Talk:Greater London Built-up Area

South east England

There is some disagreement here about this term. South East England is a modern region of England that doesn't include London or the East of England, in which some of the urban area lies.

Marky-Son

The text doesn't say South East England, it says: south east England; there is a difference. MRSC 21:09, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

There is or was a planner's term called "Roseland", R O S E being "Rest Of South East", outside London. Ausseagull (talk) 08:41, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

and "south east England" is the idiomatic usage for the more general term. i find "south eastern England" a barbarism, with a hyphen it is only mildly better. Morwen - Talk 22:16, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

Scope

Is Hemel Hempstead really contiguous with London? Surely there is countryside between the two. Lfh 23:16, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that's what I was thinking. And who invented the concept of the "Greater London Urban Area" and what purpose does the concept serve?Ausseagull (talk) 08:41, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

As the article explains, the term and its area are defined by the Office for National Statistics for the purpose of analysing urban areas. JimmyGuano (talk) 17:33, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Hemel Hempstead is almost continuously urban to central London, but Harlow, Guildford and Bracknell are surrounded by countryside, so how are they in the definition? Jim Michael (talk) 02:31, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Those three are connected by very narrow ribbon development. Guildford and Harlow more so than Bracknell. You can see in the map and if you look at the source. Eopsid (talk) 18:46, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Bromley

The definition given includes the London Borough of Bromley. This is contradicted in the text, which says that Biggin Hill isn't included because it's surrounded by countryside. This makes sense to me, but parts of Biggin Hill are in the London Borough of Bromley. Bromley also includes villages such as Downe, which are completely surrounded by countryside and not 'urbanised' in any sense. Has the ONS decided which parts of the London Borough of Bromley are included? Clear air turbulence 12:41, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Those areas shouldn't really be described as or linked to as London Boroughs though. Strictly speaking when the ONS describes "Bromley" as part of an Urban Area they are not speaking of the London Borough of that name but the "Locality" or "Urban Sub Area" of that name. The boundaries of localities and those of boroughs tend to match where they fall entirely within Urban Areas (though they are often a bit out of date), but obviously boroughs can extend beyond the Urban area, while localities, being by definition sub-components of Urban Areas, cannot.

That does leave the problem of what those localities in the article should link to though. Localities aren't nearly notable enough to have articles of their own, but linking to the articles on Boroughs is, as you point out, highly misleading. Maybe they shouldn't link to anything? Or maybe they should link to the boroughs but with a note in the article pointing out they don't match boroughs exactly? They certainly shouldn't say "London Borough of" though as that is simply wrong. Demograph 18:25, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

There's more information about it here - [1] on page 8 and 9 of the pdf (page 2 and 3 of the original document)Demograph 18:28, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

This definition does seem to lack consistency. Biggin Hill is not part of the urban area, so how is Hemel? I'm sure other parts of the outer London boroughs, such as Barnet, are not wholly urban in character either.Marky-Son 13:32, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Watford

The third paragraph describes the London Commuter belt as "a ring of towns that are physically separate from the urban area but still functionally operate largely as suburbs, with large proportions of their populations dependent on the urban area for employment."

On that basis, surely no settlement can be part of both the Urban area and the Commuter belt? I've frequently seen Watford described as being in both (although I believe it to be the latter), but could someone clarify the situation generally? BeL1EveR 16:13, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, they can. I've altered it now. Watford is in both. Marky-Son 16:59, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Old figures

The population-data is from 2005. --Oakhonor (talk) 14:24, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Citations

The citations do substantiate. You have to go from the link to Key statistics, then usual resident population, then from there you can choose data on built-up areas or their subdivisions. From this you can get to data on the population of London's Greater Built-up area, a list of subdivisions and their populations. They also have maps. You can also click key statistics and select another set of data such as Age Structure or Country of Birth and get relevant information on those subjects there as well. The data appears to be generated from a database so you can't just link straight to it. Eopsid (talk) 11:09, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Maypole?

Where is Maypole in the Kent section? Crookesmoor (talk) 10:47, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Updating

Figures are quoted for the 2011 census - are there equivalents for the 2021 census (so either direct replace or '[this] in 2011 and [that] in 2021')? Jackiespeel (talk) 12:45, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

They havent released the data for it yet. Eopsid (talk) 21:20, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

OK. There is logic for either of my suggestions - 'this is so' or 'this has changed'. Jackiespeel (talk) 11:49, 14 October 2024 (UTC)