Talk:Shrinking city

message: I believe the list of shrinking cities has problems. First, many of these are cities at the center of urban areas which are clearly growing, e.g. Washington, Philadelphia, Minneapolis. So "city" here means only an arbitrary municipal boundary. Second, my (limited) understanding of Wikipedia is that we needn't/shouldn't be doing our own analysis and adding it, we should find already published results of shrinking cities and reference them.Ddjwp (talk) 07:56, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: So do it! This is Wikipedia. :) I added a list of shrinking cities, and sure hope others expand it. If some WP genius knows of a way to point a bot at census figures and get this stuff automatically, that would be extremely cool -- especially if it pours the results into a template that shows peka population vs. 2006 (estimated) population, with percentage change. tgeller 22:23, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Problems

message: Why  Paris is include if it has gowth.
1999 : 2,125,000
2005 : 2,153,600
And it is only for the inner city. The inner suburbs wich are urban have a high growth.
Minato ku 20:04, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paris ? 

message: This article seems to be based in part on outdated information. Neither Leipzig nor Dresden are currently losing population - quite the contrary. They are especially attracting young people from smaller cities and rural areas. Leipzig has even been called "Hypezig" by some in the press Hobbitschuster (talk) 17:40, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Leipzig and Dresden are not shrinking 

message: I have 2 Problems with this article:
1) missing historic aspect of the problem: I can understand that this article isn't really about history but I guess it would be good if some historic examples would at least be mentioned in order to show that this isn't just a modern problem. Some links would be enough. You don't have to discuss it in depth. One of the most drastic examples I know of is Rome after the fall of the western empire. A city that had a bit less than a million inhabitants in antiquity and shrank to about 30k? inhabitants during the early middle ages before it started to grow again. (Quote from the Rome wiki site: Its population declined from more than a million in 210 AD to 500,000 in 273[41] to 35,000 after the Gothic War,[42] reducing the sprawling city to groups of inhabited buildings interspersed among large areas of ruins, vegetation, vineyards and market gardens.[43]) 
There are also examples where large towns completely disappeared (Babylon, Memphis and Thebes(Egypt), Karakorum etc. → Lost_city)
2) Several kinds of articles seem to be overlapping:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterurbanization
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shrinking_cities
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Urban_decay  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Valmendil (talk • contribs) 02:57, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  History: Not just a modern phenomenon 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Shrinking cities. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060715161518/http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/26/2622000.html to http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/26/2622000.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929091543/http://www.erasmuspc.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=291&Itemid=32 to http://www.erasmuspc.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=291&Itemid=32
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:28, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified (January 2018) 

message: Aside from the other problems of this article (writing quality and organization problems imo) it seems that a good deal of the general information (specifically from the Effects section) would better serve an overall understanding of deurbanization in the actual deurbanization article. Thoughts? It seems a bit confusing for some of the general principles and big ideas within this process to be only mentioned in a article that categorically belongs within the other (ie shrinking cities falls within counterurbanization).
So that information isn't simply repeated, how should this best be dealt with?
Ivangiesen (talk) 14:26, 18 March 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relationship to Counterurbanization