Talk:Metropolitan Cork

Untitled

Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Can we get a source for the 274,000 figure. The 2006 census figures won't be available yet Irlchrism 14:22, 27 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

The use of this concept

Latest comment: 18 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Is 'Metropolitan Cork' used anywhere by national agencies, such as the CSO, the department of the Environment & Local Government, etc.? As far as I knew, Dublin was the only city in Ireland considered metropolitan, dating back to the 'Dublin Metropolitan Police', etc.

I mean, I know that in the various Waterford strategic plans, many figures are used for various greater Waterford areas, but they are not official. I mean where does it all end? 'Greater Athlone Metropolitan Area'?

Since Cork councils, Cork TDs, and Cork reports use it (from a quick google), fair enough, maybe it is worth mentioning, but its use in articles such as the Munster article seems totally wrong to me. In the cities section, the huge metropolitan pop. for Cork is given, a completely incorrect (what I guess is a council 2006 mixed with a suburbs 2002) Limerick figure is given, alongside the bare bones Waterford city figure. Ignoring the apples and oranges comparison for a sec., which is a different issue, I think that what should be specified here is the latest CSO city+suburbs figure for Cork (and the others), given on the 'cities in ireland' article. Anything else in an official context seems wrong to me. Merlante 13:28, 16 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

Agree - it is not very notable or referenced. Djegan 17:23, 16 August 2006 (UTC)Reply

The quote below was taken from

Arch Eire

"On a brighter note though, the Central Statistics Office has acknowledged that the area known as Metropolitan Cork by the Cork Area Strategic Plan has an estimated population of 251,510, which is to be officially recognised when Census 2006 is carried out next week" If this is true then it would be unfair to remove the figure for Metropolitan Cork.

Towns

Latest comment: 17 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I deleted Mallow before because it was called a ring-town rather than a part of Metropolitan Cork in the document used to source this article. Recently, Passage West, Monkstown, Ringaskiddy and Crosshaven have been added with no references at all. The first three are uncontroversial. It would be hard to argue for the inclusion of Cobh and Carrigaline while excluding them. Presumably, they weren't mentioned due to their size. However, I think that the inclusion of Crosshaven might be stretching the concept a little. Your opinions? Irlchrism 09:52, 5 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Use {{fact}} and if no source is forthcoming delete? Djegan 00:08, 6 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

Proposed merger from Greater Cork

Latest comment: 15 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion

The article Greater Cork covers the same topic Metropolitan Cork, but "Metropolitan Cork" seems to be the term used in official documents such as this one. The Greater Cork article has been tagged for merger since January, but it this article was not tagged until I just added the note.

The Greater Cork article is much more substantial, so I don't want to just redirect it here. Does anyone have the energy to check the sources and do the merger? --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:06, 28 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Per most recent note here, later this week/next, I'm going to try and salvage some of the relevant and sourced content (probably not the "list of bus routes" stuff per WP:NOTDIRECTORY) and complete a merge/redirect. Guliolopez (talk) 11:39, 25 June 2008 (UTC)Reply

So, what happened? I think the Greater Cork and Met Cork should be merged and the resulting article upgraded. After all this is the second largest city in Ireland. Do we not have any editors from Cork hereabouts? Must we Dubs do everything? Sarah777 (talk) 23:31, 12 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

I'm from Cork, but this is beyond my skills as a wikipedia editor. For what it's worth, while the Greater Cork article is more substantial, it constitutes a large body of original research and is frequently inaccurate. At least this article is based on something that has some kind of official status.195.73.119.90 (talk) 15:36, 16 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

External links modified

Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Metropolitan Cork. 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:

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) 20:16, 7 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Add topic