Talk:List of conurbations in the United Kingdom

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Are you sure that Bristol is a conurbation? Should Glasgow be listed? Edward 22:11, 23 May 2004 (UTC)

This needs context and explanations. These surely aren't all official. It looks like an attempt to produce as long a list as possible by stretching the definition to breaking point. Reading a conurbation!

Contents

[edit] Reading/Wokingham Urban Area

Is this an actual urban area? because the other urban areas mentioned are to my knowledge continuously built up whereas Reading and Wokingham are seperated, and Bracknell which is included in the Reading/Wokingham urban area is certainly very seperated from Reading. The Reading urban population is in other pages quoted as 232,000 not 300,000+. Is there a source that backs up this urban area, as it does not fit the "A conurbation is an urban area comprising a number of cities or towns which, through population growth and expansion, have physically merged to form one continuous built up area. It is thus a polycentric form of agglomeration.". definition. (BoroLad1982)

Also the non-continuation of reading/wokingham, then brighton and worthing (which i admit is very close together while not actually touching) is similar to teesside and hartelpool which potentially has a population of 450,000, and are the birkenhead/liverpool areas not one of the same as they are only seperated by the mersey?

Actually, Reading and Wokingham are not separate urban areas, as they are connected by Winnersh. Brighton/Worthing/Littlehampton is considered to be a conurbation by the ONS. Teeside's population according to the ONS is 365,323. The ONS considers Liverpool and Wirral to be separate Urban Areas. Take a look at [1] for what the ONS considers to be urban area populations, both conurbations and sub-areas within conurbations. Steven J 19:22, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Ok i see. "Teeside's population according to the ONS is 365,323" i know this - what i was saying though, i meant if you look at the close proximity of hartlepool and teesside (which is conncted by industry rather than residential area) it is no further away from each other than the brighton/worthing/littlehampton area. also i cannot understand why the villages of yarm and eaglescliffe and marske do not come under the teesside urban area as they are now connected, or at most a stone throw away. Maybe this will change in the next census.

[edit] Agreed

I agree. As far as I know, there are six to eight UK conurbations but definitely nowhere near the number that are suggested here. I might see if I can confirm the eight or so and give this page an edit.

Samluke777 19:35, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Conurbation means in this context "urban areas that stretch outside local government boundaries". Morwen - Talk 13:18, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

according to conurbation, "A conurbation is an urban area comprising a number of cities or towns which, through population growth and expansion, have physically merged to form one continuous built up area. It is thus a polycentric form of agglomeration.". This applies to pretty much all the cases here. Morwen - Talk 13:20, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Ok, I've updated the article to explain what and why these these things are conurbations. Morwen - Talk 14:06, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] South Midlands?

Should the South Midlands be included on this list? David 13:01, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Don't think so. Milton Keynes doesn't include anything outside of Milton Keynes (borough). There might be a case for South Essex/North Kent coasts, which look rather similar to the Sussex coast. Morwen - Talk 14:06, 6 October 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Greater Manchester / Merseyside / Warrington

Should a comment be placed somewhere on this page mentioning that it is possible to see the whole of this area as a single conurbation, given that it is pretty much possible to travel from say, Hazel Grove to the coast without really leaving a built-up area? It's not really generally considered to be a "true" conurbation, but it's not too far away either. Steven J 12:11, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Good idea. I'll stick that at the bottom. Morwen - Talk 12:16, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

The same can be said about the Derby and Nottingham areas (BoroLad1982)

[edit] Scotland data

After much searching, can't find equivilant pop stats for Scottish conurbations. I guess only Edinburgh and Glasgow would get into the list at the moment - but want figures made with the same metholodolgy, not just random pop figures from web. Morwen - Talk 12:38, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

You are right, the Scottish census does not record information on Scottish conurbations apart from Greater Glasgow so should probably not be included in this list. It could be worked out based on official data, but this could be subjective and probably not have the metholodolgy you are looking for. For example, I worked out that the Edinburgh/Lothains conurbation would total 607,162, I have not factored in Livingston, Bathgate, Bo’ness, Linlithgow which are commuter towns of Edinburgh but there is a rural gap between them and most people in Scotland would probably think of them as burghs in West Lothian rather than part of Edinburgh. I suspect that Aberdeen with suburbs (228,965) and Dundee with suburbs (195,552) would perhaps sneak onto the list at the bottom of the article around Northampton, Norwich and Milton Keynes but again this would not be an official figure so I say stick with the census Greater Glasgow Settlement Area and City of Edinburgh unitary council authority numbers. Benson85 20:50, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] S.E. Wales/Newport Conurbation

What is with the lack of interest for South Wales when it is clearly one of the most densely populated areas of the UK?

Newport is part of an urban area with the valley towns of Risca, Cross Keys and Machen. It is also very close to Cwmbran to the North, which is in turn connected to Pontypool. The Monmouthahire town of Risca is right on the border of the City. If this doesn't make Newport a major conurbation then how can Reading claim to be when it isn't even connected to Wokingham and is even more distant from Bracknell, which is also part of this conurbation?

Also worth a mention is the Cardiff-Newport/South East Wales 'conurbation'. This would be a rough built up area including the Newport conurbation as priviously mentioned, and Cardiff, Caerphilly and part of the vale of Glamorgan. This is very similar to the Southampton-Portsmouth area mentioned in the article.

Feel free to add it! It is true that you can drive from Langstone to Penarth east—west and Pill to Blaenavon north—south without leaving the built-up area. Similarly you can get all the way to Crosskeys before the built-up area ends. The problem is there is overlap with the Cardiff conurbation. Do we list separate Cardiff/Newport conurbations are split them up and have a separate Newport/Monmouthshire valleys conurbation? Owain (talk) 09:20, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

The only place I can see a Newport conurbation mentioned is Risca. I'll make a note of the Cardiff/Newport conurbations now. The trouble is the National Statistics Office doesn't list Newport as one of the 'official' conurbations, they should do something about that considering they are based in Newport.

Well it does on http://www.statistics.gov.uk/statbase/Expodata/Spreadsheets/D8271.csv - it gives a total figure of 139,298, and breaks out Langstone and Risca separately as components. Unfortunately it also breaks out Caerleon, Marshfield and Underwood as NOT part of the Newport Urban Area! So I'm not sure what use that is, although it is the only official source we have. Owain (talk) 12:39, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
Certainly looking from a map there appears to be a large gap between Marshfield and the Newport Urban Area. The figures have absolutely nothing to do with the structure of local government, so it would seem sensible to me. Steven J 17:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

This data is very inconsistent. It seems like for some places they have got a compass and drawn a circle around a city centre, e.g. Bracknell part of Reading? Port Talbot part of Swansea? Yet Caerleon is within the built up area and city limits of Newport but not the urban area. They list the population of Cardiff City as 292,150, how do they work this one out? Also, they put Chepstow urban area in South West, when the main centre of population here is in Wales.

It is possible to go from Swansea to Port Talbot without leaving the urban area, so this makes sense as them being part of the same conurbation - it's not that Port Talbot is part of Swansea. It's the same with the Reading / Wokingham / Bracknell conurbation. The sub-areas of conurbations are based upon the pre-1974 authorities - which were actually based upon individual towns, and have little relevance with modern local government structures. Steven J 17:55, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tyne and Wear

I've brought this up on the England page, but I would also like to ask the same question here. Do you think that Tyne and Wear is really a conurbation? It's a metropolitan county, metropolitan areas can be seen as conurbations but, ultimately, they tend not to be as built up as conurbations (ie. there may be slight, but still clear, areas seperating different towns without and clear build up). Whilst Tyne and Wear certainly is one of the country's core urban areas it is possible to travel from Sunderland/Washington to a southern/central part of Gateshead and pass very few (if any) built up areas. It's two conurbations in one metropolis, there are still clear gaps between Tyneside and Wearside - just look at a map. Also, I'm sure not many geordies or mackems would like the thought of their respective areas being classed as one! The two cities are hardly united and both have entirely different identities, accents and dialect - Newcastle being typically Northumbrian, Sunderland Durham. Seriously though, I know this is briefly mentioned in the article (bordlering, multi-centred) but I would like some detailed feedback on what you think. hedpeguyuk 22:20, 28 June 2006 (UTC)