Talk:Liverpool–Manchester rivalry

Split proposal:Liverpool-Manchester as one region
If we split this off the article should probably have a better name than Liverpool-Manchester as one region.Eopsid (talk) 11:34, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Frankly I don't know why it was added to the article in the first place. I'd delete it.--J3Mrs (talk) 13:21, 17 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Ihave copyedited it for clarity but I still think it has no place here.--J3Mrs (talk) 11:00, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
 * May I asky why you think it has no place? Eopsid (talk) 11:29, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Because the title of the article suggests it is about "Rivalry" not about metropolitan areas or what is nearby.--J3Mrs (talk) 11:33, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I think it is relevant because it shows although they are famously rivals they are almost contiguous. If you dont think it is relevant then does that imply you agree with splitting it off? Eopsid (talk) 11:36, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think it should have been added at all. Mentions of the metropolitan areas may be relevant to the North West England article if appropriate but I doubt it warrants a separate article.--J3Mrs (talk) 12:42, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
 * PS most rivalries take place between neighbours, Lancashire-Yorkshire, Man U-Man City, Liverpool-Everton, etc.--J3Mrs (talk) 12:45, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Original research?
The section gives no good sources for considering the two as one region. Sources may well exist, but the article doesn't show them. I'm also concerned about the population figures - if the total has been obtained by adding up the figures for the constituent areas, it will be an underestimate as it will omit the smaller more rural areas within the wider area as a whole. And there seems no good source for deciding which areas are included and which are excluded. The section reads as though someone has got a map, and ONS population figures, and single-handedly produced a WP:SYNTHESIS. If reputable academic or governmental organisations have undertaken work on a single combined metropolitan area, that should be the information that this article (or a split-off article) contains. If those sources don't exist, the section should be deleted (and no new article created). Ghmyrtle (talk) 13:46, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

The population figure makes no claim as to being accurate it just adding up all the urban areas with populations over 20,000. It should just be considered an estimate. What is included and excluded are areas which are considered part of the Liverpool and Mancheseter Metropolitan areas according to this study as well as adding some areas which are too small to be mentioned on there but are undoubtedly part of either one's metropolitan area.

There is only one source on the article at the moment claiming the areas are one. Eopsid (talk) 14:04, 17 November 2011 (UTC)


 * [After edit conflict]: :There's a brief mention of what is termed the 'Manchester - Liverpool Megalopolis' at North West England. If evidence can be found that this (or some other similar term) is officially or academically recognised (echoing what Ghmyrtle states above), then any information pertaining to such a topic should in my view be briefly outlined in both articles (i.e. this one and the North West England one). (I think the point of the recent edits on this article is to highlight the fact that although these two cities/urban areas are rivals in some respects, they are also physically neighbours, and perhaps also contiguous by some definitions). PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 14:12, 17 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I found a source for that here
 * Not sure if reliable though its the multiple sclerosis society but the pdf has a NHS logo on it. No idea where they got the population figure for the metropolis though but the Manchester Urban Area is similiar to the 2001 census (but not the same and but is the one used on the Greater Manchester Urban Area article but it differs slightly from the 2001 census figure, even though it gives it as a source, but it may be a more recent estimate) and the Liverpool urban area is just the Liverpool Urban Area plus the Birkenhead Urban Area with the same figures from the 2001 census.Eopsid (talk) 16:37, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Another source which says they are one metro area here also this previous discussion  may be relevant.Eopsid (talk) 14:17, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
 * (e/c) 	I think the Manchester University ref is relevant, but it's not easy to find others. The ESPON report seems to me to treat the two metropolitan areas separately, and reports like this - which is where I would expect to find some discussion about the two city-regions working together - don't (except of course in the context of "the whole of the North West" working together). Statements like "The population figure makes no claim as to being accurate it just adding up all the urban areas with populations over 20,000. It should just be considered an estimate" simply suggest to me that there is an absence of sources, and that much of the information is based on one editor's own research - which we should not be publishing. Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:20, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
 * PS: I'm not at all sure about the World Gazeteer as a WP:RS.  Statements like: "If possible, official data sources are used. In many cases however no official figures are available. In that case, secondary sources such as year books, encyclopediae, atlases etc. are used. I have also received data from other stats lovers..."   don't inspire me with confidence.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 14:26, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
 * It was used as a source for List of metropolitan areas in Europe. Eopsid (talk) 14:38, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't see it in the list of references there. Ghmyrtle (talk) 15:18, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
 * It was used as a reference it is talked about in the discussion there. They replaced it with another reference stating it was not as reliable as other sources but was the only source available in some cases so was used.
 * Also as this section (that is considered to be split) points out the idea of a liverpool-Manchester region is disputed. Eopsid (talk) 15:47, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

I have found some references to Liverpool/Manchester conurbation in google books. A simple search for "Manchester-Liverpool conurbation" comes up with a number of results. There are also numerous results if you search for "Liverpool-Manchester conurbation". Some of these are bound to be reliable sources.Eopsid (talk) 16:49, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Personally I do not consider the concept of a 'Manchester - Liverpool megalopolis' to be all that controversial - I remember encountering similar ideas in school geography textbooks 30 years ago (I recall one book delineated a 'London and south-east England megalopolis' which stretched all the way down to Swanage in Dorset). And I think Eopsid has tracked down evidence that at least some bodies/organisations also treat Liverpool and Manchester together as a single conceptual unit. For myself therefore the focus of questioning should be how such a concept is presented. I'm inclined to favour adding a short paragraph to existing related articles, rather than a stand-alone article of its own, simply because I believe that concepts such as 'Merseyside' or 'Greater Manchester' or 'North West England' have greater currency in contemporary society than 'Manchester - Liverpool Megalopolis'. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 17:30, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree completely. It would be useful to move some of the text and references that have been put into this article to the section at North West England.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 18:44, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Move section to Northwest England
I think the consensus seems to be to move this section into part of the North West England article instead of splitting it off. Am I right in this and what do you think of moving this section? Eopsid (talk) 13:01, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Oh no it doesn't, only appropriate and relevant bits.--J3Mrs (talk) 13:27, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * It would be useful if you were to point out the appropriate and relevant bits. Eopsid (talk) 16:01, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

I think the concept contained in the "one region" section belongs more in the North West England article, because how the urban areas of the North West are classified and regarded seems to me to be quite pertinent there. However I think it needs to be described more clearly, and in particular the population figures must be consistent across different methods of urban area classification (if that's possible...). I personally think a small note could also be included as a counterpoint within this article, just drawing attention to the fact that Liverpool and Manchester are intra-regionally connected, as well as being intra-regional rivals (with perhaps a 'see also' or link to the North West England article.) PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 22:44, 18 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I have moved what I consider the relevant pieces to the Metropolitan areas section of the North West England article. I will now trim the section here about it being one region. Eopsid (talk) 20:06, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Liverpool–Manchester rivalry. 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/20111026025623/http://careers.astrazeneca.co.uk/working-here/our-locations/alderley-park/living-in-the-North-West/ to http://careers.astrazeneca.co.uk/working-here/our-locations/alderley-park/living-in-the-North-West/

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) 08:51, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

Misleading image
The image, File:Liverpool-Manchester Combined Urban Area.png, is misleading in that it appears to show (in red) only those built-up areas within the "Combined Urban Area" - which is not defined in the article, but presumably comprises only certain contiguous local authorities. So, it does not show built-up areas outside the boundaries of those authorities, and as a result gives a misleading impression that the "megalopolis" is surrounded by an unpopulated rural area when clearly that is not the case - there are many towns and villages in the surrounding areas. I shall amend the caption to the image, but we need to consider whether it would be better removed, or redrawn. Ghmyrtle (talk) 07:51, 16 March 2020 (UTC)