Talk:Greater Glasgow

Scotland High‑importance

	Scotland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics 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.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

UK geography High‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements 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.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

Ranking

According to the reference (2) quoted in the text, Greater Glsagow only ranks fifth within UK's most populated conurbations, the number of inhabitatants "only" being just over 1.1 million, contradicting reference (1). There are only two years between the sources so that I can not believe an increase of some 600,000 people is realistic. Reference (2) seems to be an official government publication so that I'd rather have this article based on those numbers. Can we agree on Greater Glasgow ranking fifth with a population close to 1,2 million people? If not, shouldn't we delete reference (2)in order to avoid contradictions? Thanks, 194.246.46.15 (talk) 08:26, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Health board area boundaries

I read in Greater Glasgow that the health board area includes West Dunbartonshire, but in Argyll and Clyde I read that the Argyll and Clyde health board area includes western West Dunbartonshire. Laurel Bush 11:16, 25 January 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Will need an update as Argyll and Clyde health board has been abolished and Argyll and Bute has gone to Highland health board while the rest has gone to Greater Glasgow health board, causing it to be renamed NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde (see Subdivisions of Scotland for details). Samantha of Cardyke 14:20, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The confusion is due to the fact that prior to the Argyll and Clyde NHS area being abolished, West Dunbartonshire was split between it and the Greater Glasgow NHS area: While the Dumbarton and Vale of Level districts were part of the Clyde portion of Argyll and Clyde, and are now part of the Clyde portion of Greater Glasgow and Clyde, the Clydebank districts were always part of Greater Glasgow health board area. It should be noted therefore that half of West Dunbartonshire falls under Greater Glasgow, and half under Clyde. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.11.168.170 (talk) 19:11, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Towns

I just linked all the towns. Surely Hamilton should be in there? ::Supergolden:: 11:36, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It probably should be. It's unclear how the list was compiled or where the information was sourced from. For example, as a boy I lived in Hairmyres (on the north/west outskirts of East Kilbride). We had a Glasgow telephone number and a Glasgow address and postcode. Indeed, Hairmyres is literally 2 miles from the Glasgow boundary on the Carmunock bypass, and Glasgow is where most people are employed. But, according to the definition of 'conurbation', it isn't included. The same probably goes for Hamilton. Both EK and Hamilton would be included were it termed a 'Metropolitan area'.GeorgeRob (talk) 15:01, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Very confusing

There are several different population figures given here and it's not at all clear where the boundaries for each lie, or why they should matter. The SPT reference for the 2.3mil figure actually says that's the number of people within the "travel to work area." I live in Greenock, a town on the rail network from which I travel to work into Glasgow, yet Greenock is not listed as one of the towns making up the 2.3mil figure; but it *is* part of "West Central Scotland" (which is meaningless in context; see below.) Later on, the Metropolitan Area is mentioned and its population is obviously far lower. IMO this article needs a lot of work from someone who has exact figures and exact boundaries; the 2.3mil figure is said to include West Central Scotland; West Central Scotland in fact links to an article on the Central belt which can stretch as far as Edinburgh! Nach0king 09:52, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aachen,Leige and Maastricht conurbation!

Is nowhere near the size the Glasgow conurbation! I don't know how they count as a conurbation Aachen and Liege are about the distance of Glasgow and Edinburgh and there is no constant urban build up! However I believe the number of 2.3million is fairly accurate but as the Glasgow conurbation no but I believe it should be called the Strathclyde Metropolitan Area. Thats what SPT must be refering to. This is understandable. There is a relatively big settlement area and small distances in between towns. I work in Larkhall and it's refered to a part of the Glasgow economy bear in mind it's only 9 miles from Glasgow city center. Within a 30 mile radius of Glasgow city centre there is a lot of large towns.

"Larkhall (Scots: Larkhauch,[1] Scottish Gaelic: Taigh na h-Uiseig)[2] is a town in South Lanarkshire, Scotland and is around 14 miles (23 km) southeast of Glasgow" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larkhall Towns like Clydebank,Renfrew, Paisley, Bishopbriggs, Giffnock and Rutherglen are continuous with the city of Glasgow.

Seamusalba (talk) 08:12, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Area definition

Whose definition of "Greater Glasgow" area is being used for this article? There is no Greater Glasgow in the same sense of there being Greater London and Greater Manchester. Both of the latter have boundaries as local government areas, such that, eg, Greater London excludes Watford and Slough. Perhaps Greater Glasgow (or should it be greater Glosgow?) is just a vague notion dreamed up by estate agents and property speculators?.
Laurel Bush (talk) 12:43, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

“As Local Authority leaders, and as the principal agencies for community planning, we have a clear leadership role to play on behalf of the communities we have been elected to serve. For our citizens and businesses, it is our duty to make our area a better place in which to live and work. We recognise the need to have strong connections between the Glasgow City Region and its surrounding areas, and that we have to work together to maximise our competitiveness and to promote greater social cohesion. Partnership working must, of course, extend far beyond local authorities. If we are to prosper we will need to pull together as a much larger team. The private sector, the Health Board, Scottish Enterprise, and many other regional and community based agencies all have a crucial role to play in shaping, and achieving our vision.” 03 OUR VISION DEREK MACKAY Leader of Renfrewshire Council Chair, Clyde Valley Community Planning Partnership Seamusalba (talk) 09:22, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Area source

Why does the area of 67.76 sq mi (175.5 km²) not match up to the area given in the statistics.gov publication;

http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/theme_compendia/fom2005/03_FOPM_UrbanAreas.pdf

for Greater Glasgow?

I have corrected it, no more concern is needed.

Metropolitan area and Metropolitan status

Doesn't the following sentence take a statement out of context and give false information? "Contrary to popular belief there are no metropolitan areas in Scotland, this was confirmed in Scottish Questions by the then First Minister Jack McConnell."

The quote from the then First Minister does not say that there are no metropolitan areas in Scotland, merely that there is no such thing as "metropolitan status" (for the purpose of funding allocation).

I appreciate it could be desirable to avoid giving the impression of a metropolitan area as having any form of shared government or administrative/political status. It seems equally important though to avoid the lack of such status obscuring the use of apolitical terms important to comparing urban areas. For example, the term 'metropolitan area' has a global meaning that is quite separate from any political, administrative or legal term within Scotland: It denotes an area influenced by urban areas which "serve as a hub or hubs" for people, services and infrastructure in a wider surrounding area.

I suggest this article could be clarified by keeping the stating that there is no recognition of 'metropolitan status' in Scottish law or government funding. However that statement should be accompanied by another noting that Eurostat, the EU agency tasked with comparing urban statistics, does categorize Glasgow as a large urban zone, its chosen term for metropolitan areas.

MM —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.11.160.106 (talk) 19:07, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First Glasgow Wiki Meetup

You are invited to the first Glasgow Wiki Meetup which will take place at The Sir John Moore, 260-292 Argyle Street, City of Glasgow G2 8QW on Sunday 12 May 2013 from 1.00 pm. If you have never been to one, this is an opportunity to meet other Wikipedians in an informal atmosphere for Wiki and non-Wiki related chat and for beer or food if you like. Experienced and new contributors are all welcome. This event is definitely not restricted just to discussion of Scottish topics. Bring your laptop if you like and use the free Wifi or just bring yourself. Even better, bring a friend! Click the link for full details. Looking forward to seeing you. Philafrenzy (talk) 21:12, 6 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Greater Glasgow. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090427062104/http://vision.edina.ac.uk:80/data_cube_table_page.jsp?data_theme=T_POP&data_cube=N_TPop&u_id=10217751&c_id=10090283&add=N to http://vision.edina.ac.uk/data_cube_table_page.jsp?data_theme=T_POP&data_cube=N_TPop&u_id=10217751&c_id=10090283&add=N

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:15, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Greater Glasgow. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

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) 18:32, 24 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]