Talk:List of cities with more than one million inhabitants

From OpenGeofiction Encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Larger Pictures

What would you guys think of giving all the nice symbolic pictures for the cities a bit more... room to breath? I think 150px is by far to narrow to even get the slightest impression of what's going on in it xD Perhaps something from 300-500px would be better? Of course one can always enlarge the picture to see every detailLeowezy (talk) 18:36, 15 June 2015 (CEST)

Nothing. If you will see large photos, you can click on it. Too the remarks at "landmark" in many cases in this list are very long. This is an oversight-list, not the wiki about greater towns. --Histor (talk) 19:19, 15 June 2015 (CEST)
The photos were originally 150px wide, but an error occurred to make them appear smaller. This has now been fixed, and they have been restored to 150px.
But could we please not use photos of iconic landmarks like the Arc de Triomphe, where the real location is obvious to everyone? Thanks! --Isleño (talk) 00:17, 16 June 2015 (CEST)

Too much columns

So the table can not look good. Out with square miles and the metropolitain area - and it can be aczeptable. --Histor (talk) 19:54, 4 September 2014 (CEST)

Change of focus?

For me, it might be more interesting to delete the city area (and density) information, since those can be difficult to define and compare between cities, and instead open up that space for a brief description of the city landmarks and a small photograph. It might also encourage people to start using more visual imagery in their articles.

For example:

City Country City Population
(most recent estimate)
Metropolitan population
(most recent estimate)
Photo Landmarks Coordinates
Port Emporia Flsg.jpg Pretany 8,643,000 54.6/72.0
Latina (Cidudad) Latflag.png Latina 6 345 609 -13.5/ 39.8
Khaiwoon Khaiwoon flag.png Khaiwoon 6,292,900 7,052,900 (including urban area of Marapura, Gobrassanya) Khaiwoon-little-bay-skyline.jpg Grand Fortress, Water Gardens, Royal Temple, Former Palace, Old Temple, Tree of Luphuran, Bekhtubatna Hall, Great Market, City Hill, Paiphangun Night City, Tombs of the Princes, Taiwala Tomb, Casino Mile, Global Tower 18.6/89.5
Markvað Nordurland Flag.png Norðurland 4.626.244 6.216.784 61.4, 18.4
Frjálshöfn Nordurland Flag.png Norðurland 1.211.058 2.157.836 63.9, 42.9
I endorse this idea, but regrettably I am not a photoshop genius, like Isleno. . . I doubt I could ever equal the work already invested in Khaiwoon, as much as I would like to. Therefore I hope there is tolerance for less image-based approaches to our geofiction.--Ardisphere (talk) 05:48, 5 September 2014 (CEST)
Haha, I don't think a photoshop genius would call me a photoshop genius.  ;-)
But it's possible to add images without any photoshoppery. For example someone could show us the sandy deserts or snowcapped mountains of their country, a sprawling city or a village lane, or a motorway, or a dress shop, or a tasty snack, etc, etc.
Of course there should be no intolerance for less image-based approaches, but given the power of images and their unique ability to draw people in, I think it's not a bad idea to encourage them. --Isleño (talk) 06:27, 5 September 2014 (CEST)
I am being forced to remove my images so no, I won't be adding any to my articles. Sorry but public domain images are ugly and limited in quality. So yes ardisphere is right. You need Photoshop skills. I would rather have no images at all than bad ones. Bhj867 (talk)
You aren't limited to public domain images or pictures you take yourself. As long as you give credit to the photographer, release the photo under its original license, and aren't using it for commercial purposes (OGF is non-commercial as far as I know), then you should be able to use photos released under any Creative Commons license. I will run this past the admins on the Help & Resources page, but there are literally tens of millions of photos available with these licenses (there are tons at Flickr and on Wikimedia Commons for example) so there's absolutely no need to give up. --Isleño (talk) 07:19, 8 September 2014 (CEST)
I also definitely felt frustrated in surveying what was available in public domain, so I made a decision to only use images I completely own i.e. my own photography or artwork. It will limit what I can have, but I spent some time going through my own photography archives of the last several years and was surprised at some of the things I found where with just a bit of cropping I could say "hm that is somewhere in one of my countries." Don't give up too easily. . . one thought I had is maybe someone could set up a kind of OGF photo-sharing page, here or using a service like flickr. I definitely have some photos where they are pretty good quality but would not fit my mental image of either Mahhal or Ardisphere (my two countries), but might be suitable for other people to use.--Ardisphere (talk) 19:24, 6 September 2014 (CEST)

category

By the way, I had created two categories that complement this list: and. I am not sure if those are useful or the "right" way to do things.--Ardisphere (talk) 06:09, 5 September 2014 (CEST)

Categories are a specific thing. We should avoid categories, when parallel there is a portal, so we can find the article or the list easy. Let us not create too many of them as root-category. So I delete categories like "countries in Antarephis", because we have the Portal "countries" and the portal "Geography", where you can esay find such items in both ways. So the root are two sorts of categories: First the countries (Latina, Wiwaxia, Khaiwoon, Ardisphere and so on) and second "international things" as Oceans, Universities, Languages, Metros and so on) --Histor (talk) 09:50, 8 September 2014 (CEST)

Solon

Wow - only some roads, nothing in the wiki, and the greatest city of the OGF-world? And so, as I see, only a copy of the layout of New York. No good idea.

I think generally, that cities with red links should have no place in this list. --Histor (talk) 08:29, 16 June 2015 (CEST)

Kama'ata

Hello - the link to the geographic position of your town is not correct --Histor (talk) 20:03, 14 March 2016 (CET)

Akrug

Do you think it is fair, to set in this list a town with an old city with only some streets and one block of houses nearby? Comes strange. --Histor (talk) 20:05, 14 March 2016 (CET)

Overwikification?

Is this OGF:Overwikification and/or a list of the largest/biggest/greatest/mine-is-bigger-than-yours? Was just sent to look here after somebody set Gobras City to 11M on the map (realistically 3M max?) /wangi (talk) 04:01, 27 January 2019 (CET)

I think this list is helpful, if somebody will see great cities in OSM. Indeed Gobras City is not in the list, but well mapped, so that city might be shown in this list. The design-team of Gobras city has to say, how many inhabitants. And about short ot long I think, that Stanton may be on of the greatest cities. --Histor (talk) 10:03, 27 January 2019 (CET)
Every day I wonder that there are no cities with >500 M inhabitants. I see this list as prototype of all overwikification. There are several 8 M cities with not much more than a name on the map, but as long as the community continues discussing issues which are not on the map (countries which never existed or cultures placed somewhere, but there is exactly nothing on the map) I see no chance to change anything. If you want to make a good and fair list here, I think there should be some very detailed prerequisites defined (could be easily checked by overpass), e.g. cities with more than 1.5 million inhabitants should have all infrastructure mapped (schools, health care, industry, public transportation, electricity, ...), which makes it very difficult (but valuable) to put your city to the list. --Mstr (talk) 16:57, 27 January 2019 (CET)
If I remember well the node-cities were removed in the past which was in general good idea. I think the cities shouldn't be added to the list until the detailed mapping allows the user to count the population. That means there should be at least residential buildings so not every city (if any?) can be put on the list. But the entire idea of the list is brilliant because it allows to find the major population centers quickly. --Rüstem Paşa Discussion 19:48, 27 January 2019 (CET)

As I remember, there are deleted (too from me) a lot of cities in the past, where the mapping was too poor. --Histor (talk) 10:45, 28 January 2019 (CET) 22:15, 27 January 2019 (CET)

I'd be ok with some rather strict rules, for example that every city on the list shoud have a complete street grid, as well as all of the infrastructure mapped (obviously not every single building, a full coverage of land use at least I'd say), i.e. the way I'm trying to slowly give a finished look to my capital city at the moment --Stjur (talkOGF) 22:53, 27 January 2019 (CET)
Would love to see some kind of set rules for this page, and I'd happily volunteer to keep tabs on it if a monitor is needed, since the admin team probably wouldn't have time to take it on. I'm with stjur, though—having all buildings mapped is way too high a bar. There are many real-world major cities that don't have buildings mapped, so I buildings don't really impact verisimilitude/realism to me (and they're so tough to get right that they often make the map seem *less* real). As long as roads and infra are mapped, along with land use (parks, hospitals, schools, libraries, museums, etc) that seems detailed enough, no? -- Louis Walker (talk) 00:00, 00 January 2019 (EST)

At last we have some rules - you see it at the top of the side = Please no "red" links in this list and no cities, which are only a point on the map or only a rough scetch. Please only short remarks in "small". I think, it is not fair, to set cities in the list, which has no wiki-article and / or is not mapped in a satisfacted way. I for myself think, that streets, rails and civic infrastructur like schools, parks, waste-water treatment, theaters and so on is to shown on the map and that the number of inhabitants seemed to be realistic. --Histor (talk) 10:53, 28 January 2019 (CET)

The list has five entries which have been marked as somebody as likely overwikification (and there should probably be more). What's the done thing to deal with those? /wangi (talk) 11:00, 28 January 2019 (CET)
Name Country Population (city) Area (km²) density (per km²) Image Map Notes
Ataraxia City* Flag-Ataraxia-v1.png Ataraxia 8 081 176 9 027 895 TBA 33°N
114°E
Capital region of Ataraxia, with all 3 national capitals

City: 2,217,970 (1st)
Metro: 8.1 million (1st)
Conurbation: 10.3 million+ with satellite cities (Baudoinville, Combault, Marbella)

Balonis City* Lost country.png Balonis 5 997 250 16°S
126°E
Largest city and capital of Balonis. Metro area with population over 7 million.
Markvað* Nordurland Flag.png Norðurland 4 626 244 Riian vanhakaupunki.jpg 61°N
18°E
Administrative capital city, largest city of the country
Oyonnax* Flag-Ataraxia-v1.png Ataraxia 4 470 131 32°N
109°E
Oldest "large" city in Ataraxia

City: 931,792 (3rd)
Metro: 4.5 million (2nd)
Conurbation: 5-6 million with satellite cities (Halifax, Sentéry, Sferax, Port Franqui)

Senford* Neberlian Flag.jpg Neberly 4 056 119 57°N
126°E
Capital of and largest city in Neberly

So as I have seen, Markwath and Senford have lesser standard as Ataraxia, Balonis and Oyonnax. So I think, delete Markward and Senford from the list, delete the yellow marker for the three cities and decategorize the list as "containing overwikifikation" --Histor (talk) 02:53, 31 January 2019 (CET)

I see absolutely no difference between them, so deleting all five would be the minimum from my point of view. I think there are more in the list, only the largest are marked for overwikification since a large residential patch isn't sufficient for 8 M inhabitants. But my opinion is also that as long as there are no "hard" criteria deleting cities from the list is arbitrary. What's the minimum for which size? --Mstr (talk) 03:15, 31 January 2019 (CET)
I agree with Mstr here. We should lay down some criteria for this page, as the five in question don't seem to merit being mentioned here yet. I also don't see the need to rush; let's really talk this out. — Alessa (talk) 03:21, 31 January 2019 (CET)
I do not hang my heart at this five cities. If you mean, this towns are to delete from the list - delete them.
Important for me is, that this list may be preserved and this withtout the discreminend "overwicification"-marker.
Too I think, that most of the cities in this list are not fully mapped, but most of them in a remarcable manner. Which criterias do you will set? Now we have "no red links" and "not only a point on the map". May be too
  • realistic number of inhabitants?
  • infrastructure? (streetcar, subway, wastewater treatment, opera, townhall and so on)
  • other meanings? --Histor (talk) 11:31, 31 January 2019 (CET)

List transparency desired?

The large ones:


Not listed so far:


I guess it needs some discussion and the list some clean-up!--Mstr (talk) 20:25, 15 August 2019 (CEST)

The main issue the list might have is that it's focus is on city-limits but for many cities such as the Métropole de Troie-Charleville-Sansévérina(TCS). Which is one of the most organized areas and is on the list, the population of any of the three smaller cities simply wouldn't make the list, while the area as a whole not only deserves to be highlighted on this list but in general as great large city mapping. This in itself will increasingly become a problem as time goes on. With FSA showing of U.S mapping you have situations like Miami- where the city is 400,000 but because of the way it is built the metro area is over 6 million people now. Another great example is Manila which does have 1.6 million people but is part of an area of 12 million. Lagos, Nigeria is also technically in a similar population if you accept LGA's as towns same with Tokyo. You would end up with an LGA and a ward respectively both under a million but with metro areas well over 20 million. Or even if you say the city of Lagos, you end up in some cases only including the original city of Lagos and exlcluding suburban areas that are considered Lagos by virtually everyone alive and end up with a population of only 2.5 million. These are part of the reasons that due to the complexity of political boundaries and the fact that many cities like TCS are already using their metro area population on the list. This list should be listed by metro areas. Because in actuality, Stanton is probably the biggest or second biggest city in the world and it currently registers at 3rd or 4th. It's also hard to believe this world only has one city over 10,000,000 technically two but my city Marie City isn't on the list. --Portopolis (talk) 22:14, 18 August 2019 (CEST)

Everybody can draw its city-limits, as he/she want (in real world and in OGF). So it is clear, that the ranking with the number of inhabitants - as in real world - says not all. For me it is more imprtant, that in this list appear only cities with significant mapping. If a town is in this list, sure is in the responsibiliy from the mapper of a city.--Histor (talk) 21:01, 18 August 2019 (CEST)
As an attempt at acting in the interest of cleaning up this list and encouraging only good mapping, I've removed Laneston and Vandover, both Freedemian cities, from the list as I don't think they currently meet the standards we're trying to stick with. I do believe Quentinsburgh deserves to stay on the list though. --Ernestpcosby (talk) 14:32, 19 August 2019 (CEST)
Can 1000 named objects be a limit? --Histor (talk) 14:56, 19 August 2019 (CEST)
It would be a very conservative one. I'd say at least 4000! /wangi (talk) 15:18, 19 August 2019 (CEST)
What about counting schools, shops, ... anything else? Would be much more informative, also to see where improvement is needed or what is completely missing. Would also be a great tool to "measure" the level of education, health care, ...--Mstr (talk) 19:52, 19 August 2019 (CEST)

A town with 1 800 000 inhabitants may have 2500 streets, 100 suburbs, 400 other significant objects (so in reality Hamburg, Germany) - roundabout 3000 names. Then it is better to say for each 1 000 000 inhabitants 1000 names, to get in this OGF-list. And only one: Name is not name. I can get many names with "1st Street" to "277th Street" and can double my score, if I divide in "1st Street West" and the same in north, east, south and central. --Histor (talk) 19:40, 19 August 2019 (CEST)

Mstr, can you get us the same numbers for Hamburg? /wangi (talk) 14:30, 20 August 2019 (CEST)

I wonder whether this type of list will ever make sense. On one hand some users draw a massive grid or a landuse-residential-blob and claim it's a metropolis. This is the issue you are about to tackle here. But on the other side, there are users who are not adding their (probably well mapped) cities to the list. Some don't even add their countries to any list. Should there be a rule which allows the public or a small group to maintain those lists, by adding cities of users who don't use the wiki? --Toadwart (talk) 15:01, 20 August 2019 (CEST)

My god! [1] - and in my brain there were only 2500, not 9000. But this list contains all streets - a lot of them small and unimportant. And not to forget: Lang roads in Hamburg traditonally have several names, if the suburb change on its way. --Histor (talk) 20:40, 20 August 2019 (CEST)

Seemed, we have two discussions parallel for this "million-question". I personally think, that this list of towns over 1 000 000 inhabitants is useful to look at greater towns in the OGF-world. (Yes - you also can look at the towns with a subway-net ... are most the same towns). Long time ago I wrote at the top of the list "no red links" and "not only a node in the landscape". That maeans - in the map more as nothing and a wiki-article. Indeed a low standard. Yes, we can set higher boundaries. But for what this list will be? If you mean, the "best mapped towns" than you mean an other thing as this list will show.

And you can count this and that and if you do this, you never can see the special flair and style of a town. I think, if you set such critearias too a town as Khaiwoon will fall out of the basket. --Histor (talk) 22:49, 20 August 2019 (CEST)

Of course, only counting something does not say anything about quality. But at least it can show what is missing, e.g.
  • quantity, a metropolis with only 5 nodes is not sufficient
  • a town without an appropriate number of schools, kindergartens, a city hall, library, police station ... is not complete
Hamburg has about 32000 named streets/street parts, 530 schools, 390 kindergartens, 60 police stations 110 fire stations, 170 libraries, 20 colleges, 250 bars, 170 churches, 110 railway stations, 100 hospital buildings...--Mstr (talk) 01:27, 21 August 2019 (CEST)
32 000 street parts? May be only then, if a street is counted in its parts between other streets; different names are only 9000 and this means also, that long streets has several names (Grindelberg - Grindelallee - Hoheluftbrücke - Hoheluftchaussee - Lokstedter Steindamm - Kollaustraße = 1 street, Adenauerallee - Borgfelder Straße - Hammer Landstraße - Horner Landstraße and more = 1 street and a lot of more examples). 250 bars? What is meant with this? --Histor (talk) 02:01, 21 August 2019 (CEST)
110 railway-stations? I know only 5: Hauptbahnhof, Dammtor, Altona, Bergedorf, Harburg. All other are subway-stations or commuter-railway ("S-Bahn"), but this S-Bahn partly is like a subway on Hamburg. Real commuter-stations are roundabout 25. What a OSM-tagging! --Histor (talk) 02:16, 21 August 2019 (CEST)