Talk:London metropolitan area/Archive 1

This article is totally wrong. Whatever it is about, it is not about the London Commuter Belt, the whole point of which is that it is NOT metropolitan. The commuter belt starts where the fields start at the edge of the London conurbation i.e. slightly inside the M25. It finishes at about an hour's journey by train from the London termini. 78.86.229.20 (talk) 00:51, 28 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't accept that there is a "generally" accepted definition of this vague area. The list of places excludes my home town of Bedford which is a major commuter town.Philip 12:01, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

What is the meaning of ONS? It is not defined in the article, but used twice, even in a title. --Agschwen 09:52, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What does "alongside Moscow" mean? Does it mean they are approximately equal, or does it meant except for Moscow?

The closest there is to an official definition of the London metropolitan area is the area defined by Eurostat as the Larger Urban Zone (LUZ). A list of the local authorities included in the London LUZ can be found here. I'll try and update the article later when I have time. Polaron | Talk 18:06, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It took more than five years for someone to upload that information. Five YEARS!!! Shows how nobody reads this article or it's talk page. But i have finally uploaded that information and it is pretty relevant and useful. Eopsid (talk) 19:04, 1 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This whole article is bullshit. The only official number of a metropolitan area for London is the one defined by the GLA and is 18 million. Don't spread misinformation through Wikipedia!!!

A LUZ is not an metropolitan area either. Metropolitan areas are calculated according to commuter patterns. And if you apply the methods used by the US Census for this to London, you'de get 18 million. So much misinformation out there... —The preceding

Although the above is unsigned, I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiments expressed. It's like a media term - terribly elastic, and meaningless as an encyclopaedia article. It could just as easily been expressed in a general article about towns, cities and their commuting population Peter Shearan (talk) 13:48, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree with Peter (89.167.221.3 (talk) 20:22, 13 December 2008 (UTC))[reply]

This article seems somewhat flimsy!! I would hardly call Aylesbury, Hatfield and Welwyn Garden City commuter towns! Aylesbury in particular is so disconnected from London that such a title is silly Dvmedis (talk) 13:05, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article sucks!

Firstly, there is next to no information the 'actual metropolitan area' (as described by the title and lead) aside from a population. Most of the article is about other described areas. I believe there used to be a lot more information about the actual metropolitan area though. Secondly, is Chelmsford really included in the ONS uran area? I have moved it to the correct region however There is miles of countryside between Chelmsford and London. I believe that this article can work but it would require a major rewrite and a merging/splitting session. Regards, FM [ talk to me | show contributions ]  19:28, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some trains get from Milton Keynes to London in less than 40 minutes and there are certainly plenty of London commuters in MK - shouldn't it be included? Lfh 22:40, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Surely there must be a more representative picture than this? Don't get me wrong, as a photo of Liverpool Street station it's excellent, but "Commuters from East Anglia"? All I can see is a couple of dozen shoppers and tourists. According to the description page it was taken 1 May 2004, which was a Saturday - and a bank holiday weekend to boot! --Blisco 13:06, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This needs some objective criteria. "Normal commuter train time < one hour" seems reasonable, but it's still artificial. Cambridge, Milton Keynes, Oxford, Reading are not dormitory towns for London, despite having a significant number of resident London commuters. All have rather more incoming commuters of their own. --

Stockbroker belt does not refer to the whole of the London commuter belt, mostly Surrey and perhaps Berkshire. MRSC • Talk 14:37, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

who says? Peter Shearan (talk) 05:26, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How about including people from Northern France, too, while you're at it? That makes this article even more rubbish Peter Shearan (talk) 13:03, 17 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have just removed this section. It is completely original research! If you feel that it deserves to be here, I'd be interested to hear a case for it, but there were no citations and it seemed to be purely someones opinion. Dvmedis (talk) 13:10, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]