Talk:Paris/Archive 4

message: The city of Paris proper has 2.1 million inhabitants [1], but its centre of influence extends to cover a  "Greater Paris" metropolitan area that has a population of about 11.1 million [2]... 
To be factually correct, this should read:The city of Paris proper has 2.1 million inhabitants [1], but its centre of influence extends to cover an "aire urbaine" (metropolitan area) that has a population of about 11.1 million [2]...  
... and this...
...over one sixth of the French population. Paris is the third largest metropolitan area in Europe (after Moscow and London), and approximately the 22nd most populous metropolitan area in the world.
Factually correct should read:
...over one sixth of the French population. Paris' aire urbaine is the third largest metropolitan area in Europe (after Moscow and London), and approximately the 22nd most populous metropolitan area in the world.
... Paris has an aire urbaine, but it is not its aire urbaine. Though honesly I don't see the use of this vague and imprecise comparison for which there exists no factual sources, and the UN "world metropolitan area" publication uses the IDF as a boundry. I strongly disagree with the (after Europe and Moscow) - It has pompous connotations and is uninformative.
THEPROMENADER 20:37, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Introduction

message: Inhabitants of the whole Paris metropolitan area are known officially as Franciliens, i.e., from Île-de-France. 
... Non Sequitur. Paris' aire urbaine has nothing at all to do with the Franciliens apellation. This should read:
 Inhabitants of the Île-de-France are known officially as Franciliens.  
THEPROMENADER 20:37, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: People

message: As a matter of fact, as of February 2004 estimates, the population of the city reached 2,142,800 inhabitants, increasing for the first time since 1954. As for the metropolitan area, it reached approximately 11.5 million inhabitants in 2004, growing twice as fast in the 2000s as it did in the 1990s. The metropolitan area of Paris has been in continuous expansion since the end of the French Wars of Religion at the end of the 16th century (with only brief setbacks during the French Revolution and World War II).
...the aire urbaine did not even exist in these periods. in fact it is only ten years old. What publication does this info come from? THEPROMENADER 20:40, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Demography

message: Size
The metropolitan area of Paris is one of the engines of the global economy. In 2003 the GDP of the metropolitan area of Paris as calculated by INSEE was €448,933 million , or US$506.7 billion (at real exchange rates, not at PPP). If it were a country, the metropolitan area of Paris would be the 15th largest economy in the world (as of 2003), above Brazil (US$492.3 billion) and Russia (US$432.9 billion).
Year in, year out, the metropolitan area of Paris accounts for about 29% of the total GDP of metropolitan France, although its population is only 18.7% of the total population of metropolitan France (as of 2004). In 2002, according to Eurostat, the GDP of the metropolitan area of Paris accounted alone for 4.5% of the total GDP of the European Union (of 25 members), although its population is only 2.45% of the total population of the EU25.
Although in terms of population the Paris metropolitan area is only approximately the 20th largest metropolitan area in the world, its GDP can be estimated as the fifth or sixth largest in the world .
At the 1999 census there were 5,089,170 persons employed in the metropolitan area of Paris, 31.5% of whom worked inside the city of Paris proper and 16% in the Hauts-de-Seine (92) département, home of the new La Défense business district, to the west of the city proper, while the remaining 52.5% worked in the suburbs.
... there is no such thing as a "Paris metropolitan area GDP" and no such figures exist. Paris' economy is discussed in every English and French reference I know, to the limits of its Île-de-France. So this should read:
Size
Paris and its île-de-France région is one of the engines of the global economy. In 2003 the île-de-France GDP, as calculated by INSEE and Eurostat, was €448,933 million, or US$506.7 billion (at real exchange rates, not at PPP). If it were a country, the  Île-de-France would be the 15th largest economy in the world (as of 2003).
Year in, year out, the île-de-France accounts for about 29% of the total GDP of metropolitan France, although its population is only 18.7% of the same (as of 2004). In 2002, according to Eurostat, the Île-de-France GDP accounted alone for 4.5% of the total GDP of the European Union (of 25 members), although its population is only 2.45% of the total population of the EU25. In all, the île-de-France région GDP can be estimated as the fifth or sixth largest in the world .
At the 1999 census there were 5,089,170 persons employed in the Paris aire urbaine commuter belt (or metropolitan area), an area approximating that of the Île-de-France région. Citing statistics compiled the same year, 31.5% of of this number worked inside the city of Paris proper, 16% held employment in the Hauts-de-Seine (92) département to the west of the city, home of the new La Défense business district, while the remaining 52.5% worked throughout the remaining of the commuter belt suburbs.
THEPROMENADER 20:37, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Economy

message: This insertion was a bit odd - it was placed (in various forms) through the English, French and German Wiki by what seems to be the same person, but not in so much detail as here. It was a promostional article in itself. I didn't at all think it adapted to the history section where it first appeared (?), nor to the "Economy" section, as La Défense is a district, not an Economy (although economy "happens" there). For this I added a La Défense description (taken for the most part from the article) and Link to the "Paris Districts" section, and moved the article to the "Paris Districts" page. Perhaps some of it could be added to the La Défense article itself as well.
THEPROMENADER 08:09, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is a typical example of your page appropriation. A new Wikipedian comes to this article and adds info that wasn't in the article, but you remove it right away, labelling it "promotional article" (always making accusations!). If La Défense, the business district of Paris, is not appropriate in the economy section, then I don't know where it is! It's irritating to see you consider this article as your own. Hardouin 17:43, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Oh, it didn't sound promotional? Fine, I'll avoid saying things like that in the futre then. Changed it right away? No, I had a good think about it over a day - saw you were right there to move it though. Did the La Défense description, complete with its projection of future towers, really belong in the Economy section? Don't mix arguments such as these with personal misgivings. You, accusing me of page appropriation? LOL. THEPROMENADER 21:53, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hi, Hardouin. Would you mind addressing the items in the section above? Could both of you sum up  the dispute in broad strokes? Thank you in advance. Regards, El_C 15:26, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Hardouin, are you the author the comments in the section above, just so I'm clear. I seem to have overlooked these. El_C 18:45, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure I understand you. Which comments do you refer to? Hardouin 01:08, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  La Défense section 

message: What's wrong with saying that the city of Paris has 2.1 million inhabitants and the metropolitan area has 11.6 million inhabitants? Why do you keep reverting that? This is the format adopted for most other large cities on Wikipedia (first, city population, then metropolitan area population). The long-winded sentence written by ThePromenader ("Its influence as a city extends well into its suburbs in a metropolitan area commuter belt whose population...") is both awkward and above all misleading. It is misleading because the influence of Paris is actually felt well beyond the metropolitan area, in fact it reaches most of northern France. Different geographers propose different extents to that zone of influence, but usually it goes from Lille (excluded) in the north to the Massif Central in the south, and from Strasbourg (exluded) in the east to Rennes (excluded) in the west. The INSEE calculate what they call "espace urbain", which reflects the area of influence of large cities. The "espace urbain" of Paris contains nearly 16 million inhabitants at the 1999 census, and it includes cities like Rouen, Reims, Orléans, Le Havre, Auxerre, and many more. So I don't think it is wise to talk of "influence". Let's keep things simple. Hardouin 18:20, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Measuring "influence" is the very reason the 'aire urbaine' was created. A city's "influence" is not the city itself. THEPROMENADER 19:04, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

text: PS: in addition to your overall bad behaviour, disregard for consensus and incivility, you have yet to provide any references that speak of Paris in the terms and context that you try to impose here. This is the basis for criticism of your work. If your theories were reality you would simply have no opposition. THEPROMENADER 19:18, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not trying to impose anything. It is you who is trying to impose your view of Paris as a small city amongst a largely rural Ile de France région. Maybe in 1900. But we are in 2006 now. Besides I have already given GEMACA II reference, plus Encyclopedia Britannica reference. And I have tried to explain (but do you even listen) that the word "influence" is misleading in that context. Hardouin 20:32, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  You are a proven reverter of all fact not your own opinion - of course you impose. A conceptual study is not an existing reality. You obviously do not read a single word not your own - read my answer to your "proof" - including the Encyclopedia Britannica comments - above. In selectively ignoring/choosing arguments and sources are purposely leading us in circles. Stop. THEPROMENADER 20:53, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduction 

message: I'm sorry to have to do this but Hardouin makes incorrect assertions, and when challenged on these assertions does not reply with supporting evidence. I feel that the only way to clear up this mess is to summarise in tabular form what Hardouins statements are and my answers to them.
Hardouins statements                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          	My answers
Comparison made between the 'commune of Paris', Greater London and New York City to show that Paris City limits have not changed much since 1860. Two paragraphs down a comparison between the commune and Inner London and Manhattan                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         	Inappropriate because Greater London, Inner London, and Manhattan are not cities. City of London has not extended limits since Middle Ages - the changes I made show clearly and concisely that the administrative limits have not changed much in Paris since 1860.
That the size of the administrative city of Paris is more like the size of Manhattan or Inner London.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         	These are not similar figures - Paris is about 105 km², Inner London is 320 km² and Manhattan is 85 km².
Thus, the Brooklyn, Greenwich, or Charlottenburg of Paris are still outside the city of Paris proper                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          	Each of these places is unique to its metropolis. It is demeaning to Paris to suggest that it has versions of other cities suburbs.
The City of London is not a city, administratively speaking. It is but a borough of Greater London.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           	The City of London is officially a city and Greater London is a current region of England and was formerly a metropolitan county
Compare this with London where administrative limits were mandatorily extended by the British government in 1965 to create Greater London, including areas like Richmond or Kingston-upon-Thames that were previously outside the limits of London.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           	In 1965 the county of Greater London was created by merging the former counties of London and Middlesex, the City of London (which was separate from London County) and parts of Kent, Hertfordshire, Surrey and Essex
London is actually a small city of some 8,600 people (the population of the City of London). Is that what you really think?                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   	Absolutely, because the British government says it is a city
Surrounding Paris you have Hauts-de-Seine and Seine-Saint-Denis which have approximately the same land area and same density as Queens or Bronx, and yet they are not part of the city of Paris                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               	According to recent census estimates,
* Bronx County has 1,363,198 residents in 108.9 km² (plus 39.9 km² water) - density 12,518 people/km² on land (9,161 people/km² including water)
* Queens County has 2,229,379 residents in 282.9 km² (plus 178.8 km² water) - density 7,880 people/km² on land (4,828 people/km² including water)
* Hauts-de-Seine département has 1,490,783 residents in 176 km² - density 8,470 people/km²
* Seine-Saint-Denis département has 1,413,293 residents in 236 km² - density 5,989 people/km². These are not similar figures at all.
Err, how exactly are they not similar? 236 km² (Seine Saint Denis) and 282.9 km² (Queens) is not similar enough? 1,363,198 (Bronx) and 1,413,293 (Seine Saint Denis) is not similar enough?                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   	236 km² and 282.9 km² are not similar -  a difference of 46.9 km² makes Seine-Saint-Denis 83% of land area of Queens. Difference in populations is 816,000 people - Seine-Saint-Denis' population is 63% of Queen's population. Comparing Seine-Saint-Denis' and Queens' area, then comparing Seine-Saint-Denis' and Bronx population is inconsistent. Compare Queens' population with Seine-Saint-Denis - 1,413,293 is not similar to 2,229,379. What about Hauts-de-Seine's 176 km² compared to Bronx's 108.9 km²?
No later than 6 years ago, I was in Berlin and I still neatly remember city representatives taking the example of Charlotenburg to explain to us how Berlin enlarged after the Gründerzeit (foundation era), comparing it to Versailles or Sceaux, which are very similar to Charlotenburg, but are still separate cities from Paris proper.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  	You cannot base an article on your memories of an event alone. We need to see some proof from Berlin city representatives that they believe this.
For instance geographers would say Guatemala and Vietnam are two countries whose climate is subtropical.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      	This one made me laugh because both Vietnam and Guatemala are tropical not subtropical - again an incorrect comparison being made.
As for "Greater Paris", this phrase in English is commonly used in demographic/economic literature to refer to the Paris metropolitan area. You can check the authoritative GEMACA II study that was conducted in 2000-2001 by several research centers (including the London School of Economics and the Institute for Urban Planning and Development of the Paris Ile de France Region). The study compared major metropolitan areas of North-Western Europe. In the study, Ile de France is indifferently referred to as "Greater Paris", the "metropolitan area of Paris", the "Paris area", and so forth.	The Regional Council of Ile-de-France is a member of the World Association of Major Metropolises. There is no mention of a representative from Greater Paris, the metropolitan area of Paris, the Paris area or the aire urbaine. It doesn’t matter what GEMACA II or any other study regards as the metropolitan area of Paris, as long as the Ile-de-France is the representative at the World Association.
At [] - What the figures show, is that the aire urbaine/metropolitan area of Paris and the Île-de-France région are almost identical. When economists and demographers do not possess data for the aire urbaine of Paris, they use data for Île-de-France instead, because both areas cover each other almost perfectly (more than 97% the same)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              	Here you are comparing two concepts that are similar but are not interchangeable because only the Ile-de-France region is the metropolitan area. Aire urbaine is a statistical term and should be used in the correct context.
More fundamentally, ThePromenader says "Paris is not its metropolitan area", and wants to replace all mentions of the Paris metropolitan area in the article with "Ile de France région".                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     	See above for Ile-de-France. Note it is not Ile-de-Paris or Region-de-Paris or anything else.
On the one hand there is "angel's gender" arguing that Greater London is not stricly legally speaking a city, despite the fact that demographers, urban planners in the world, and even the British government treat Greater London as the municipal level of administration in London                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        	Greater London is the metropolitan area and the municipal level of administration is the City of London, the City of Westminster and the 31 other boroughs.
Also, as usual I see ThePromenader is misleading people. He says aire urbaine is unique to France, it is mostly farmland, while US metropolitan areas are "densely-packed". Followed by a comparison of densities of aire urbaine of Paris and three US metropolitan areas.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   	Promenader is correct – look at the official website of the Ile-de-France . Click on the left side link for Territoire / Tourisme, and then click on the link for La Region and then in the middle near the top click on Departements and you should see a list of departements followed by some text which reads – Forte de 11 millions d'habitants, soit 1/5 de la population française, l'Ile-de-France s'étend sur 12,072 km², (2,2 % du territoire national) dont 9700 km² d'espaces naturels, agricoles ou forestiers.
Roughly (and forgive my translation) I translate it as saying that – 11 million inhabitants strong, 1/5 of the French population, Ile-de-France extends to 12,072 km², (2.2% of the national territory) including 9700 km² of natural spaces (I'm unsure how to translate that bit but I think it means open countryside?), agriculture or forest. I make it that about 80% of the area is natural spaces, agriculture and forests.
A lot of incorrect information Hardouin, but with very little substance. My apologies if anyone got bored reading the table but it seems the only way to present information concisely. Green Giant 01:36, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The innaccuracies so far 

message: In light of our agreement about the errors and lack of references supporting the present version, I have begun, with the Economy section, to correct the article's different "region" apellations to those found in references and official (English version) websites. I found some other errors as well, and eliminated some repetition. THEPROMENADER 09:21, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Apellation Consensus, corrections.