Talk:Los Angeles--Riverside--Orange County, CA CMSA

What is the total population in this area? -- Kaihsu 17:06, 2004 May 10 (UTC)

Are you sure that the metropolitan area designation is no longer used? I thought it was customary to "divide" the area further but also keep the CMSA. WhisperToMe 22:25, 25 May 2004 (UTC)

United States metropolitan area does not say that CMSA is no longer used. Look at this article first, and please show me evidence that CMSA was entirely done away with. WhisperToMe 20:56, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * A paragraph near the middle of says:
 *  Federal agencies that use the statistical area definitions for nonstatistical program purposes should note that the 2000 standards changed the terminology used for classifying the areas. Under the 1980 and 1990 standards there were two types of areas: (1) Metropolitan Statistical Areas and (2) Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Areas that consisted of Primary Metropolitan Statistical Areas. The terms “Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area” and “Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area” are now obsolete.


 * This is from the top link at . I didn't comment on Baltimore-Washington because I am mainly interested in Los Angeles topics. Mackerm 03:24, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Now this gets complicated. 1. The census was done in 2000, and as that listing proves, most of the metro areas shown are CMSA.

Two is how to represent the data. The next census is all the way in 2010, so should we show the 2000 data as if it was current, or should we show it as if it was a thing of the past? Also, we must make a note of it in the United States metropolitan area article. WhisperToMe 05:11, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * You make some good points, and I appreciate all the hard work you've done with the maps. I got a bit distressed a while back because somebody (I don't think it was you) began associating various informal names of urban areas with the Census statistical districts. This causes problems especially in California, because the counties are very large and the empty land does not fit the normal definition of "metropolitan". I mostly corrected the problem by rewriting the opening of Greater Los Angeles area, and creating this page for the exact Census definition. Also, somebody changed the righthand column at United States metropolitan area so it says not necessarily equivalent to the Census definition of the metropolitan area, which really helped eliminate the confusion. (I'll post more thoughts in a little while) Mackerm 06:04, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * This may seem a bit silly now, but trust me, it's frustrating to correct an article about a village in the middle of nowhere, and someone keeps saying it's in the Greater Los Angeles area. The last problem I see (at the moment) are the names at United States metropolitan area. Although the Census dept has used the term "Metropolitan Area", the areas themselves have very specific and arcane names. That page should use those exact names, e.g. Chicago-Gary-Kenosha, IL-IN-WI CMSA. Mackerm 09:17, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)