Talk:Primate city

European list?

The list of primate cities in Europe seems a bit too short. If the city no. 1 twice as big as no. 2 rule is used Sweden, Portugal and possibly also Poland should make the list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.208.64.43 (talk) 20:34, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

Wellington and Auckland

The article says:

A non-capital primate city may also emerge organically:

and gives Auckland and Wellington as an example. But as far as I'm aware, Auckland was already the larger of the two, and was the de facto original capital, and the choice of Wellington as capital was part of a conscious political strategy to position the government nearer to the South Island. So is this truly "organic"? TooManyFingers (talk) 03:04, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

The Map is also wrong as it shows NZ as not having a primate city, when in fact Auckland is, in fact, almost 5 times larger than Christchurch and Wellington, and is the only city in NZ with a popultion greater than 1 million. 33% of the country's population and 38% of the national economy. No other city or urban area in New Zealand having a population greater than 450,000 202.62.41.81 (talk) 07:31, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

I don't think that's true, please include your source. Alexeyevitch^(talk) 12:04, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Do you disagree with the numbers at List of New Zealand urban areas by population? Largoplazo (talk) 15:00, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

I commend your enthusiasm! Alexeyevitch^(talk) 20:02, 12 March 2024 (UTC)

Another part of what is stating is that the map does not agree with the page. I think you'll find that they're right. Sushidude21! (talk) 05:58, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Of what 202.62.41.81 is stating I meant. Sushidude21! (talk) 05:58, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

The tables are not helpful

I think the tables are rather silly. They encourage the addition of cities in small countries which would never be described in sources as "primate cities" (e.g. with all respect to St Kitts and Nevis, Basseterre). And they suggest that primacy is a completely objective measure which can be measured by "population of city rank 1 is more than double population of city rank 2", whereas the rest of the article indicates its more nuanced than that. I think it would be better to only retain cities in the table if a reliable source describes it as a primate city. Matthewmayer (talk) 03:36, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

A similar was floating through my mind yesterday. As you say, it isn't a precise arithmetic definition, so WP:2+2=4 doesn't suffice to exempt the inclusion of a city in the table from the prohibition of WP:OR if the designation of it as a primate city isn't sourced. By the time you reached the end of your comment, though, you were contradicting your first sentence, which implied that the tables should be removed rather than restricted to sourced entries. I'm in favor of the latter. Largoplazo (talk) 09:51, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

If the tables are kept, i would suggest having a specific column for "References" - at the moment due to copy-pasting the same reference is often copied multiple times. Note for example this reference (which is about Oslo) has been copy-pasted to over 10 different rows incorrectly. Matthewmayer (talk) 10:35, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

I think that it's especially jarring that an entry I added for Tel Aviv, which uses a source which explicitly says that "Tel Aviv [...] has been Israel's primate urban agglomeration since the 1920s (Reichmann 1972)", has been removed several times now, while the copy-pased Oslo reference entries stay on the table. Glide08 (talk) 12:00, 5 August 2024 (UTC)

(Slightly) Confusing Map

Currently, there is a world map with certain countries colored red if they do NOT have a primate city--those that do are left "blank map gray", as it were. This seems counterintuitive--don't most maps in articles highlight the places that ARE the thing the article is talking about? I'd suggest redoing the map, coloring primate countries red and leaving non-primate cities gray. (Yes, the map has a caption clearly stating that red is for countries without primate cities, but... Why is it backwards?! Ugh.) 2601:408:C402:8D6D:AC97:9995:11CD:3C3C (talk) 23:28, 25 July 2024 (UTC)

Tel Aviv

People should really stop removing Tel Aviv from the list of primate cities. Tel Aviv is explicitly called "Israel's primate urban agglomeration" by a reliable source. The fact Jerusalem is home to government institutions and serves as a spiritual center for the three major Abrahamic religions, does not cancel out Tel Aviv being a primate city due to being Israel's social, economic, and cultural center and its metropolitan area being home to 50% of the Israeli population. Glide08 (talk) 22:43, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

Map

The map or tables appear to be incorrect. The map does not highlight New Zealand, yet the page states that Auckland is New Zealand's primate city. Conversely, the page claims Australia does not have a primate city, although the map suggests otherwise. There is likely further errors and inconsistencies throughout. Sushidude21! (talk) 05:57, 7 November 2024 (UTC)