Talk:Leeds

Trade
Debenhams have closed their department store in the centre of Leeds. The original business was liquidated. Only an online shop remained. Hamy01 (talk) 14:27, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

GLAM/LEEDS 2023
Hello all, I'm working on a piece of paid wiki-work for Leeds 2023 as part of the legacy of the year of culture (see here). Images are due to be shared to Wikimedia Commons in the next few weeks, and there are three articles now sent to AfC. I'll keep you posted. Lajmmoore (talk) 15:54, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Infobox images: we've lost the Town Hall
Leeds Town Hall is such an icon of the city that it is used in media as a "this is Leeds" setup shot, so it really ought to be in the infobox. Preferably as the shot which will appear as the banner for the article when seen on a mobile (there is a formula for this: it's the first image with a particular ratio of length to height: at the moment Leeds Dock is showing up). I see that on Jan 1st the Town Hall was prominent. Please replace it. I won't get into edit wars on this but bring it to the attention of @DragonofBatley, @Chocolateediter and @Murgatroyd49 who seem to have been editing the images lately. Yes, it's a difficult building to photograph as it's so vast, but this one is recent and looks good (though it's not landscape-format so won't get priority): lots of others to choose from on Commons. One way or another, we really need the Town Hall up there. Thanks. Pam D  17:31, 29 January 2024 (UTC)


 * erm it's been readded. I dunno why it was gone but I wanted to maintain the minster since it is a prominent landmark by Leeds Dock which is also in lead photos. DragonofBatley (talk) 21:43, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
 * @DragonofBatley Thanks.It appears as the leading image on mobile too. Pam  D  00:24, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Glad I got that right, wasn't sure how the mobile image was selected for display. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 10:07, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

RfC: Should the metro or urban region population be in the lead?
I noticed that a contributor has changed the lead section of the Liverpool article just recently. The Liverpool lead section now only includes Liverpool's local authority population and the population of the official city region. Having looked at the Birmingham Leeds and Edinburgh articles, I notice that their lead sections make reference to the wider metropolitan area.

To quote the Birmingham article lead section: "The wider metropolitan area has a population of 4.3 million, making it the largest outside of London." The citation is worldpopulationreview.com

To quote the Leeds article: "The city is part of the fourth-largest built-up area by population in the United Kingdom, West Yorkshire Built-up Area, with a 2011 census population of 1.7 million" The citation is ONS Census 2011. The WY Built-up Area is out of date and is not calculated any more. But I am wondering if this needs to be in the lead section as an editor has removed mention of Liverpool metropolitan area from its lead section.

To quote the Edinburgh lead section, "The wider metropolitan area has a population of 912,490." The citation is OECD.

I am sure there are many many examples on wiki where city articles make reference to a wider 'urban region' or metropolitan area.

Should we be aiming for consistency in these articles? I have also started an RfC on the Liverpool, Birmingham and Edinburgh articles. Liverpolitan1980 (talk) 10:40, 4 May 2024 (UTC)

A major production centre, … of carbonated water
The opening para says "It expanded by becoming a major production centre, including of carbonated water where it was invented in the 1760s". While no one seems to doubt that (artificially?) carbonated water was first created in Leeds, nothing in the article suggests that 'fizzy drinks' had any impact at all on Leeds' growth. Also, gramatically the sentence would be clearer as " a major production centre, including of carbonated water, which was invented there in the 1760s" Pincrete (talk) 12:48, 4 May 2024 (UTC)


 * While mentioned in the leaf, there is no further information in the body of the article on the subject and certainly no supporting references. I suggest the sentence is deleted from the lead. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 13:25, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Removed from lead, retained in body. Pincrete (talk) 04:46, 22 May 2024 (UTC)