Talk:Demographics of London

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

London High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LondonWikipedia:WikiProject LondonTemplate:WikiProject LondonLondon-related articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

The English in parts of this section is appalling. Any objections if I clear it up and remove references to countries not in the top 5? --Owain loft (talk) 13:20, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article states that London is the second most populous city in Europe, after Moscow. What about Istanbul? It has a population of just over 10 million. The issue is complicated by the fact that the city is in two continents. Any ideas? Cordless Larry 22:59, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That is generally understood to be in Asia though,culturally. User:raspberrysnapple 28 April 2007

According to the Wikipedia article on Demographics:

"Commonly-used demographics include race, age, income, disabilities, mobility (in terms of travel time to work or number of vehicles available), educational attainment, home ownership, employment status, and even location."

Unfortunately, the 'demographics of London' article is biased towards just two elements. One is 'ethnicity'. The other is size comparisons with other European capitals. No explanation is given as to why these two factors are more important than say, the distribution of income or occupation.

This article can only be improved by a much more indepth study that goes beyond just nationalism and ethnicism.

Ackees 08:52, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly, this article must be updated, as it does not say anything about the Polish population in London. On the statistics table, it is not even included. There has been a very significant wave of Polish migration since 2004 and the article doesn't reflect that. Tango —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.27.181.79 (talk) 11:49, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Polish population is mentioned in the article, which notes that the are no reliable statistics on the size of the community available. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:55, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What happened before 1801? Any date from historical population of London? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.120.5.169 (talk) 05:15, 21 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There used to be a link to the historical population of London. Somehow that got lost, carelessly deleted by an editor. I restored the link. --Maxl (talk) 08:08, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

what i'd love to see is if you could lay the data maps on top of javascript based maps such as openstreetmap.org ? maybe with mapbox.com it can be done ? if anyone knows how to do this, it could be quite useful all over wikipedia

Tetriminos (talk) 12:20, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141021093542/http://data.london.gov.uk/datastorefiles/documents/2011-census-first-results.pdf to http://data.london.gov.uk/datastorefiles/documents/2011-census-first-results.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050311050212/http://www.statistics.gov.uk/statbase/ssdataset.asp?vlnk=8271&More=Y to http://www.statistics.gov.uk/statbase/ssdataset.asp?vlnk=8271&More=Y

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{

This message was posted before February 2018.

• 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) 20:58, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150924002318/http://www.espon.eu/export/sites/default/Documents/Projects/ESPON2006Projects/StudiesScientificSupportProjects/UrbanFunctions/fr-1.4.3_April2007-final.pdf to http://www.espon.eu/export/sites/default/Documents/Projects/ESPON2006Projects/StudiesScientificSupportProjects/UrbanFunctions/fr-1.4.3_April2007-final.pdf

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.

• 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) 15:28, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This promotes the racist white supremist consepricy theory called the great replacement that says white people are being replaced by non whites 93.106.155.178 (talk) 12:10, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for pinging me here, I do agree entirely about using a published source if we can find one.

In the replies to that tweet he responded for someone looking for a source with a link to this book which I have initially used for the 1971 figures, however, the book itself, at-least from the preview does not contain the precise figures given in Kaufmann's tweet (for 1981 and 1991) of the White British percentages, he does a rough approximate however that 'White British have dropped 10% points every decade.' but that's not something we can really 'source' for anything on the table. (although alot of good material can be used for prose text in there)

I don't know where else he might have published said figures, I could email him perhaps? His website includes all of his works on there, so we could check there? Additionally, if it helps verify his twitter account (not sure if this would help) on his official website his Twitter links to his account which I have sourced from -

talk) 13:06, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

I don't have any serious doubts that it's him, but per

WP:SELFSOURCE, we should only use this sort of source for information about the person posting it (such as their birthday). I suggest that until a properly published source can be found, the information be removed. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:58, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

OK fair enough, remove it for the time being and I'll have a look around later on today to see if I can find anything additional.

talk) 14:12, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply

]