Talk:List of English districts by population

message: Erk! Everything from 302 to 326 seems to have been lost when the figs were updated to the 2002 census. sjorford 13:54, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: These figures are highly dubious. They are based on 3 year old data which have been proven inaccurate by the mid-2004 figures. josh (talk) 22:36, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  2006 figures 

message: Would it make sense to add another section header and listing of just the London boroughs?
Why are the metropolitan areas of liverpool, leeds, manchester, etc. listed?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.24.204.7 (talk) 15:44, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  London boroughs 

message: The result was do not merge with List of largest urban sub-divisions in England by population. -- DWaterson 16:30, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would agree with the statement about work being required on the article, for the reasons that you give. Fingerpuppet 10:15, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Can I say your statement "no contirbution is possible on theses unless been vetoed by Fingerpuppet" is unfair. Fingerpuppet has correctly pointed out that the information is of primary source from the Office of National Statistics and just because you're not happy with it, does not make it invalid. If Fingerpuppet hadn't point these facts out then I or others would have done. --82.37.199.48 23:28, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge in of [[List of largest urban sub-divisions in England by population]] 

message: Contributors to this page may be interested in this AFD on List of largest cities in England by population and  this RM on List of largest urban sub-divisions in England by population. Cheers, DWaterson 23:56, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: In other news

message: here are the mid-2006 population estimates which the article needs to be updated with. └and-rew┘┌talk┐ 21:54, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've done the first two blocks - could somebody else now carry on? David 19:09, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mid-2006 population figures now available 

message: Where is eastbourne  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kentem (talk • contribs) 10:54, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's there - ranked 237th. David (talk) 15:10, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Eastbourne 

message: Cornwall and Wiltshire are not districts! Yes they are now unitary authorities, but they are not districts. This article needs renaming if it's going to include the county unitaries.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.100.85.19 (talk) 14:48, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cornwall and Wiltshire?! 

message: Wait, quick question...so the City of Manchester went from 392,819 in 2001 to 503,127 in the 2011 Census?  Manchester added over 100,000 new residents without its borders having been redefined? Just want to be sure I'm not reading that incorrectly. --Criticalthinker (talk) 03:25, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: This is laughable. The city population inside the city of Manchester's borders is just above Leicester. What they are doing is adding some peripheral boroughs that Manchester council has some partial control. The same for Leeds, Sheffield, etc.  Leeds city is over 700,000?  This is a joke and totally misleading. The fourth largest "city" is Liverpool, below London, Birmingham and Glasgow.78.105.238.158 (talk) 23:51, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

text: BTW, why are all of the numbers rounded (to the nearest hundred, no less) when there is clearly census data available?  Some of these are rounded quite a bit.  I've never seen another population page for any other country that uses rounded numbers, when exact census data is available. --Criticalthinker (talk) 03:01, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: The 2001 census badly underestimated the population of Manchester, so that is not a real growth. The only debatable addition to Manchester is Ringway, which has a small population.  For e.g. Leeds the figures given are for the metropolitan borough, which has city status; this will be more than the settlement of Leeds.  Mr Stephen (talk) 00:26, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: "The 2001 census badly underestimated the population of Manchester". Huh? Censuses do not estimate, they count every resident of given place. If it (under)estimates anything, it is not actually much of a census then. 85.76.47.149 (talk) 03:52, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe so.  There is some more information at 2004 Local Authority studies: Analysis of data and evidence for Manchester.  Mr Stephen (talk) 18:46, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  City of Manchester 

message: There reads: reported as the 2011 mid-year estimates</br>
There is no sense of using "2011 mid-year estimates", since United Kingdom Census 2011 took place on March 27. Either use the census figures, or more recent estimates. Though it seems to be the current way of doing those, as I see after checking a few of these articles. 82.141.94.229 (talk) 13:31, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: That'd be my opinion, too.  Either use the actual Census numbers or the most recent estimates.  In fact, if anyone wanted to put in the time, both could be added, which could show the estimated growth since the Census.  But, yeah, using the mid-year estimates for a Census year is ridiculous. --Criticalthinker (talk) 17:54, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Which ever is used we should be consistent and not use a mixture between articles. Keith D (talk) 18:37, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  estimates vs census 

message: A list for LUZ and historic counties seems impertinent to me as they don't correspond with local authority districts, LUZs would at best be based on figures different to 2011 figures and an LUZ figure spans a number of local authorities, therefore for the West Yorkshire LUZ you would need to put the same figure in Leeds, Bradford, Kirklees etc. Likewise Historic Counties hardly correspond to modern day local authorities, for example take South Lakeland in Cumbria, this would be in the Historic Counties of Lancashire, Yorkshire and Westmorland, unless all three are placed there in that particular example then that column would be erroneous.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.247.3.178 (talk) 18:45, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: LUZs and Historic Counties

message: It is available  here — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dead Asteroid Miner (talk • contribs) 13:17, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  2018 data is available 

message: The data is available for the 2021 census and has been for ages. Presumably because this page has been made so impossible for anyone to edit it hasn't been. Some stupid nerdly code has made it impossible for even veteran editors to update. Get rid of it please Sirhissofloxley (talk) 21:19, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: That's because the statistics aren't stored on this page, they are at  which can then be shared across all Wikipedia articles.  Dr Greg  talk  21:27, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: All of the entries need updating at the same time, not just an indiidual one of interest to you. Keith D (talk) 22:25, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

text:  so where at  is there any information about (a) where the data is stored or (b) how to replace it. I have already raised this question at Template talk:English district population#2021 estimates available (based on 2021 Census) without response. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 23:20, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sorry, I'm only aware of that template's existence and haven't been involved in its implementation.  Dr Greg  talk  23:35, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

text: So we are over a week after the biggest release of UK demographic info for ten years and because of some stupid way of doing things no-one knows how to update anything. Great. Whoever made it this way needs to fix it  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.106.252.209 (talk) 14:35, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The people who can respond to this might not be watching this page. You might get a response by joining the discussion at Template talk:English district population#2021 estimates available (based on 2021 Census).  Dr Greg  talk  15:05, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  2021 Census out 

message: Northants is currently missing — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.193.166.137 (talk • contribs) 22:25, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: Also needs Somerset, N Yorks, Cumberland, Westmorland and Furness Mapper2345 (talk) 05:47, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

text: Northamptonshire is no longer a legal district, it has been split. Just a ceremonial county now. But your point still stand re NN and WN: someone has added a hatnote but nothing in the body, perhaps because there is no data yet?--𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 08:35, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Northants