Talk:List of busiest container ports/Archive 1

Flagicons
the addition of flagicons certainly improves the look of this article, but they make it incredibly slow to load. This isn't a criticism of anyone (I added some of the icons myself), but given the length of the list, the number of icons and the fact that they add no additional information to the article, I propose they be removed.

Any other views? Euryalus (talk) 03:15, 27 February 2008 (UTC)


 * In the absence of any other views, I've removed the icons. Euryalus (talk) 04:08, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

2006 Data
The data for 2006 is up at the AAPA website. I don't have time to edit the page now, but here's the data for anyone interested:

http://aapa.files.cms-plus.com/Statistics/worldportrankings%5F2006.xls

-- Exitmoose (talk) 23:37, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Port Klang
I changed all 'Klang' to 'Port Klang'. Unlike Port of Singapore or Port of Long Beach, Port Klang (not Port of Klang) is a town in itself, distinct from neighbouring Klang.

--115.133.114.48 (talk) 06:07, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

2009 data
The economist has posted a list of world's largest ports (ranked by TEU) with newer data: http://www.economist.com/node/16881727?fsrc=scn/fb/wl/dc/containerports Updating this requires better skill with tables than I have, so I'm putting the link up here for anyone else to work with. Trubadurix (talk) 18:33, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

LA +LB merge
All that Los Angeles/Long Beach merge seems to be like kind of original research. I suggest to keep them separated, as they are in the source data. --Jklamo (talk) 19:01, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I see that Fonty72 is removing LA/LB merge. I agre with that as my comment above, so we have now consensus about that. --Jklamo (talk) 21:06, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Los Angeles/Long Beach Harbor  is a world phenomenon, two big ports are connected and have a common infrastructure. Therefore they should be in this list (without number). Subtropical-man (talk) 17:30, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Jklamo is right. Attempts to change the way basic published data is represented can be considered as OR. The edit will thus be removed.--Huaiwei (talk) 12:17, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Busiest ports
I'm puzzled. Le Havre is the only French port on the list, yet the Wikipedia article for Marseille stats that it is 'France's largest port'. Am I missing something? Timnott (talk) 07:49, 18 November 2010 (UTC) Tim Nott, France
 * Scope of the list is busiest container ports. Marseille has "just" 883 thousands of TEU, thus did not qualify in top 50 container ports. But for example in cargo tonnage statistic, Marseille is more busy than Le Havre.--Jklamo (talk) 10:46, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Shanghai overtook Singapore in 2010
Hi @all,

could you pls refresh this article because acc. to foll. link http://www.joc.com/maritime/shanghai-becomes-world%E2%80%99s-largest-container-port

it's not Singapore anymore but Shanghai!

Brgds Max --145.253.175.205 (talk) 13:30, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

2011 data
Second ref now contains also 2011 data. --Jklamo (talk) 13:47, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Tanger-Med
Where is this super port on this list? Haas it not been completed yet? 99.232.191.33 (talk) 18:58, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

CHN vs HKG
Dear anonymous IP address, CHN vs HKG issue is totally out of scope of this article, so please stop changing these. Thanks --Jklamo (talk) 10:53, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Ideally, HK would be listed as "Hong Kong, China" with it's own flag icon. As a port, HK is nearly independent and fiercely competitive with other Chinese ports. It doesn't help the reader much on this issue with the current layout. But - as this is the current layout, reverting the IP user (who is probably a known sock) is the correct thing to do. SchmuckyTheCat (talk)
 * In source AAPA list it is clearly listed country China. So there is no need to go into that sensitive issue by changing it. If we change it to anonymous IP version, i suppose that sooner or later some another anonymous IP will change it back. --Jklamo (talk) 23:31, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * There are also fierce competitions among Shanghai, Ningbo, Tianjin, Canton, Shenzhen and other major ports in mainland China. Such economic "independence" does not justify any editor's political abuse of Wikipedia which affects the accurateness and consistency of this list. Its other tables apply "China" as the country to Hong Kong or its port, which is correct since the column name is "Country", not "Economy" or "Country/Area" (in this case, "CHN" should be replaced by "Mainland China"). There is no doubt Hong Kong is not a country but a city and SAR of the PRC (no Taiwan issue here at all). Thank you. -- 60.240.3.78 (talk) 12:32, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
 * It is simple disputable issue, there is no "correct" solution (and ther are zillion discussions at zillion talks on wiki on that). But in both source data (AAPA and JOC) they choose CHN, so it is simply easier to stick to these sources. --Jklamo (talk) 12:04, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

RfC consensus
Before changing the status of Hong Kong, please consult the RfC consensus: Talk:List of cities proper by population/Archive 8. See also WP:SOVEREIGNFLAG. -Zanhe (talk) 20:50, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on List of world's busiest container ports. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20081221123213/http://aapa.files.cms-plus.com:80/Statistics/worldportrankings%5F2006.xls to http://aapa.files.cms-plus.com/Statistics/worldportrankings%5F2006.xls
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070927223354/http://aapa.files.cms-plus.com/Statistics/WORLD%20PORT%20RANKINGS%202005.xls to http://aapa.files.cms-plus.com/Statistics/WORLD%20PORT%20RANKINGS%202005.xls

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 18:28, 16 January 2016 (UTC)

German article
Note: A German version should be created. -- Horst-schlaemma (talk) 20:03, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

"Seattle/Tacoma"
These are two separate ports run by two separate agencies, which have a business partnership. Neither would appear on this list based on their own shipping volume. It would be like combining Los Angeles and Long Beach, in order to catapult them from #19 and #20 on the list to #10. Very dishonest. 70.30.100.138 (talk) 13:25, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

"Economy" column
This seems to have been expressly changed to appease editors warring in the "CHN vs HKG" spat above. It should be reverted to "Country". This is ridiculous. 70.30.100.138 (talk) 13:28, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Accuracy and Reliability of AAPA World Port Ranking Data
I have opened this section to highlight the discrepancies and possible inaccuracies of TEU numbers reported by American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA) date files. Hopefully, this would lead to re-update of the page with more reliable and consistent information and removal and reporting of the issues to relevant stakeholders.

Here are few issues:

Some of the busiest ports have unusually lower numbers (> 50 % drop) in 2015 which is not possible. These data can be easily dispute by multiple sources including Lloyds and websites of relevant ports.

I first noticed the issue with numbers reported to Port of Colombo -Sri Lanka (which no longer on the table). According to several sources, number of TEU handled by this port was 5.19 million in 2015  and 4.19 million in 2014. However, AAPA reports the same number in 2014 but 1.662 million in 2015. AAPA reference does not provide sources of each number but said numbers were based on internet sites of the ports, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' Waterborne Commerce Statistics Center, etc... In this case inaccuracy of numbers reported by AAPA is obvious. Same can be reported to several others.

See the page. http://www.worldshipping.org/about-the-industry/global-trade/top-50-world-container-ports This leads to considerable changes on the table (more than 10 new ports should included into table) and question of reliability of AAPA as a sources.

Currently, I am gathering data to modify the table but like to hear others view on this. Also, as a reputable organization how can AAPA publish a list with these types of errors and what should we need to do about it.--Lipwe (talk) 09:45, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on List of busiest container ports. 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/20150328065403/http://europe.nxtbook.com/nxteu/informa/ci_top100ports2014/ to http://europe.nxtbook.com/nxteu/informa/ci_top100ports2014/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150328071452/http://europe.nxtbook.com/nxteu/informa/ci_top100ports2013/ to http://europe.nxtbook.com/nxteu/informa/ci_top100ports2013/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150328065358/http://europe.nxtbook.com/nxteu/informa/ci_top100ports2012/ to http://europe.nxtbook.com/nxteu/informa/ci_top100ports2012/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150217005018/http://europe.nxtbook.com/nxteu/informa/ci_top100ports2011/ to http://europe.nxtbook.com/nxteu/informa/ci_top100ports2011/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110724030347/http://staging.aapa.rd.net/files/Statistics/WORLD_PORT_RANKINGS_2004.xls to http://staging.aapa.rd.net/files/Statistics/WORLD_PORT_RANKINGS_2004.xls

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) 03:55, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Sorting is alphabetical rather than numerical
Right now, if you click on the triangles to sort a column (for shipping volume in a given year), it sorts alphabetically rather than numerically. For example, if I sort a column from largest to smallest, 2,900 appears above 30,000, even though the latter is larger and should therefore appear first. Does anyone know how to fix this? RCTodd (talk) 14:21, 31 January 2018 (UTC)