Read the description. source gives this for Zurich:
City proper=0.42m;
Agglomeration core=1.12m;
Agglomeration=1.41m
I live nearby. IMO the colored "Agglomeration" region is not appropriate to be used for urban area. My estimate for the urban area of Zurich would be 1 million. Then again, you could argue that most of Switzerland is one big urban area.
Maybe someone has already asked this but, why is Upper Silesia on here? It just isn’t on the list provided in your source. Or is that your own calculation? (Just interested, not trying to be a whingeing pedant!)
I've since created a blog article about the Ruhr issue. It's so weird to read all these statements if you're from the region. Imagine being from Philadelphia and reading that people "consider" your city to be part of the South, or to belong to the Boston metro area.
To be fair the distance from Philadelphia to Boston is roughly the same as the distance between the Ruhr and Berlin so it's not really a valid comparison. Also does your blog not exist anymore? The link doesn't work
the titles "biggest cities" doesnt really fit imo if the quiz is about urban populations. Like Stuttgart definitely doesnt have over 2 million inhabitants, we have less than 700,000
Why Is Upper Silesia here? The biggest city in Upper Silesia has only 354.200 people! Theoretically you can call every bigger region as a urban area. That is so confusing.
True. They claim to have the border in their city, but I think even the sign showing the Asia/Europe “border” is a bit west of the city. They’re definitely east of the Urals, in any case.
You can see the border, or at least a monument to it with a line, on GSV and as you say it is just west of the city. It is, however, inside of their ring road. Most of the population of Yekaterinburg is however east of the line.
Mannheim is a really strange pick here, maybe include the rhein-neckar metropolitan area instead. Mannheim is not even in the top 15 largest cities in Germany
This is very but i mean really extremely inaccurate, maybe most of the cities fits there, alright, but the order is crazy, use a normal source next time.
Please separate Rotterdam and The Hague. They are not considered to be one city. If 'the Ruhr' is an answer, then 'the Randstad' should also be an answer, which is Rotterdam, The Hague, Haarlem, Amsterdam and Utrecht combined (and more)
No, it’s not. There is significant green/agricultural space between the two. My mother lived in a small rural village located near Warrington, halfway between Manchester and Liverpool.
Soon Citypopulation.de is probably going to decide that New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore and Washington DC all form one "urban area". From looking at satellite photos, I think there may in fact be a stronger argument for this than grouping Manchester and Liverpool together!
Has been said many times already but Yekatrinburg is not in Europe. Sources: Wikipedia: "Geographically, Yekaterinburg is in North Asia, close to the Ural Mountains" and "Of the 16 Russian cities with over 1 million inhabitants, 12 lie within European Russia: Moscow, Saint Petersburg, Kazan, Nizhny Novgorod, Samara, Ufa, Chelyabinsk, Rostov-on-Don, Krasnodar, Voronezh, Perm and Volgograd (the remaining four are Yekaterinburg, Omsk, Krasnoyarsk and Novosibirsk)." US Embassy: "Yekaterinburg lies at the crossroads between Europe and Asia, east of the slopes of the Ural Mountains in central Russia."
Well done, I managed to not get my own capital city because I didn't realise I wasn't writing it in English. I tried it 3 times XD I guess I'll need a bit more cafein today
Because most of Turkey is in Asia (97%) with only Eastern Thrace region being in Europe. Half of İstanbul is Europe geographically and culture+history wise it is natural to clasiffy it as entirely European.
I'm fascinated by the many Europeans pushing back against measuring their cities by urban area. As an American, I think it is a better metric for American cities as the city proper limits feel very arbitrary and usually don't cover the whole "city" so to speak. I guess it feels different in Europe
I don't know if this is the case for all examples, but certainly in the UK, many towns that are considered part of an "urban area" consider themselves to have a distinct identity, and indeed often existed for centuries as a separate entity before they were engulfed, in very recent history, into a bigger sprawl. I'm not really an expert on US history, but I feel like your cities and urban areas might have developed differently given they were built with more intention and are much more modern?
citypopulations definition is bizzarely wide, it encompasses whole regions, and adds up cities, that are not continuously connected, have distinct cultural identities, different administrative structures, sometimes are in different states, are not part of a common commuter area, etc. It's just way too big to make any sense.
City proper=0.42m;
Agglomeration core=1.12m;
Agglomeration=1.41m
I live nearby. IMO the colored "Agglomeration" region is not appropriate to be used for urban area. My estimate for the urban area of Zurich would be 1 million. Then again, you could argue that most of Switzerland is one big urban area.
I’m smart
Metropolitan etc. is fake, this city has not more than 300-400 thousand people.
I live there, that‘s crazy.!
(Edit) Even with the surrounding areas it (only) makes about 800-900 thousand.