Talk:List of metropolitan areas in the Americas

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Why I made the reverts[edit]

Why I made the reverts: This is not a US Census bureau list, it is one got from the World-Gazetteer. Secondary cities are only listed if they are over 10% of the population of the metro area. -- Earl Andrew - talk 03:05, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

appologize[edit]

Since this is not the U.S. Census list, then I appologize for the comment I made on the summary edit. I based my information on the U.S. Census when I made the edit. UH Collegian

Thanks, there is a list I believe that bases it on US Census Bureau populations, just like there is a list based on Statistics Canada. -- Earl Andrew - talk 06:50, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Just out of idle curiosity[edit]

Just out of idle curiosity ... Why does this list stop at 116> It seems like an odd number to stop with.  :) RickK 07:22, May 30, 2005 (UTC)

It has more to do with the populations than the rankings. Note #116 has just a little over 1,000,000 people, signalling that that is the cut off. :) -- Earl Andrew - talk 08:18, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Binational Areas[edit]

Why not add in Detroit-Windsor, San Diego-Tijuana, and El Paso=Juarez? 69.171.160.71 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:16, 11 November 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Wrong, inconsistent and out of date data[edit]

The list seems to have wrong information. e.g. New York is listed as having 22 million whereas the United States metropolitan area article, which links here, lists it at 18,323,002. This leads me to believe that there are more problems with this list. Mind you, such a lists must be maintained regularly to be of any value..... Chelman 18:13, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's not wrong. The world gazatteer site has different paramaters for metropolitain areas. -- Earl Andrew - talk 18:47, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
        In the case of the United States this list is mixing census defined MSAs and CSAs. (For instance uses New York's larger CSA              
        figure and Chicago's smaller MSA figure.)  The source needs to settle on a single source of parameters.  And yes when you
        look at New York's metro figure and not its CSA, the number you arrive at is between 18 and 19 million.chazman 18:34, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Charlotte metro has at least 2,500,000,you have almost 1,700,000 that actially down from the 2,067,000 you had befor Charlotte one of the fastest growing cities in the US how did the Metro Population go down,your list do not make sense. I moved to Rock Hill S.C.last year from Buffalo N.Y. I know how a city and area look when its lost POPULATION schools closing services declining boards being send in from the state to run the city.What I see here is new roads being build everywhere schools not having enough room and new ones being build. I just read an article where York country S.C.which Charlotte spills over into has over 208,000 people now, where in 1990 it had 140,000 and you can say that for all 12 of the N.C. and the 3 S.C. coutries Lancaster , Chester and York. Also your article about Statesvile being a Micametro is a joke Stateville growth is a part of the runoff of Charlotte a lot of these people work and play see the arts go to football games basketball games in Charlotte. COME ON LET GET REAL HERE.

San Francisco-San Jose?[edit]

Shouldn't it be San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose? or San Francisco bay area?

Oakland didn't make the 10% threshold I had for inclusion on this list. (was not 10% of the metro area population) -- Earl Andrew - talk 02:29, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A strange source[edit]

I REALLY question the use of the World Gazetteer as the source for this information. They have some strange ideas on how a metropolitan area is defined. First and foremost, no nation considers cross-border proximity when calculating metropolitan area populations. It is a very strange move. This is not done because the border acts as somewhat of a barrier to regional economies and commerce. Many legitimate areas have whole corporations representing them; something that does not happen accross a national border. People also do not commute a great deal accross national borders for work... some DO, but not enough to warrant a declaration of a relationship of the same type that occurs among juristications whereby this sort of activity is not hampered by political and economic barriers.

Regardless, you will not see this done by either Statistics Canada or the US Census Bureau. Instead, I suggest combining StatsCan and Census Bureau data to use as the source. It just makes more sense. --24.85.245.200 01:55, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree on the strangeness of using the "World Gazetteer" as the source, and I would suggest to use those sources you cite (StatsCan and US Census Bureau), and also INEGI (for Mexico), and whatever is appropiate for other countries...
However, I disagree on your implication that the border acts as a barrier to regional economies and commerce. After all, the NAFTA agreements allow for cities in the US-Mexico and US-Canada border to trade, and I know many people who live in Mexico and work in the US, or who live in Canada and work in the US, and viceversa, simply by living in border towns. I think that listing border towns as metropolitan areas is a good move.
Finally, some Metro areas have special names given to them by sociologists or researches, such as the Washington-Baltimore, DC-MD-VA-WV Combined Statistical Area (CSA), or the Mexico Valley Metropolitan Area, which comprises what is commonly agreed to be the Mexico City metro area, plus the adjacen Toluca, and the urban sprawl of towns all over the surrounding side of the State of Mexico, in the Mexico Valley... Indeed, delimitating a metropolitan area according to a certain source or another will greatly affect how the population is measured. For example, Mexico City proper by itself, is 18 million in population, but adding the commonly agreed adjacent municipalities would give it the 22 million reported in this list (just below New York), but the Mexico Valley Metropolitan Area is the largest Urban Sprawl in the world, and the most populous with a little over 30 million inhabitants, so, different sources and different definitions of Metro areas will give different measurements, and a common one is needed to accurately compare the Metropolitan areas. --Hseldon10 12:50, 31 January 2006 (CST)
For CSA's that reach international borders, the definitions should stick to geographic sense (especially with Canada) and should be based on census divisions (counties, regional districts, etc.) instead of municipalities. For instance, the Detroit MSA across in Windsor should have all of Essex County, and the Buffalo-Niagara MSA should have all of the Region of Niagara. As for Mexico, it is harder to figure that one out as I don't know how they break it down. Vancouver BC should also be adjusted; I'd put at least Whatcom County, Washington in the consolidated area if that is the definition used. CrazyC83 03:45, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Part of the problem with the source, at least when measuring U.S. metros, is that it relies on several sources for information. This leads to some interesting stats. For instance the people of Trenton NJ are counted twice in both the New York and Philadelphia figures. This happens because the New York CSA (a statistical region used by the Census that measures areas that receive a small but still measurable number of commuters coming from outlying areas into a the defined New York urban area for work)and the Delaware Valley Region (a non statistical region that relies on geography and public perception) are both used to measure the population of Trenton. For this source to be reliable it would have to settle on a single source to determine its figures. In the U.S. and Canada this is easily done by settling on using those country's census defined metropolitan areas. (For the record....Trenton has its own metro area.)chazman 18:11, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

United States Metropolotian Areas[edit]

Some of the United States Metropolotian Areas seem to be very unreliable. I find it hard to believe that the city of Rochester has a larger population than that of Calgary.

The metro areas of Calgary (1,060,300) and Rochester (1,039,028) are basically the same size in terms of population (as of 2005). --Polaron | Talk 03:40, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Some US Cities are small in population but large in suburban or metro areas. Salt Lake City and Orlando are good examples of cities around 150,000 people that have over one million people in their metro areas. Calgary has almost all it's people in the central city and few in it's metro area. This is why Rochester and Calgary are similar but the difference is most people in Calgary live in the central city, while most people in Rochester live in the suburbs
there's an edmonton calgary corridoor that covers an area comparable to some US metro cities.

that place would have 2-3 million people. 4.143.230.146 (talk) 05:16, 19 March 2008 (UTC)eric[reply]

Questions?[edit]

Where is all the information from the source used here, World Gazetteer? I could not find the specific info was looking for on World Gazetteer, maybe some of the other info is there, maybe I just didn't look hard enough, maybe it is now missing, I don't know. What actually constitutes a metropolitan area? Or better yet, what is the definition being used for this article?

I came to this article originally from the main Tennessee Wikipedia article, because it stated that the Tri-cities metro area (Johnson City, Kingsport, Bristol, TN/Bristol, VA) was the fourth largest in Tennessee, which I thought was in error. I thought the Chattanooga metro area had to be larger than the Tri-cities metro area. However when I found this article it listed Johnson City at 200 with a population of 504,827, which is WRONG, way WRONG! Johnson City has a population of about 55K as of last census (which I know for a fact, I live there and go by a city limit sign which states the population everyday). Maybe the article is supposed to read Johnson City metro area, if so then it should be Johnson City, Kingsport, Bristol, TN/Bristol, VA metro area, or better yet Tri-cities metro area.

Well, I decided to crunch some numbers and I added up surrounding counties/cities numbers I came up with a number close to the 504,827 figure. Again, what actually constitutes a metropolitan area? Also I understand the Tri-cites figure is going to include figures from Virginia, but stating largest metro areas in Tennessee, should the VA numbers be included? Are Arkansas numbers used for Memphis? Are Georgia numbers used for Chattanooga? (at least in the Tennessee article?)

I think this article needs a definition of what constitutes a metropolitan area, some kind of formula to go by. I also think there should be individual links for each figure stated.

I find Wikipedia to be a very good source for the most part, except when it comes to numbers, that is why I checked this source. Also I did check for vandalism, recent edits and this discussion page.

Also, I'd like to state that I respect ALL of you Wikipedians!!! You all work hard and provide a very good service to the world. I would do more myself for Wikipedia, but I do not have the time or patience, plus I really do not undrstand all the formatting, edit wars, etc, etc, etc. Also I just don't feel comfortable changing someone elses hard work, unless I ABSOLUTELY positive it is wrong, which I will do here. I will change Johnson City to Tri-cities or Johnson City, Kingsport, Bristol, TN/Bristol, VA, if I can figure out the formating.

Hope I haven't ruffled any feathers, if so I'm sorry I meant no offense. 24.158.102.32 00:13, 6 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I changed Johnson City back to Tri-Cities again. I don't know if this data is correct, but I do know that there is no way Johnson City has that large of a population. Earl Andrew, you really seem like you know what you are doing, but why revert my change without an explanition? Maybe it was an accident, I don't know.24.158.102.32 18:55, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Article needs to be updated[edit]

The source provided on this page has new data. Someone please update this listing. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cooljuno411 (talk • contribs) 23:14, 10 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Golden Horseshoe[edit]

How come Toronto - Hamilton defines the golden horseshoe? They share one Television market and a lot of people commute from Niagara, Kitchener,etc. to Toronto. Toronto alone has 6 million people. I feel it should be Hamilton Toronto or St Catharines - Hamilton - Toronto - 8.15 million making it 8th in the Americas.

The Golden Horseshoe is not a metropolitan area but a region that closely resembles the CSAs found in the United States that are included in this source. The problem with this list is that it only sometimes list metropolitan areas as they are defined by census authorities. The list does include many CSAs, which are not metro areas, found in the United States (such as New York and Los Angeles....cities with much smaller metro areas than found here) and if it is to be a list of these larger urban regions, it should include the 8 million plus found in the Golden Horseshoe. If it does this however it should not purport to be a list of metropolitan areas.

in Canada metro area is comparable to csa. that's why metro Chicago and Denver are allowed to cover areas 10 times larger than Canadian metro areas do. that has to be taken into account when putting together lists like this. A third of Canada's population (11-12 million people) lives in an area that would be included in metro areas of some US cities. To have a city like that below Houston is indicative of a problem in the list.

chazman 18:25, 28 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Page doesn't match source...[edit]

On the article page it says one thing, but on the source it say something completely different. ex: Article on this page says San Diego-Tijuana is the 19th largest. On the source it says it is the 21st.

wrong[edit]

Santiago's population was 5.6 millions according to 2002 census, the list shows santiago with 5 millions according to 2008 proyection, but it really has nearly 7 millons now. Wrong data, I assume there is a lot of other wrong information here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.164.189.121 (talk) 19:23, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List overhaul[edit]

I would like to propose completely overhauling this list to use official definitions of metropolitan areas and their population figures where available. The only countries that do not appear to have official metropolitan area or urban agglomeration definitions are Venezuela, Guatemala, and the Dominican Republic. For these, we can keep the World Gazetteer source. For the U.S, which has two definitions, I am planning to use the monocentric metropolitan statistical area definition, rather than the polycentric combined statistical area. I will likely proceed in a few days unless there is strong objection. --Polaron | Talk 15:06, 10 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is a bad idea. I believe that the "Metropolitcan Statistical area definition" does not truely reflect the true size of these areas. Los Angeles and Riverside-San Bernardin are truely one single Metropolitan area. San Diego, USA and Tijuana, Mexico is also truely a single metropolitan area that is split by the international border. The same is true for Detroit and Windsor, Canada. user:Mrsmith93309 —Preceding undated comment added 23:40, 22 April 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Wenn sie nicht möchten das seiten bearbeitet werden müssen sie die seiten. (SPERREN) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.3.174.173 (talk) 23:42, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Convert to English please, so that we could answer your concerns. --Moreau36 (talk) 23:48, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]


very biased information here[edit]

if you look at the stats you have cities like Denver covering areas close to 10 times more than some Canadian cities like Vancouver when Vancouver could easily double its population if it did the same thing. Toronto has 10 million people in the horseshoe area which covers an area almost the same as Chicago metro area. By US standards Montreal would have 5 million people. Toronto 10 million Montreal 5 million Vancouver 4 million


in Canada metro area is comparable to csa. that's why metro Chicago and Denver are allowed to cover areas 10 times larger than Canadian metro areas do. that has to be taken into account when putting together lists like this. A third of Canada's population (11-12 million people) lives in an area that would be included in metro areas of some US cities. To have a city like that below Houston is indicative of a problem in the list.Grmike (talk) 17:35, 10 April 2010 (UTC)grmike[reply]

Love it![edit]

I love this list!!! But it would be better maybe if it includes top 60 cities? PlatinumFire (talk) 16:58, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Inconsistency[edit]

This article is essentially choosing its own definitions of metropolitan areas without even being clear about how those choices are made. Among other things it states that it is using "official" definitions though since these are not legal entities, and the governments sometimes publish multiple definitions for what a given metro area is, it is not clear which definition the article is using, or what rationale it has for using this.

As a simple example, consider the New York metro area. The article states the population as 19,006,798. This would appear to be the population of the OMB-defined MSA. But there is also the OMB-defined CSA which has a population of well over 20 million. There is also the BEA-defined EA (economic area) which has a population in excess of 25 million. And none of these are legal entities nor do they have any degree of "officiality" beyond the statistics they are used for (indeed the local communities often define these areas differently).

Without clarification and a consistent methodology for determining how information in published here this article is essentially WP:OR.

--Mcorazao (talk) 22:07, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. The best thing would be to find a single, reliable source that publishes statistics for all of these. This would be the least original research. --Mcorazao (talk) 22:09, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Census bureau doesn't classify CSAs as metropolitan areas. MSAs are what the census bureau classifies as a metropolitan area. Choosing any other definition for US metropolitan areas wouldn't be appropriate then. Elockid (Talk·Contribs) 02:20, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Los Angeles shortchanged[edit]

In the 1990s, the L.A. area was said to have more than 17 million persons (because it included Riverside, San Bernardino, Oxnard, etc.) The current definition of an MSA is not really compatible or reflective of reality. the CMSA comes closer to being real.Ryoung122 18:35, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree on this but the definition of a CSA isn't a metropolitan area. If we make an exception, that might cause disputes and will create inconsistencies in the article. Elockid (Talk) 21:28, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I tend to agree on this. The United States always gets short-changed on these type of lists. A CSA is a metropolitan area. It just means that two large regions sit so close together geographically that they also have a combined metro area. There are tens of thousands of people that commute each way between San Jose and San Francisco, or Baltimore and Washington, DC. Therefore, each of those regions are actually one metro area. Not to mention they share the same tv stations, same newspapers, same radio stations; i.e, they are the same metro area. Now, tv and radio stations signals in San Jose aren't picked up in Los Angeles. And people aren't commuting between San Jose and Los Angeles everyday; therefore, they are two separate metro areas. Other countries of the world may have only one definition of a metro area, and may not have both CSA's and MSA's like the United States. But the definiton their governments are using is comparable to the United States' CSA's. Think about it this way: if Baltimore had a population of 60,000 people it would surely be in the metro area of Washington, DC; it's only 40 minutes away. But because it has 600,000 people it is now suddenly not part of the metropolitan area? That doesn't make sense. The city itself hasn't moved, it just grew. ---Another example: Tacoma (pop. 198,000) is considered part of the Seattle (pop. 608,000) metro area (MSA). Now if decades from now Seattle has 1 million people, and Tacoma has 800,000 are they now in separate metro areas? No. They are still in the same metro area. The U.S. government will simply state what was once known as the MSA for the entire region is now the CSA; and it will give figures and data for that. And it will then give figures and data for Tacoma and its extremely immediate environs, excluding Seattle and its extremely immediate environs. This is done simply because each city has a population large enough that some people may want various statistics about one of the cities and its immediate environs. But that doesn't mean they are not still in the same metropolitan area. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.211.88.48 (talk) 08:37, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the Combined Statistical Area article even describes the area as a metropolitan area. It is the most expansive concept in America of the metropolitan area and is what is considered by everyday Americans as the metropolitan area. For instance, people consider the Los Angeles metropolitan area as encompassing of the Inland Empire (California) when, in fact, they are two different metropolitan statistical areas grouped under the Greater Los Angeles Area - or CSA. 08OceanBeachS.D. 18:22, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I do consider the Inland Empire as part of the Los Angeles metro area. Yes, the federal government has given each of them their own metro designations, but this is because they both have large populations. Basically, there are commuters who only live, work, and commute in Los Angeles and its more immediate environs such as Burbank, Long Beach, or Anaheim. There are also commuters who only live, work, and commute within the Inland Empire. So due to this commute pattern and the large population of each, the federal government releases statistics on each one like population, racial make-up, housing costs, etc, since some people are more concern about data from only one of the areas. But there is another set of commuters: the tens of thousands that travel on a daily basis between the Inland Empire and Los Angeles/Orange County. As they travel between the two areas they share the same radio stations, they do not lose radio signals; when they come home they share the same tv stations; and they can also pick up a copy of the Los Angeles Times newspaper anywhere in Ontario or Riverside if they wanted to. -Not to mention the fact that there is suburban rail service (Metrolink) that runs between the Inland Empire and L.A. Suburban rail agencies across the country only serve the areas that are suburbs of the central city. If the Inland Empire were not part of the metro area, the ONLY rail service between the two would be Amtrak. -It's kinda like one person stating they own a Buick and another person stating they own a Chevy. Yeah; but it's still all GM. One person owns an Acura, another a Honda; but it's still all the Honda Corporation, doesn't matter. So L.A./Orange County and the Inland Empire are different divisions of the same metro area. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.211.82.178 (talk) 11:29, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Inconsistent[edit]

This is very inconsistent; come on guys, get on it and fix this. The New York City statistics gives the number for the Combined metro population (CSA) while that of Los Angeles and San Francisco give the smaller MSA numbers instead of the CSA numbers. Los Angeles should be listed at roughly 17 million and San Francisco at about 8.5 million. Good writing is keeping facts consistent; people come to Wikipedia for accurate information. Get it fixed, keep it consistent and accurate.

File:Santa feconj.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:Santa feconj.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 12:00, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File:CIUDAD MEXICO, DF.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:CIUDAD MEXICO, DF.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations
What should I do?

Don't panic; deletions can take a little longer at Commons than they do on Wikipedia. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion (although please review Commons guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.
  • If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Commons Undeletion Request

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:CIUDAD MEXICO, DF.jpg)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 20:45, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of metropolitan areas by area size (km²)?[edit]

Does somebody knows where one can find a list of metropolitan areas by size, preferrabily in square km? Why this list doesn't have this info in the table?

--Cesarakg (talk) 00:19, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Guatemala city[edit]

is listed twice. oh sheeeeit.

Awesome city, eh? Has both 2.9 million AND 4.1 million people. Of course, the figures are a year apart, so maybe 1.2 million people moved there in 2011. Imagine the housing boom. 154.20.40.23 (talk) 08:55, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The metropolitan area has a population of 4.1 million people as of 2011, perhaps there was an expansion between these figures or they are based on a different definition. Either way, the problem should be addressed. TBrandley (T • C • B) 16:44, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Toronto[edit]

I just wanted to point out issues with the numbers chosen for "Toronto."

This appears to be the citation for the Toronto figure. As it comes from Statistics Canada, it's a reputable source and that would seemingly end debate. http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/dp-pd/prof/details/page.cfm?Lang=E&Geo1=CMA&Code1=535&Geo2=PR&Code2=35&Data=Count&SearchText=toronto&SearchType=Begins&SearchPR=01&B1=All&Custom=&TABID=1

This is the link that shows the map for the definition of the Toronto Metropolitan Area. http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/dp-pd/prof/details/page_Map_Carte_Detail.cfm?Lang=E&G=1&Geo1=CMA&Code1=535&Geo2=PR&Code2=35&Data=Count&SearchText=toronto&SearchType=Begins&SearchPR=01&B1=All&Custom=&TABID=1&geocode=535

The problem is, as any Torontonian would tell you, a definition of a Metro Toronto area that excludes both Oshawa and Hamilton is, simply put, insane. People reading this are unlikely to be from Toronto, so I will simply point you to this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Toronto_Area

The simple way to handle it would be to change Toronto to "Toronto-Hamilton." Oshawa's CMA does not meet the 10% inclusion threshold, but would also be included out of simple common sense. This would give Toronto a metropolitan area that more closely approximates what the US Census does. The corrected number, as listed here, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Toronto_and_Hamilton_Area) is 6,574,140. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.62.175.171 (talk) 07:24, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Caracas[edit]

Caracas Urban area is much bigger than here says, is at least 5-6 million pepole. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.73.95.88 (talk) 23:33, 6 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of metropolitan areas in the Americas. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 06:27, 2 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on List of metropolitan areas in the Americas. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:44, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on List of metropolitan areas in the Americas. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:51, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mix up of CSA and MSA within US cities[edit]

The Wikipedia entry for US MSA is more accurate than this list which mixes up MSA and CSA. For ex. Dallas has the MSA value and Washington DC has a source that uses CSA numbers. This entry is for "List of metropolitan areas in the Americas" so the MSA values should be used. 2603:8081:210B:AAD:F89E:1632:1339:5C7E (talk) 21:11, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_metropolitan_areas_in_the_Americas&oldid=1217102621"