:I think we need to insert something after "Leeds is" to say what, not just where, it is - not a hill, a monument, a shopping mall etc.. I've had a go, producing "Leeds (pronounced /ˈliːdz/ (Speaker Icon.svg listen)) is the major settlement within the City of Leeds" (replacing "Leeds (pronounced /ˈliːdz/ (Speaker Icon.svg listen)) is located within the City of Leeds").  Settlement doesn't seem right, as I think it tends to mean somewhere so small as not yet to be a village, town, city. Could we use "town"? Or even "old-established city"? The article has to say something, and if we agree it now it is less likely to be the target of future edit-warring. 

 ::I've now had another go and am happier with this version ("Leeds (pronounced /ˈliːdz/ (Speaker Icon.svg listen)) is a city[2] in West Yorkshire, England and the major settlement within the City of Leeds[3] metropolitan borough" with explanatory footnote about city status). What do people think? 

 :I also think that the lead needs to have something more to show the historic significance of Leeds: by the late 19th century it must have been the nth largest town in England, where n is pretty small number, and this isn't reflected as yet. I'll try and find some figures - eg populations of towns in 1900.