Talk:Leeds

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Leeds article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Leeds received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Cities

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

England High‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

UK geography High‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Yorkshire Top‑importance

	Yorkshire portal Leeds is within the scope of WikiProject Yorkshire, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Yorkshire on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project, see a list of open tasks, and join in discussions on the project's talk page.YorkshireWikipedia:WikiProject YorkshireTemplate:WikiProject YorkshireYorkshire articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

United Kingdom High‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Leeds

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Leeds, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Leeds on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LeedsWikipedia:WikiProject LeedsTemplate:WikiProject LeedsLeeds articles

Archives

Pre March 2008

This page has archives. Sections older than 28 days may be automatically archived by .

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Census#United Kingdom|UK census]] The anchor (United Kingdom) has been deleted.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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. PamD 17:31, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

@DragonofBatley Thanks.It appears as the leading image on mobile too. PamD 00:24, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Glad I got that right, wasn't sure how the mobile image was selected for display. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 10:07, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

RfC: Should the metro or urban region population be in the lead?

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

There is no need for four virtually identical RfCs. Please see WP:MULTI and discuss in one place only. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 12:58, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Removed from lead, retained in body. Pincrete (talk) 04:46, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"proceded with" > "proceeded with" ?

"proceded with" > "proceeded with" ? R. Henrik Nilsson (talk) _"proceeded_with"_?" class="ext-discussiontools-init-timestamplink">14:29, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]