slightly older (2002) reference for ''cities'' by number of airport passengers. The source I advocate takes into consideration that a city may be served by multiple airports, whereas Bjornson's doesn't. In fact, Bjornson's source shows London and Tokyo to each have two airports inside the 30 busiest in 2005. Thoughts, anyone? ] 23:14, 2 October 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
:I agree with you. BTW, that table about airports was initially inserted by me as temporary solution while we do not have the appropriate data. The data on cities was planned from the very creation of this table.--] 23:19, 2 October 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== This is a joke? UK Edition == |
|
|
|
|
|
OK, I'm from Liverpool and naturally I'm totally biased and think it's the greatest city on the planet. However, how on earth can Birmingham, Manchester, Glasgow & Leeds be granted of having some some evidence (whatever that means) of becoming global cities yet Liverpool doesn't seem to have a case? More emphasis is needed on how the points system which yielded this result was formulated and by whom. ] |
|
|
|
|
|
::All the details are provided in the relevant links - for example the . I personally feel that given the nature of copyright infringements etc., it is not unreasonable to suggest that the reader follows the link for more detailed information about the calculations etc. - such details are probably too complex to incorporate into an article such as these. I have no comment to make regarding Liverpool - perhaps you should take it up with Loughborough University - we sure as hell can't do anything about it here! ''']''' <small>(])</small> 14:48, 8 October 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
:::I think we have a distinct scoping issue here: is this article about the concept of a "world city" (which is the more usual term, I'd have thought), or is it about GaWC's world city research? The fact that the article title is ]/] would strong suggest the former is the desirable outcome; that the article is entirely about the latter, and even seems to imply that the two are synonymous, strikes me as a huge problem with the current version (and smacks of an article-jack by way of people boosterising their own research). But one we sure as hell can do soimething about... ] 21:47, 16 October 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
::While true, there is an inherent problem in that the use of the term in its general context is one of the most POV issues plausible. GaWC appears to be the only real research that is available on the subject, and accordingly it is the only justifiable basis for any of the content on this page. Given this, it is important that it is constantly referenced in order to ascertain verifiability of this information under ]. ''']''' <small>(])</small> 11:21, 17 October 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
== Kansas City appears twice on the 1999 list == |
|
|
|
|
|
It's in the one point section and the four point section, I don't know which is correct. <small>—The preceding ] comment was added by ] (] • ]) 07:37, 8 October 2006.</small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> |
|
|
|
|
|
::Well spotted! Kansas City should a one-point city - see for details. ''']''' <small>(])</small> 14:43, 8 October 2006 (UTC) |
|
But it is missing from all these rankings lists. Either the list needs updating, or the Johannesburg article needs correction. Deliusfan (talk) 01:26, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello everyone, I'm new to editing Misplaced Pages pages and I'm interested in contributing to this page. Could someone please guide me on the appropriate editing protocol for this page? I want to ensure that any changes I make align with Misplaced Pages's guidelines and are beneficial to the page's content. Thank you in advance for your assistance.
level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
Done ― Blaze WolfBlaze Wolf#6545 16:01, 29 September 2022 (UTC)