Talk:List of cities in Bulgaria

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Evidence for Stara Zagora being smaller than Rousse by population 2 Evidence for Rousse being smaller than Stara Zagora by population 3 Information about bulgarian regions - Stara Zagora 4 3O

[edit] Evidence for Stara Zagora being smaller than Rousse by population

1. World Gazetteer, 2006 calculation 143,164
2. CityPopulation.de, 2004 calculation 141,489
3. Head Direction of Residential Registration and Administrative Service, population table by permanent and present address as of 14 March 2006. Only official source, lists 146,870 permanent+present address, 163,193 permanent address, 155,021 present address. The data for Rousse is 160,987 permanent+present, 177,058 permanent, 170,169 present. All in all, Stara Zagora is clearly ~15,000 behind. Todor Bozhinov  → 14:32, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Its false —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Хаха (talk • contribs).

There are even pessimistic numbers:

1. Population.wn.com, 137,422 (Rousse at 157,204, unknown date).

The data for Stara Zagora is 182,700 permanent+present, 178,158 permanent, 164,769 present. All in all, Rousse is clearly ~10,000 behind. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Хаха (talk • contribs).

You're confusing municipality data (за общината) with city data (за града). Or you are pretending to be doing so, so you could troll further. Todor Bozhinov  → 15:22, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Evidence for Rousse being smaller than Stara Zagora by population

Stara Zagora 160 000 inhabitans, Rousse - 150 000 inhabitans

• [1]
• [2]

Stara Zagora 150 000 inhabitans, Rousse - 140 000 inhabitans

• [3]
• [4]
• [5]
• [6]
• [7]
• [8]
• [9] and so on... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Хаха (talk • contribs).

Please note that tourist websites are not reliable sources according to the Wikipedia guidelines. Besides, only a broad estimate (160,000) is provided in the website cited by User:Хаха and the two references are actually one, as the material seems to be copied. In addition, the user in fact inserts a number of 163,193 while his unreliable references say 160,000. Todor Bozhinov  → 15:07, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Information about bulgarian regions - Stara Zagora

Situated in the Central part of Bulgaria, Stara Zagora is the 5th largest city in Bulgaria, with population of 165 000 people. It is one of the most economically developed cities in the country, with low unemployment rates and growing foreign investment.

Adress Bulgaria[10]

Bulgarian 2 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.91.128.141 (talk • contribs).

Same as above — unreliable as per the Wikipedia guidelines, gives a broad and exaggerated estimate, generally POV. Todor Bozhinov  → 11:46, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 3O

I would eliminate this dispute entirely by basing the sort solely on the last government census. It is not up to WP to determine population. Instead, find the most verifiable source. So, base the sort on the 2001 census (and not the 2006 estimates).

Either that, or do away with sort based on measurement.

- Keith D. Tyler ¶ (AMA) 17:53, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

These are not actually estimates, but the calculations made by a national direction (i.e., they are official and used by the authorities). Anyway, the suggestion to use the 2001 census is quite good, the 2001 data only needs to be checked through primary sources, as I only checked the newest calculations for accuracy.

However, thinking in another way, imagine how old 2001 census data would look in 2010, for example. And city articles still have to use somewhat more recent data (all Bulgarian city articles in Wikipedia, be it Bulgarian, English or whatever, use these governmental calculations, not 2001 data). A large problem is what data actually to use — permanent address in the city, present address, or both permanent and present in the same city. The last one has been used in Wikipedia, but it has the disatvantage of erasing people (everyone's permanent and present address don't always match, so many people would in fact not be counted). You see, it's really a minor dispute and edit war with a troll, but has actually instigated an important discussion.

Thanks for the suggestions! Todor Bozhinov  → 18:13, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

The tendency of decennial census data to become stale in an ever-changing world is unfortunate, but a problem hardly particular to WP. As for how to count, using a consistent source eliminates the problem -- someone else decides the count for you. Now, if someone can point to a published source that explains why such data may be in doubt, that is includable. However, this would get us way out of the appropriate scope of a simple list article. - Keith D. Tyler ¶ (AMA) 21:56, 25 May 2006 (UTC)