Talk:City

{{Collapse top|Discussion re-opened for wider input}}

{{Closed rfc top|There is consensus to include the graph as the lead image. This has already been implemented, and the consensus seems pretty clear in favour. Everyone is, for the moment, happy. 🎄Cremastra 🎄 (talk) 15:43, 29 December 2023 (UTC)}}

{{collapse bottom}}

{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1705899674}}

What would people like to see as the lead image? Castncoot (talk) 03:56, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

A. {{multiple image

| total_width = 350px

| perrow = 1/2/2/2

| image1 = Above Gotham.jpg

| alt1 = Tall buildings on the island of Manhattan

| image2 = Camille Pissarro - Boulevard Montmartre, Spring - Google Art Project.jpg

| alt2 = Impressionist painting of wide tree-lined Boulevard Montmartre with horse-drawn carts in the 1890s

| image3 = Tokyo Shibuya Scramble Crossing 2018-10-09.jpg

| alt3 = People cross busy Shibuya intersection lined with electronic billboards at dusk

| image4 = Cairo From Tower (cropped).jpg

| alt4 = A large river flows through Cairo

| image5 = Hong Kong Harbour Night 2019-06-11.jpg

| alt5 = Hong Kong skyline

| image6 = The Bara Toti market in Sadar Bazaar.JPG

| alt6 = Shopping bazaar in Delhi

| image7 = Metro de São Paulo, Luz Station, Brazil (square cropped).jpg

| alt7 = An underground train in the São Paulo Metro

| footer = From the top, left to right''': Skyline of Manhattan; painting of Boulevard Montmartre in Paris by Camille Pissarro; Shibuya Crossing in Tokyo; The Nile River in Cairo; Hong Kong; shopping bazaar in Old Delhi; and the São Paulo Metro;

}}

{{clear}}

B. {{multiple image

| total_width = 350px

| perrow = 1/2/3/2

| image1 = Palace of Westminster from the dome on Methodist Central Hall (cropped).jpg

| alt1 = London skyline with Palace of Westminster in midground

| image2 = Tokyo Shibuya Scramble Crossing 2018-10-09.jpg

| alt2 = People cross busy Shibuya intersection lined with electronic billboards at dusk

| image3 = Camille Pissarro - Boulevard Montmartre, Spring - Google Art Project.jpg

| alt3 = Impressionist painting of wide tree-lined Boulevard Montmartre with horse-drawn carts in the 1890s

| image4 = 1 rocinha night 2014 panorama (vertical cropped).jpg

| alt4 = Informal settlements built into the hillside in Rocinha, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil at dusk

| image5 = Fast-Paced Streets of New York City.jpg

| alt5 = Skyscrapers line a busy sidewalk along 6th Avenue in New York City

| image6 = 20191205 Targ przypraw w Starym Delhi 0703 6755 (cropped).jpg

| alt6 = Vendors and signs along a busy dirt street in Old Delhi

| image7 = Hong Kong Harbour Night 2019-06-11.jpg

| alt7 = Hong Kong skyline

| image8 = Metro de São Paulo, Luz Station, Brazil (square cropped).jpg

| alt8 = An underground train in the São Paulo Metro

| footer = Zigzag from the top: Westminster Palace in London; Shibuya Crossing in Tokyo; painting of Boulevard Montmartre in Paris by Camille Pissarro; the Rocinha favela in Rio de Janeiro; 6th Avenue in Manhattan; spice market in Old Delhi; Hong Kong; and the São Paulo Metro

}}

{{clear}}

C. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=City&oldid=1033458250 An original:]

{{clear}}

D. [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=City&oldid=630711494 Something more conceptual, like this:]

{{clear}}

E. No lead image.

{{clear}}

• Choice A. This image is inclusive of most continents, and most importantly, leaves room for growth and modification. The images are clear and the resolution is good, which is also very important. Unfortunately, choice B doesn't have a single redeeming feature: choice B excludes Africa, contains two pictures of Brazil (unnecessary), contains an obscenely large picture of a ferris wheel, thereby reducing pictures of Rio de Janeiro, Manhattan, and Delhi to eye-squinting peculiarities, and very significantly, has a layout which really doesn't leave room for sensible growth or modification. Castncoot (talk) 04:16, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
• That being said that my first choice would be Choice A for the multiple reasons stated above, I also wouldn't mind Choice E. None. Castncoot (talk) 17:37, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
• Ba slight winner but either is fine.Lukewarmbeer (talk) 09:15, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
• None of those choices. See my comment above from the previous discussion, which you seem to have ignored. Bazza (talk) 10:12, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
• None. None of the proposals meet the principle of MOS:IMAGES, which in summary says that images in articles are to illustrate the points made in the text, not to decorate the page. All of your proposals are essentially decorative, failing to illustrate high-density "housing, transportation, sanitation, utilities, land use, production of goods, and communication" (as Bazza 7 puts it concisely). Of the options offered, D is the least worst. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 10:53, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
• :Can't just have a gallery where any one can put pictures of cities and have the option D? Sertyt (talk) 12:02, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
• ::Guys answer I dont want this to be in a youtube video! Sertyt (talk) 13:05, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Bazza (talk) 13:38, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

• :How about this (or any other pic in [https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?search=ISS+city+night&title=Special:MediaSearch&go=Go&type=image here])
• :File:Nighttime View of Northern Egypt and the Sinai Peninsula.jpg]]
• :This pic is a bit abstract but I think it illustrates cities' high density nature perfectly. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 15:39, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

:::@CactiStaccingCrane: It illustrates perfectly what the eastern Mediterranean looks like from a very high altitude at night, but fulfils none of the requirements of MOS:IMAGE to illustrate some properties of a city as described in the lead of this article: high-density "housing, transportation, sanitation, utilities, land use, production of goods, and communication. Here's some for transportation; I've no doubt other editors could find better examples for all the categories.

:::

201704 D313 passes Wuxi Station.jpg|

Secunderabad-station top distant view.jpg|

Kita Railway Station, Osaka (45899311222).jpg|

Köln Hauptbahnhof 3.jpg|

Busy station at 14th and Stout (2799742397).jpg|

:::Bazza (talk) 19:28, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

• I don't give a hoot but, for Pete's sake it needs to have an actual photo of a city in it somewhere, having no photos whatsoever is completely absurd. jp×g🗯️ 02:02, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

File:St Davids 1971 - geograph.org.uk - 2806125.jpg, a city in Wales]]

:*Such as this one? --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 16:35, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

{{clr}}

How about this image to work off of, to grow and evolve from? Would people accept this as a starting point?

{{multiple image

| total_width = 300px

| perrow = 2/2

| image1 = GatewayVueNB.jpg

| alt1 = Tall building in the center of New Brunswick, New Jersey

| image2 = Kreuzfahrt Norwegen 1324.jpg

| alt2 = People walking across a bridge in Norway

| image3 = Kita Railway Station, Osaka (45899311222).jpg

| alt3 = Train station in Osaka, Japan

| image4 = India - Chennai - busy T. Nagar market 2 (3059483658).jpg

| alt4 = Busy shopping street in Chennai, India

| footer = From the top, left to right''': mixed-use tower in New Brunswick, New Jersey; Pedestrian bridge in Trondheim, Norway; Busy railroad station in Osaka, Japan; Shopping bazaar in Chennai, India

}} Castncoot (talk) 06:38, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

:There needs to chanes@Castncoot Sertyt (talk) 09:09, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

:Which part of {{tq|None of the proposals meet the principle of MOS:IMAGES, which in summary says that images in articles are to illustrate the points made in the text, not to decorate the page. All of your proposals are essentially decorative, failing to illustrate high-density "housing, transportation, sanitation, utilities, land use, production of goods, and communication" (as Bazza 7 puts it concisely)}} did you not understand? 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 11:12, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

::My goal was to indeed demonstrate utilitarian properties with this latest proposal, not to be decorative. If I've failed even with this attempt, then this may be a signal that we indeed need to go with no lead image at all. Castncoot (talk) 14:12, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

:::The discussion was along the lines of showing the qualities described without specifying location (since that only invites people to replace it with their home city). I recognise your good faith but, even ignoring the location naming, I struggled to see how the images you selected met the criteria. For example, if I wanted to illustrate intensive pedestrian traffic, the Shibuya Crossing is most famous example: your quiet pedestrian bridge does not hit the spot.

:::I don't know that this is resolvable? Maybe "no image" is going to be the only solution... --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 16:36, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

::::@JMF, the whole effort I was trying to implement was to use images from lesser-known secondary or tertiary cities, where a large proportion of the globe's population now lives, and specifically as Bazza 7 pointed out above which would portray the utilitarian nature of cities more representative of mundane reality than the most famous landmarks of the most famous cities. Norwegians do live in Trondheim, you know.. not just in Oslo or Bergen. This montage is a work in progress, subject to modification and improvement and perhaps even growth. But if it's irreconcilable, then I have absolutely no problem with having no lead section image. Castncoot (talk) 00:54, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

:::::I do have an idea

:::::@Castncoot .....That being of a statistic image. Like an UN image saying that 54% of world population living in cities and it will go 68% or so in the future. Sertyt (talk) 05:56, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

::::::I like that. Castncoot (talk) 08:22, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

::::::Great idea as well, just like in human history. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 12:27, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

:::::::I like it too: it is clear, useful, and doesn't encourage the perennial "my city is even prettier" edit wars. I reverted CactiStaccingCrane's idea (to use File:Number of people living in urban and rural areas, World (OWID).svg) only for procedural reasons. Half a day is a bit early to declare a consensus but hopefully... --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 19:43, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

::::::::I checked the image added by @CactiStaccingCrane and I think its alright. What do you guys think? Sertyt (talk) 04:10, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

:::::::::It's ok for now. I may, over the coming months, look for illustrations which meet the criteria above and could be used to reinstate a montage. I'll alert contributors to this discussion if and when I have done that. Bazza (talk) 09:37, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

:Is it appropriate here to say that I don't like the idea of a montage at all? I'm sure they are proposed by people with much younger and better eyes than mine, and with bigger screens than mine. And I'll bet they never look at their montages on phone screens. HiLo48 (talk) 09:58, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

::So, Do we agree? @JMF

::@CactiStaccingCrane@Bazza 7@HiLo48 Do we reach a Consensus Sertyt (talk) 15:29, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

:::Agree. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 15:31, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

:::Agree --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 15:46, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

:::Agree. Bazza (talk) 15:50, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

::::Agree Sertyt (talk) 04:53, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

:::::I have added the picture which was originally added by @CactiStaccingCrane. If anyone has a better picture than this one, please discuss with other editors before replacing it. Sertyt (talk) 04:57, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Comment This is a continuation of the RfC, and should therefore be a subsection of the one that introduced the RfC. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 07:29, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

• RfC2 montage with four images incorporated examples of the different aspects to a "city" as defined by the page; the images are clear and high quality; and because there are only four, the images take up less real estate on the page. I disagree with 𝕁𝕄𝔽 that the montage is merely decorative. I argue that the montage enhances the page. Option A is also acceptable. No image is unacceptable. Penguino35 (talk) 00:25, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
• :So let me repeat: {{tq|if they fail to illustrate high-density "housing, transportation, sanitation, utilities, land use, production of goods, and communication" (as {{u|Bazza 7}} puts it concisely)}}, then they are decorative rather than illustrative. What has changed since the last time it was said?
• :And what stops one or more of the pics being replaced by an arbitrary editor with a prettier one of their own home city? --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 01:15, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
• None of the above - MOS:LEADIMAGE: a lead image should be {{tqq|a representative image ... to give readers visual confirmation that they've arrived at the right page.}} I think the lead image should depict the topic, not the parts of the topic (housing, transport, sanitation, etc.), and not the parts of the article. The lead image of car shows a car, not an engine, wheels, exhaust, etc. Human shows typical humans, not the aspects of humans. The lead image of city should be a picture of a city that shows the whole city--an aerial view, because of the size of a city--not a montage showing the parts of a city.

  I'm ambivalent about whether it should be 1 lead image or a montage (of cities, not of parts of cities). I'm not sure that multiple images of cities really adds much beyond one image, though. I prefer the single image of car to the montage of town, for example, and fish is a good example of a bad montage, for comparison.

  As for what stops an arbitrary editor from replacing the lead image, that's what some editors said about the lead images of Man and Woman, but the answer is consensus: have an RFC, pick a lead image, and--like at Man and Woman--once it has consensus, it'll stay stable for years (and it's ok if consensus changes).

  If I absolutely had to pick from one of the options, it would be A (I agree with Castncoot's reasoning above as to why A is better than B), but that's a distant second choice to just having an image (or montage) of an aerial shot of a city; that's what will "give readers visual confirmation that they've arrived at the right page". Levivich (talk) 01:57, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

• :We got to these RFCs precisely because of arbitrary and unilateral changes to the collage and refusal to accept the previous consensus. Your principle is very noble but in this case it is "more honoured in the breach than in the observance". It has proved impossible to defend the consensus unless there are enough editors committed to doing so.
• :Almost every editor knows what a city looks like; the current image, a graph showing the rise of urban living far more effectively confirms to visitors that they have arrived at a useful article about cities in concept. I suggest it meets the test of MOS:LEADIMAGE far better pictures of skyscrapers or indeed of sewage running down the street. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 14:33, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

30px

The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%E5%B8%82&redirect=no 市] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at {{slink|Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 13#市}} until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 08:31, 13 February 2024 (UTC)

30px

The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Metropolitan_city&redirect=no Metropolitan city] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at {{section link|1=Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 24#Metropolitan city}} until a consensus is reached. Jay 💬 21:17, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

30px

The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Citt%C3%A0&redirect=no Città] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at {{section link|1=Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 20#Città}} until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 08:44, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

30px

The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sat_(Romania)&redirect=no Sat (Romania)] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at {{section link|1=Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 20#Sat (Romania)}} until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 08:49, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

30px

The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Insular_city&redirect=no Insular city] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at {{section link|1=Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 20#Insular city}} until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 08:57, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

30px

The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=City_employment&redirect=no City employment] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at {{section link|1=Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 20#City employment}} until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 09:07, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

30px

The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=City_work&redirect=no City work] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at {{section link|1=Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 20#City work}} until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 09:10, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

30px

The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Desert_cities&redirect=no Desert cities] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at {{section link|1=Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 20#Desert cities}} until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 09:15, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

I’ve noticed an inconsistency on some of the states pages on Wikipedia like South Carolina for example. It says it’s most populous CITY is Charleston but the largest metro area is Greenville ( I’d assume it’s the largest urban area too but haven’t checked it). By the definition of “city” on this page the most populous city in South Carolina would be the Greenville urban area not Charleston as the Greenville area is the most populous human settlement. I know when you click on most populous cities it says municipalities, but shouldn’t it say “the most populous municipality in South Carolina is Charleston” instead of “the most populous city in South Carolina is Charleston” on the South Carolina page? That’s why I added municipal definition to the intro although I don’t think the 2 should be confused. I’ll go ask at the South Carolina and Charleston page too. Im not sure if municipalities that have the largest population in their state should say they are the largest city like Charleston, South Carolina for example because it seems to send the wrong message when there’s another human settlement in the same state that is larger especially when this is the definition for “city” on Wikipedia. Would appreciate an opinion on this Kansascitt1225 (talk) 09:34, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

:You also need to take a worldwide view. For example, city status in the United Kingdom has a legal meaning and is awarded to local government, not specifically the built-up area. For the edge cases, see City of Carlisle and City of Milton Keynes. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 10:34, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

::Per WP:lead, you need to have written the body content first, then summarise it in the lead. So in the meantime I'm reinstating {{u|Remsense}}'s reversion of your edit. Body content done, you can add it again. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 11:05, 13 June 2025 (UTC)

Ok sounds good, I’ll look more into the UK cities definitions and boundaries too and get back to that when I have time Kansascitt1225 (talk) 11:11, 13 June 2025 (UTC)