The Uk's Coldest City

[NorthernRab]

I was thinking of Durham when I said that. Never mentioned Harrogate as a candidate though! It's simply not a city, and with Knaresborough makes... two towns more-or-less joined together. A lot larger than Inverness, which demonstrates for me that this is also a town.

Yeti, no matter how many times you say it isn't, Inverness is a city. If you look at the hinterland of Inverness, you'll find its population is closer to around the 120,000 mark. Inverness has no statutory boundaries.

[Stratos Ferric]

Appleby is almost twice the size of Kirkby Stephen, and Kirkby Stephen is a town. That's how big Appleby is.

Harrogate must be seventeen times the size of Appleby, which means that it's at least thirty four times the size of Kirkby Stephen; but doesn't KS have a Booth's (or am I thinking of Kirkby Lonsdale, there's so many Kirkby's about)? Harrogateborough doesn't? Ilkley does as well, though its Betty's is smaller. York has two Betty's but no Booth's, so far as I'm aware.

It's all very confusing.

None of them have a Woolworth's any more. We should all be very grateful that that wasn't the criteria for city status.

[Yeti]

Well as I have said, for me a city is what is a city is for me - and somewhere the size of Inverness doesn't fit into that category. So what if somewhere has a cathedral? I don't recognise the church's authority and as far as I am concerned you may as well say somewhere is a city if it has an IKEA (NOT that I worship IKEA!)

The cathedral-city definition is open to dispute these days and it depends on what you think. I for one don't find that it makes a city. This is why I stand by my claim that Aberdeen is probably the coldest city overall even though it is not the coldest in winter. In fact, I have figures to back this up rather than just guessing.

No amount of rudeness from SF is going to change my opinion.

[Osbourne One-Nil]

I need to put this to bed once and for all - Kirkby Stephen doesn't have a Booths, it has a Co-op and a working men's club. Kirkby Lonsdale has both a Co-op and a Booths, no working men's club, but a very nice bath shop.

[Stratos Ferric]

Yeti, no matter how many times you say it isn't, Inverness is a city. If you look at the hinterland of Inverness, you'll find its population is closer to around the 120,000 mark. Inverness has no statutory boundaries.

It must have, otherwise it would go on for ever, and I'd be tapping them up legitimately for all sorts of go greener loans, and Osborne would be suing them for damage to his bike wheels. Boundaries play a specific governmental role demarcating the area over which the local authority (be that tertiary or secondary) exercises its duties. It may be that what you mean is that Inverness has tertiary status now, in which case the authority's boundaries may have been extended beyond what was originally the city boundary. Think Greater Manchester (although in this case Manchester is a secondary tier authority) as an example.

[Nick H]

Well as I have said, for me a city is what is a city is for me - and somewhere the size of Inverness doesn't fit into that category. So what if somewhere has a cathedral? I don't recognise the church's authority and as far as I am concerned you may as well say somewhere is a city if it has an IKEA (NOT that I worship IKEA!)

The cathedral-city definition is open to dispute these days and it depends on what you think. I for one don't find that it makes a city. This is why I stand by my claim that Aberdeen is probably the coldest city overall even though it is not the coldest in winter. In fact, I have figures to back this up rather than just guessing.

No amount of rudeness from SF is going to change my opinion.

There is an official definition whether you like it or not. As far as I am aware it is a matter for Parliament not the Church, although of course the Church has representation in the House of Lords which is a component of Parliament. A quick Wiki search will reveal all the cities of the UK. You can't come on here and say "that's not a city because I don't think it should be" or "this should be city but it isn't".

Edited December 28, 2008 by Nick H

[Osbourne One-Nil]

Yeti, I think a city is a city if it's a city. If it isn't a city, then it's not a city. If it is, then it is, because it is.

[Stratos Ferric]

Well as I have said, for me a city is what is a city is for me - and somewhere the size of Inverness doesn't fit into that category. So what if somewhere has a cathedral? I don't recognise the church's authority and as far as I am concerned you may as well say somewhere is a city if it has an IKEA (NOT that I worship IKEA!)

The cathedral-city definition is open to dispute these days and it depends on what you think. I for one don't find that it makes a city. This is why I stand by my claim that Aberdeen is probably the coldest city overall even though it is not the coldest in winter. In fact, I have figures to back this up rather than just guessing.

No amount of rudeness from SF is going to change my opinion.

Yeti, I'm not being rude, though you might be being a bit thin skinned in which case I apologise for teasing you. However, I don't think any of us on here is so great, even you, that we can set our own criteria for what is a city. We'll be redefining inches next when measuring snow depths...

...actually that horse has bolted. OK, we'll be arguing about the CET; onions...

There is an official definition whether you like it or not and a quick Wiki search will reveal all the cities of the UK.

Is Harrogateborough on the list?

[Yeti]

I don't claim to define what a city is for everybody, but I know what I think a city is and for me that will do. Read something on virtue theory.

And for heaven's sake, I have said from the outset that there is no way Harrogate is a city, whether combined with Knaresborough or not (and Harrogate is NOT combined with Knaresborough, despite their beginning to join together).

[Jack Wales]

What about Penzance?

[Osbourne One-Nil]

Now you're being silly. Knaresboroughgate is definitely not merging with Penzance.

[Yeti]

Yeti, I think a city is a city if it's a city. If it isn't a city, then it's not a city. If it is, then it is, because it is.

Exactly, have it how you want! Much more interesting that way. As I say, read something on virtue theory

Seriously though, my point is that certain cathedral cities are not really cities as far as I am concerned - somewhere with 2000 people borders on a village. The fact is that the government definition will, most of the time, produce a realistic result; however, with certain cathedral cities brought in from ancient laws, a pinch of salt is needed.

[davehsug]

Now you're being silly. Knaresboroughgate is definitely not merging with Penzance.

Now then OON, it's not for you to decide what the good burgers of Knaresboroughgate & Penzance decide to do

[Yeti]

Now then OON, it's not for you to decide what the good burgers of Knaresboroughgate & Penzance decide to do

I'm wondering whether we can merge with Ripon soon; then we really will be a city! It's not too far off after all.

[davehsug]

I'm wondering whether we can merge with Ripon soon; then we really will be a city! It's not too far off after all.

In that case I'm merging Stoke, with the West Midlands, Derby Nottingham, Sheffield, Greater Manchester & Liverpool, all within 50 miles, to form the new city of Greater North Staffordshire & declaring us now bigger than London & the rightful capital of England.

[NorthernRab]

It must have, otherwise it would go on for ever, and I'd be tapping them up legitimately for all sorts of go greener loans, and Osborne would be suing them for damage to his bike wheels. Boundaries play a specific governmental role demarcating the area over which the local authority (be that tertiary or secondary) exercises its duties. It may be that what you mean is that Inverness has tertiary status now, in which case the authority's boundaries may have been extended beyond what was originally the city boundary. Think Greater Manchester (although in this case Manchester is a secondary tier authority) as an example.

No, it has no statutory boundaries.

Source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverness

As a law student, I can tell you that there is a world of difference between what it is theoretically possible in the law and what is put into practice. English law is quite different from Scottish law.

Also, Yeti, have you ever even been to Inverness? Whether you regard it as a city or not is inconsequential I'm afraid. It's a question of fact, not individual perception. If I was to judge cities on a world level, I certainly would not regard Leeds as one, even though you've classified it so. A city is a cluster of the population in an important economic and social centre, which is what Inverness is.

Edited December 29, 2008 by NorthernRab

[Yeti]

In that case I'm merging Stoke, with the West Midlands, Derby Nottingham, Sheffield, Greater Manchester & Liverpool, all within 50 miles, to form the new city of Greater North Staffordshire & declaring us now bigger than London & the rightful capital of England.

Nah you need to set your goals higher and engulf London too. I reckon we can just about mange York, and Leeds isn't far off either.

However you're not allowed to merge with Sheffield as it's in Yorks, and N and S must remain separate

[Nick F]

Good job we are not talking about the US, because every god-damn habitation is classed as a city.

I think the word 'city' shouldn't necessarily be defined as any large conurbation ... it has more strict criteria for the UK.

[Thundery wintry showers]

The attribution of city status doesn't just depend on the size of the conurbation, it depends on various other things, e.g. cathedrals, defence sites etc. all help. For instance Preston is much bigger than Lancaster, but Lancaster acquired city status as it used to be the main centre within Lancashire.

Norwich can indeed get very cold when the east wind blows, and it is one of England's coldest cities in winter, but not as cold as Durham, or indeed Inverness or Aberdeen.

[Stratos Ferric]

No, it has no statutory boundaries.

Source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverness

As a law student, I can tell you that there is a world of difference between what it is theoretically possible in the law and what is put into practice. English law is quite different from Scottish law.

Also, Yeti, have you ever even been to Inverness? Whether you regard it as a city or not is inconsequential I'm afraid. It's a question of fact, not individual perception. If I was to judge cities on a world level, I certainly would not regard Leeds as one, even though you've classified it so. A city is a cluster of the population in an important economic and social centre, which is what Inverness is.

You've clearly never been to Leeds, which would pass muster on any global register long before Inverness did. It's the UK's second biggest legal centre, and third or fourth largest financial centre; by population it's something like no.5 in England. If you dismiss Leeds then all of Scotland's cities bar Glasgow and Edinburgh disappear by any sensible logic.

The boundaries point is interesting. I understand your point now, there are boundaries for Inverness as an administrative unit, though not for the urban area called Inverness. I suspect that in practice this is little different to the likes of Leeds and Manchester, which now administer larger metropolitan areas than were formerly contained in the city boundaries, though in these letter cases the city boundaries are still recognised, even though they have no Governmental function.

Exactly, have it how you want! Much more interesting that way. As I say, read something on virtue theory

Seriously though, my point is that certain cathedral cities are not really cities as far as I am concerned - somewhere with 2000 people borders on a village. The fact is that the government definition will, most of the time, produce a realistic result; however, with certain cathedral cities brought in from ancient laws, a pinch of salt is needed.

By your logic Yeti then I can go and drive at 90mph and not have PC Plod stop me, because in my book I'm not speeding. There is a definition of a city; you, me, or anyone else may not like it, but the definition is there. There's no point discussing anything if we are going to constantly define terms to suit our argument, rather than the established orthodoxy.

The small cathedral cities may not match the might of Knaresboroughgateon, but in their time they were important centres, hence Wells and Ely for example. So far as I'm aware the only English city ever to lose its status was Rochester, and that was by virtue of a cock-up.

Anyway, I wish you'd make your mind up. At one moment you seem to be defending Harrogate's tweeness and 'Betty'sness', and at the next you're coveting city status.

[NorthernRab]

You've clearly never been to Leeds, which would pass muster on any global register long before Inverness did. It's the UK's second biggest legal centre, and third or fourth largest financial centre; by population it's something like no.5 in England. If you dismiss Leeds then all of Scotland's cities bar Glasgow and Edinburgh disappear by any sensible logic.

Hold on! Haha, I'm certainly not dismissing Leeds as a city, because without a shadow of a doubt it is one! I was illustrating the point that you cannot COMPARE to determine whether a settlement is a city or not, it's simply a question of fact. Yeti argued that it is population that makes a city a city, my point was that in comparing the population of Leeds to world cities such as Tokyo, New York, Beijing, London, Moscow, one could falsely assume that Leeds isn't a city because it doesn't compare. This is of course absolutely wrong, and my example was to illustrate how this form of thinking was wrong.

Both Leeds and Inverness are cities, that much we can agree on.

Sorry for the misunderstanding, I have been to Leeds, nice place

As a small aside, Inverness could soon have world heritage status, with Loch Ness being considered. (woop woop for tourism )

Edited December 29, 2008 by NorthernRab

[Yeti]

You've clearly never been to Leeds, which would pass muster on any global register long before Inverness did. It's the UK's second biggest legal centre, and third or fourth largest financial centre; by population it's something like no.5 in England. If you dismiss Leeds then all of Scotland's cities bar Glasgow and Edinburgh disappear by any sensible logic.

The boundaries point is interesting. I understand your point now, there are boundaries for Inverness as an administrative unit, though not for the urban area called Inverness. I suspect that in practice this is little different to the likes of Leeds and Manchester, which now administer larger metropolitan areas than were formerly contained in the city boundaries, though in these letter cases the city boundaries are still recognised, even though they have no Governmental function.

By your logic Yeti then I can go and drive at 90mph and not have PC Plod stop me, because in my book I'm not speeding. There is a definition of a city; you, me, or anyone else may not like it, but the definition is there. There's no point discussing anything if we are going to constantly define terms to suit our argument, rather than the established orthodoxy.

The small cathedral cities may not match the might of Knaresboroughgateon, but in their time they were important centres, hence Wells and Ely for example. So far as I'm aware the only English city ever to lose its status was Rochester, and that was by virtue of a cock-up.

Anyway, I wish you'd make your mind up. At one moment you seem to be defending Harrogate's tweeness and 'Betty'sness', and at the next you're coveting city status.

No SF, you don't understand and clearly have no idea about the kind of logic that I like to use here. Perhaps you should read something about it like I suggested before professing the ability to refute it?

And btw, I never said Harrogate was a city, whether with Knaresborough or not, and when I proposed its merging with Ripon it was one of those extraordinary things....

A joke.

P.S. I have been to Inverness, and it felt like a town. Nice place though.

Yeti argued that it is population that makes a city a city,

Did I? Thanks for telling me that!

Edited December 29, 2008 by Yeti

[Richard Taylor]

This still rumbling on???

[NorthernRab]

P.S. I have been to Inverness, and it felt like a town. Nice place though.

Did I? Thanks for telling me that!

How did it feel like a town? Did you rub the letters patent? No, you looked at how many people were round you and how busy the streets were. Either way, you've said it now.

Like I've said, it's inconsequential whether you believe it to be a city or not, and Leeds is not the coldest city (even in England).

Edited December 29, 2008 by NorthernRab

[Osbourne One-Nil]

I have been to Leeds, nice place

Are there two Leeds?

No SF, you don't understand and clearly have no idea about the kind of logic that I like to use here.

I've got to hand it to you, it takes a special sort of person to make Peter Mandelson look humble!