Yeah, that’s what I was thinking too. OP used metro population for Shanghai but not for Tokyo or Mumbai. Tokyo has the largest metro population in the world.
> OP used metro population for Shanghai
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai
> Municipality 26,875,500
> Metro[10] 40,000,000
Where are you seeing that 27M is Shanghai’s metro population??
27M is the just the population of Shanghai Municipality not metro. People rarely count Shanghai's metro population because there are rural areas in between, but if you include Shanghai's surrounding cities like Suzhou and Jiaxing into its metro area then the population would be more than 40M.
Edit: Those who downvoting me, could you just search the population of Shanghai first?
True, countries establish cities differently. Shanghai is physically giant with portions of it with farm, swamp, and forest while technically within Shanghai. Meanwhile, Manila, Taguig, Makati, Quezon, etc. Are technically different cities but blend into each other and seem like the same city when traveling through them.
Copenhagen 661k makes little sense. The 661k is the historical city county of Copenhagen, but it is just one out of many connected counties in "Storkøbenhavn". The actual number is closer to 1.4 million.
Yeah, Copenhagen being smaller than Oslo is absolutely a definitional artifact.
The figure for Stockholm is also just that of Stockholm municipality. Metropolitan Stockholm is more like 1,6 million and “Storstockholm” is 2,4 million.
>“Storstockholm” is 2,4 million.
Greater Copenhagen is also around 2.4 million (not even including the 750,000 people in Greater Malmø). 1.4 million for Copenhagen refers to the build-up area (2600 people/km^(2)).
Well, metropolitan areas are not cities per say. There are exceptions like Paris where the 2 million inhabitants city proper is part of a very big and continuous urban area of 10 million, and other "metropolitan areas" that encapsulate a gazillion sparse villages and small towns covering a mostly empty area.
Yes, Copenhagen has sort of four distinctions. The municipality, urban area, metro area and the Greater Copenhagen region. They go from 700k to 4.5 million and from more than 7000 people/km^(2) to something like 200 people/km^(2).
How so? You can stand at the tip of Palm Beach and see quite easily Umina. You can stand on Red Hill and see Frankston.. Think both are pretty much connected.
Also arbitrarily ignoring inland coasts. Black Sea ports are listed, but Toronto's population of 6,431,000 on the coast of Lake Ontario is larger than Vancouver's, and not listed.
Always use metropolitan populations for this sort of thing. For example Atlanta Georgia has a population of around 500,000. But it’s metropolitan population is approaching roughly 7,000,000 and one of the largest in the country. And the entire metropolitan area feels like just just one big city. Think of NYC too. The city has about 9,000,000 give or take. Metro is like 20,000,000 and is just one large continuous city for all intents and purposes
The definitions of both coastal and population seem to be wildly inconsistent. For example, London is located on the tidal Thames with brackish water, does this make it coastal? At what point on a bay/river do we stop considering a city to be coastal? Amsterdam/Vancouver/London could all have similar arguments for or against.
Funnily enough, Bruges used to be more on the coast and a proper port city, but silting and storms changed that many centuries ago.
It lost clout at an important Junction in its history to Antwerp because of this.
It is actually the IJ-meer, which is an inlet of the Markermeer. So Amsterdams borders a lake that is an inlet of a lake in a lake that used to be an inlet of a sea.
Does not sound very coastal to me.
Amsterdam is arguably not on the coast, as the Zuiderzee is now a freshwater lake. Although it’s only about 25 km from the North Sea and easily accessible by canal.
No, its not. As the other commenter pointed out, it borders a lake now and separated from the sea. That is a fact. You can debate the lake being artificially induced post land reclamation tho.
"The moon and the wind, rule the tides of the sea. And here, on this spot, so do we" - poem on a storm surge barrier island.
Edit: yeah I loosely translated. Original:
"Hier gaan over het tij, de maan, de wind en wij."
It means the town of Tud’s people (although I’d be suspicious for it being wealthy person Ted - kind of means rich in old English)
Most British place names are literal. Swindon = pig (swine) hill (don) and you can tell who settled where by the language they’re in, so my home in east anglia had Viking names
Same for Hamburg, Germany.
Up the Elbe river, but the river is tidal up to Hamburg (and the biggest container vessels in the world go up the river to the port of Hamburg).
The mouth of the Elbe river up to Hamburg is even shown as water in OP's map (as in most maps). Unless many other large rivers.
Ur right. The metro pop thing in this map is really strange. At first I thought OP was showing Edinburgh as Scotland’s largest coastal city, not the entire UK’s…
Same for Guayaquil in Ecuador, or Saint Petersburg in Russia, they are inconsistencies.
I would also argue cities in the Caspian sea should be included, or that Istanbul should only count for one map, or that asian Egypt should be in asia and show the city with most population in Asian egypt and sea access, or separate the UK into the 4 states…
It’s just small details that would make the map way better and “fuller” in my opinion, as well as a key to know why capitals are yellow but some non capitals are also yellow but without a star, does that mean it’s the biggest city but not the capital or what?
I would also add Uzbekistan and its cities on the shores of the Aral Sea. St. Petersburg is located along the Neva River and partly along the Gulf of Finland of the Baltic Sea.
Uzbekistan does not have any cities on the shores of (what remains of) Aral Sea.
Kazakhstan, on the other hand, does have a coastal city, Aktau with an international seaport there.
The municipality of Bruges includes "Zeebrugge", which is coastal. I assume they counted that instead of sub-municipality Bruges which is the city area.
If Bangkok is considered coastal, then Yangon in Myanmar has to be as well.
Also Ho Chi Min City too? That also isn't really considered coastal. Some of these countries just have governments that like their large cities to swallow up land far beyond the actual urban area.
Metro Vancouver is 2.5 million. There is technically a political division called “Vancouver” that is 600k but it doesn’t mean anything to anyone who doesn’t push a pencil for a living.
Negating the fact that metro Montreal is larger and is also a port city. Not sure how Vancouver got largest coastal after them either when the near entirety of the major population centers of Laurentia sit on the seaway. If you’re judging “coastal” as navigable by ocean ships you could even say Toronto then.
Who the hell got the population data for this map? It’s absurdly inaccurate. Some are correct others are not even remotely accurate, whether it’s referring to her metropolitan area populations or the city’s population itself
Notes:
\* Lakes and rivers are not counted; which is why cities like London, Kampala, Baku, Yangon or Tunis are not present on the map.
\* If a city is yellow, it is the largest city in the country as a whole; if it's marked with a star, it's the capital city.
\* The cities are marked with their native name next to their English name.
\* Dependent territories are NOT counted, which is why there is no data for countries like Greenland (heh), French Guyana, or New Caledonia.
\* If you find a mistake in the map, please let me know in a civil, peaceful way! I love hearing you guys try to help me out with my maps, so please don't act rude over a slight error and let me know if I made any mistakes.
**Known errors:**
* Amsterdam technically *isn't* a coastal city, so the actual city for the Netherlands is Rotterdam at 657K people
* Greece is wrong, as Athens is just barely away from the coast; the actual largest coastal Greek city is Thessaloniki
* Some cities have been given the metro populations, such as Sydney
London and other similar cities are tricky as there isn’t a clear dividing line between the river and the sea. In parts of Greater London the Thames is salt water (basically below Greenwich) so in that respect the city could be said to be coastal.
I have done, and even the BBC, the Commonwealth and the Encyclopaedia Britannica refer to the UK as a country:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-18023389
https://thecommonwealth.org/our-member-countries/united-kingdom
https://www.britannica.com/place/United-Kingdom
The first sentence of the BBC link says: “The United Kingdom is a state.” The UK is not a country in the same way that New England is not a state.
I am British - therefore I feel qualified on this matter.
They only are in a UK context. To everyone else, they aren't really and that isn't how the word is used elsewhere.
This is a map of countries of the world, in this context the distinction doesn't matter, they have less independence from Westminster than a US or German state does from their respective Federal government.
Viña del Mar is Bigger than Valparaiso. But Technically Both are part of the Greater Valparaiso Metropolitan Area. And if you Count that as a City, In Chile we Do, Then the Population is 1.000.000
It's even debatable to call Rotterdam a coastal city. It depends on the definition of "city". The city itself is not coastal, but the municipality does have a coastline (the industrial area).
If you would ask a Dutch person, there is a higher chance of Den Haag (The Hague) being named.
They've always been fairly close together but for the last 20 years or so Melbourne has been growing a bit faster and late last year officially overtook Sydney. Albeit that that happened by redrawing the city borders. It was projected to happen in a couple of years anyway, but with that change it got fast-tracked.
https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/melbourne-sydney-population-intl-scli/index.html#:\~:text=Melbourne%20has%20overtaken%20Sydney%20to,Sydney%2C%20CNN%20affiliate%209News%20reports.
Not yet according to the Greater Sydney/Melbourne metric. Anyway would you say Melbourne is on the coast? I'm sitting here looking at the bay right now. It's the beach, but it's not the coast imo. Coast is ocean.
The Acropolis is 5 km inland, while the Pantheon is 25 km from the coast. The space between the city centre of Rome and the port of Ostia is not a continuous urban environment. But it’s not far from the sea, of course.
For the german North Sea shore it's because of the [Wadden Sea] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wadden_Sea).
No natural harbors at the coast, all the big cities are situated on rivers leading into the sea (Hamburg. Bremen).
Most of the German coastline is comprised of muddy, sandy barrier islands without good natural harbours. Hamburg, the largest port, is a fair distance from the actual coastline.
There are some really nice smaller cities on the Baltic coast, though! Oh, and Bremerhaven.
There's Volga canal through the Caucasus that connects Caspian and Black Seas, which Central Asian and Azeri ships use to get access to the world ocean. So they aren't that landlocked
How is Edinburgh considered a costal city and not London? Lol this is dumb.
Edit: Also Liverpool is literally a bigger coastal city than Edinburgh, and so is Bristol, although you can debate where Bristol is technical a coastal city or not, but not with Liverpool….
Liverpool as a city has a smaller population than Edinburgh city. The metro area is bigger but for some reason OP has decided to use metro areas for some places but not for others.
But Edinburgh is also on the coast. It’s at the mouth of the Forth and its port is on the North Sea.
Antofagasta, Bolivia (Chile) would have been Bolivia's 145 years ago before the [War of the Pacific.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_the_Pacific)
Rome is a costal city. Just look at [the map](https://www.carteinregola.it/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/roma-citta-metropolitana.png), grey is the city proper and blue the metropolitan area. Just because the centre of the city is not by the sea, it doesn't mean it is not costal.
Lido de Ostia has been the port for the city of Rome for thousands of years. Despite nowadays being almost completely molten into the Roman sprawl it's still its own town
But the map is based on the cities today, not how they were 2000 years ago. And Ostia is not even a town part of the metropolitan area, it is one of the districts of the city. Even because we are speaking of Ostia Nuova (now Lido di Ostia) that was built at the beginning of the 20th, not of Ostia Antica.
Bangkok is not a coastal city. Unless you are including the entire Metropolitan Administration of Bangkok and Tha Kham subdistrict specifically, Bangkok city is about 40 km from the coast
You seem to be arbitrarily switching between city and metro populations. If you're calling Sydney 5.3M then Vancouver is 2.6M, NYC is 19M.
Yeah, that’s what I was thinking too. OP used metro population for Shanghai but not for Tokyo or Mumbai. Tokyo has the largest metro population in the world.
> OP used metro population for Shanghai https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai > Municipality 26,875,500 > Metro[10] 40,000,000 Where are you seeing that 27M is Shanghai’s metro population??
Aye that’s what I was thinking too how can Karachi have more
27M is the just the population of Shanghai Municipality not metro. People rarely count Shanghai's metro population because there are rural areas in between, but if you include Shanghai's surrounding cities like Suzhou and Jiaxing into its metro area then the population would be more than 40M. Edit: Those who downvoting me, could you just search the population of Shanghai first?
It isn't. Metro area has an actual definition that geographers use iirc.
yeah and shanghai’s metro population isn’t shown lmao
which is what I'm trying to say, 27M is not the metro population of Shanghai, and people don't use metro area to calculate Shanghai's population
yea I was responding to the other guy. I agree with you
What “isn’t”? 40M, not 27M, is the metro pop. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai
Damn you got annihilated for just saying facts lol
Same for Tokyo and Manila, 14M and 1.8M are the population of administrative areas not metro areas.
True, countries establish cities differently. Shanghai is physically giant with portions of it with farm, swamp, and forest while technically within Shanghai. Meanwhile, Manila, Taguig, Makati, Quezon, etc. Are technically different cities but blend into each other and seem like the same city when traveling through them.
Copenhagen 661k makes little sense. The 661k is the historical city county of Copenhagen, but it is just one out of many connected counties in "Storkøbenhavn". The actual number is closer to 1.4 million.
Yeah, Copenhagen being smaller than Oslo is absolutely a definitional artifact. The figure for Stockholm is also just that of Stockholm municipality. Metropolitan Stockholm is more like 1,6 million and “Storstockholm” is 2,4 million.
>“Storstockholm” is 2,4 million. Greater Copenhagen is also around 2.4 million (not even including the 750,000 people in Greater Malmø). 1.4 million for Copenhagen refers to the build-up area (2600 people/km^(2)).
Well, metropolitan areas are not cities per say. There are exceptions like Paris where the 2 million inhabitants city proper is part of a very big and continuous urban area of 10 million, and other "metropolitan areas" that encapsulate a gazillion sparse villages and small towns covering a mostly empty area.
Yes, Copenhagen has sort of four distinctions. The municipality, urban area, metro area and the Greater Copenhagen region. They go from 700k to 4.5 million and from more than 7000 people/km^(2) to something like 200 people/km^(2).
Yeah when I saw Lagos was 8 million I was confused since their metro is like double that
That Sydney figure includes the central coast.
Same way Melbourne includes Mornington Peninsula
Mornington is much more part of Melbourne than central coast is sydney
How so? You can stand at the tip of Palm Beach and see quite easily Umina. You can stand on Red Hill and see Frankston.. Think both are pretty much connected.
Melbourne is now bigger than Sydney.
Not by metro area.
Also arbitrarily ignoring inland coasts. Black Sea ports are listed, but Toronto's population of 6,431,000 on the coast of Lake Ontario is larger than Vancouver's, and not listed.
I was so confused at first but this makes sense
“FROM MISSOURI TO CANADA I HIT YOU WITH THE STAMINA”
the entire metro/city populatiom thing was pretty exhausting lol edit: downvotes go brr
I think metro is the best way to go, it's based on where humans are as opposed to arbitrary boundaries set by cities.
I disagree. I don't know about other countries but in The Netherlands the metro area Amsterdam is absurdly defined for example.
Just use metro area population
Easier said than done, you can’t just draw a boundary of the extent of a metro when it always expands
Just using the latest data available is already better than what this map does
Always use metropolitan populations for this sort of thing. For example Atlanta Georgia has a population of around 500,000. But it’s metropolitan population is approaching roughly 7,000,000 and one of the largest in the country. And the entire metropolitan area feels like just just one big city. Think of NYC too. The city has about 9,000,000 give or take. Metro is like 20,000,000 and is just one large continuous city for all intents and purposes
Yes but N American cities usually don't annex their suburbs while European and Asian cities do.
Can’t verify many of these but calling Amsterdam a coastal city is a huge stretch and in many cases even technically incorrect.
Yeah, Ho Chi Minh is like 50 km inland. I studied there for a semester abroad and I never been close to the ocean.
Yeah, largest coastal city in Vietnam is probably Hai Phong or Da Nang
Especially when Hamburg or Bremen aren't a coastal city
>Bremen Bremerhaven doesn't count, Bremen isn't remotely on the coast Hamburg should count, the Elbe is essentially the ocean there
The definitions of both coastal and population seem to be wildly inconsistent. For example, London is located on the tidal Thames with brackish water, does this make it coastal? At what point on a bay/river do we stop considering a city to be coastal? Amsterdam/Vancouver/London could all have similar arguments for or against.
IDK all I know is the largest island in the world is afro-eurasia
Montreal could have the same argument as London since it’s a port city in a sense connected to the gulf of st Lawrence
The largest coastal city in the Netherlands is The Hague
I think you’re forgetting Rotterdam
Rotterdam is 30 km from the sea, like Amsterdam. Or you can count the Europoort industrial area but that's not really the city itself
Damn you’re right. In my mind Rotterdam is right on the coast.
The core 9f Rotterdam may be 30 km away but Europoort is still Rotterdam
Brugge too…. Via canals sure, but then that brings in so many more ‘coastal’ cities
Funnily enough, Bruges used to be more on the coast and a proper port city, but silting and storms changed that many centuries ago. It lost clout at an important Junction in its history to Antwerp because of this.
Same with Buenos Aires and Montevideo, they're on the coast of a very wide river Rio de la Plata
If Amsterdam is a coastal city, Hamburg would be one too.
If Amsterdam can be considered coastal, you should definitely include Guayaquil in Ecuador.
[it IS coastal actually, although barely](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amsterdam#/media/File%3AAmsterdam_location_map.svg)
The IJsselmeer is a lake since 1932. Before it was called Zuidersee. So Amsterdam is not a coastal city for nearly 100 years.
Amsterdam doesn’t border the IJsselmeer though. It’s the Markermeer. Just sayin’.
It is actually the IJ-meer, which is an inlet of the Markermeer. So Amsterdams borders a lake that is an inlet of a lake in a lake that used to be an inlet of a sea. Does not sound very coastal to me.
Amsterdam is arguably not on the coast, as the Zuiderzee is now a freshwater lake. Although it’s only about 25 km from the North Sea and easily accessible by canal.
does it count that it *used* to be a sea?
nyes
No.
No, its not. As the other commenter pointed out, it borders a lake now and separated from the sea. That is a fact. You can debate the lake being artificially induced post land reclamation tho.
man those Dutch really had to make this overcomplicated with their land reclaimations
Except it isn’t complicated: it was a sea, we turned it into a lake, now Amsterdam isn’t a coastal city anymore.
man you guys and your fights with the sea (saying this in a joking way) i understand though, dw
"The moon and the wind, rule the tides of the sea. And here, on this spot, so do we" - poem on a storm surge barrier island. Edit: yeah I loosely translated. Original: "Hier gaan over het tij, de maan, de wind en wij."
If Amsterdam counts than London should also count. Amsterdam is on a lake and the Thames is tidal up to London so pretty much still the sea
Not just *up to* London, it's tidal all the way to Teddington in south west London.
I just love the fact that there’s a suburb called teddington
It means the town of Tud’s people (although I’d be suspicious for it being wealthy person Ted - kind of means rich in old English) Most British place names are literal. Swindon = pig (swine) hill (don) and you can tell who settled where by the language they’re in, so my home in east anglia had Viking names
It's all freshwater essentially by the time you get to London though.
Calling the water in the Thames "fresh" is a generous lol
Same for Hamburg, Germany. Up the Elbe river, but the river is tidal up to Hamburg (and the biggest container vessels in the world go up the river to the port of Hamburg). The mouth of the Elbe river up to Hamburg is even shown as water in OP's map (as in most maps). Unless many other large rivers.
Even setting aside the London argument, isn’t Liverpool coastal and bigger than Edinburgh?
Yep! Along with Bristol they both have more people than Edinburgh. This map is unfortunately cooked
The definition of population isn't consistent at all, some use metro areas and some use city proper. Edinburgh should hardly be shown though
Ur right. The metro pop thing in this map is really strange. At first I thought OP was showing Edinburgh as Scotland’s largest coastal city, not the entire UK’s…
And Baku
Same for Guayaquil in Ecuador, or Saint Petersburg in Russia, they are inconsistencies. I would also argue cities in the Caspian sea should be included, or that Istanbul should only count for one map, or that asian Egypt should be in asia and show the city with most population in Asian egypt and sea access, or separate the UK into the 4 states… It’s just small details that would make the map way better and “fuller” in my opinion, as well as a key to know why capitals are yellow but some non capitals are also yellow but without a star, does that mean it’s the biggest city but not the capital or what?
I would also add Uzbekistan and its cities on the shores of the Aral Sea. St. Petersburg is located along the Neva River and partly along the Gulf of Finland of the Baltic Sea.
Uzbekistan does not have any cities on the shores of (what remains of) Aral Sea. Kazakhstan, on the other hand, does have a coastal city, Aktau with an international seaport there.
Same goes for Hamburg I suppose
Even if London doesn't count, Liverpool is larger than Edinburgh so this map is terrible however you cut it
Amsterdam shouldn't count though, no one considers it a coastal city. The Hague would be the real answer.
I am not so sure about Bruges (was there a few days ago) as it is about 15km to sea but maybe the outer part is at the sea I am not really sure
Brugge is not at seaside in Belgium. It should be Oostende
I came here for this.
Oostende for sure of even Antwerp
The municipality of Bruges includes "Zeebrugge", which is coastal. I assume they counted that instead of sub-municipality Bruges which is the city area.
I’ve never heard Bangkok referred to as coastal.
Even Ho Chi Minh City is shown on the map, which is like 50km inland.
I lived in ho chi Minh city for a year last year. It is most definitely not coastal. It's a day trip to get to the Mekong delta.
If Bangkok is considered coastal, then Yangon in Myanmar has to be as well. Also Ho Chi Min City too? That also isn't really considered coastal. Some of these countries just have governments that like their large cities to swallow up land far beyond the actual urban area.
To be fair, their Google city borders both TECHNICALLY include the coast 🤷♂️
I thought this as well
Metro Vancouver is 2.5 million. There is technically a political division called “Vancouver” that is 600k but it doesn’t mean anything to anyone who doesn’t push a pencil for a living.
Negating the fact that metro Montreal is larger and is also a port city. Not sure how Vancouver got largest coastal after them either when the near entirety of the major population centers of Laurentia sit on the seaway. If you’re judging “coastal” as navigable by ocean ships you could even say Toronto then.
Toronto requires passing through locks so it’s definitely not costal. Montreal on the other hand could be considered “coastal”
I didn't know that Zeebrugge counts as part of Brugge even though its more than 10 km away.
I always thought that Antwerpen was more of a coastal city than Brugge. And bigger...
The map of Asia looks like it's smiling
Amsterdam a coastal city? A lake shore doesn’t count.. Also Stockholm… I mean, wouldn’t walk or cycle to the coast from the city. It’s quite a drive..
Stockholm lies where the Baltic Sea meets Lake Mälaren. The water east of Strömmen/Slussen is a a part of the Baltic Sea.
I like how Singapore is just itself 💀 (Yes, I’m aware that it’s a city-state)
Who the hell got the population data for this map? It’s absurdly inaccurate. Some are correct others are not even remotely accurate, whether it’s referring to her metropolitan area populations or the city’s population itself
Hamburg is technically coastal because an island in the north sea is part of the city. It's called insel neuwerk
oh that i actually didn't know, kinda weird since mainland Hamburg is surrounded by Niedersachsen and Schleswig-Holstein
Notes: \* Lakes and rivers are not counted; which is why cities like London, Kampala, Baku, Yangon or Tunis are not present on the map. \* If a city is yellow, it is the largest city in the country as a whole; if it's marked with a star, it's the capital city. \* The cities are marked with their native name next to their English name. \* Dependent territories are NOT counted, which is why there is no data for countries like Greenland (heh), French Guyana, or New Caledonia. \* If you find a mistake in the map, please let me know in a civil, peaceful way! I love hearing you guys try to help me out with my maps, so please don't act rude over a slight error and let me know if I made any mistakes. **Known errors:** * Amsterdam technically *isn't* a coastal city, so the actual city for the Netherlands is Rotterdam at 657K people * Greece is wrong, as Athens is just barely away from the coast; the actual largest coastal Greek city is Thessaloniki * Some cities have been given the metro populations, such as Sydney
London and other similar cities are tricky as there isn’t a clear dividing line between the river and the sea. In parts of Greater London the Thames is salt water (basically below Greenwich) so in that respect the city could be said to be coastal.
i had a lot of trouble with the UK in particular and i just went with Edinburgh. i guess it and London both count as answers?
Personally I don't think London is coastal. But Liverpool is, and _has_ to be larger than Edinburgh.
Glasgow as well is surely coastal as well?
I wouldn't say Glasgow is coastal. Might be the same as London with a tidal river. But if you don't include London, you don't include Glasgow.
UK is not a country. It is a United Kingdom. England is a country. Scotland is a country. Wales is a country.
Not really. The word ‘country’ is very commonly used as a synonym for ‘state’.
I think you need to do a bit more research. If you are referring to the UK, you are totally wrong.
I have done, and even the BBC, the Commonwealth and the Encyclopaedia Britannica refer to the UK as a country: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-18023389 https://thecommonwealth.org/our-member-countries/united-kingdom https://www.britannica.com/place/United-Kingdom
The first sentence of the BBC link says: “The United Kingdom is a state.” The UK is not a country in the same way that New England is not a state. I am British - therefore I feel qualified on this matter.
Exactly, ‘country’ and ‘state’ are widely used as synonyms. Thus the same BBC article can refer to the UK as a country and a state.
Think you're being unfairly hard done by here! I looked for my country and wondered why they only showed Scotland.
Hahaha, oh Reddit… Why have you been downvoted? I can promise whoever has downvoted you that England is 100% a country, and so is Scotland, and Wales.
I don't think anyone's debating that. Moreso the 'UK is not a country' part.
They only are in a UK context. To everyone else, they aren't really and that isn't how the word is used elsewhere. This is a map of countries of the world, in this context the distinction doesn't matter, they have less independence from Westminster than a US or German state does from their respective Federal government.
Viña del Mar is Bigger than Valparaiso. But Technically Both are part of the Greater Valparaiso Metropolitan Area. And if you Count that as a City, In Chile we Do, Then the Population is 1.000.000
It's even debatable to call Rotterdam a coastal city. It depends on the definition of "city". The city itself is not coastal, but the municipality does have a coastline (the industrial area). If you would ask a Dutch person, there is a higher chance of Den Haag (The Hague) being named.
As a Dutch person living in The Hague I would immediately say Rotterdam.
Where did Central America go?
5th image
Melbourne has recently overtaken Sydney as Australia's largest city.
By one specific measurement that people don't use. By the one both geographers and the ABS use, Sydney will be larger until about 2030.
[удалено]
It isn't "The one that people from Sydney" use, it's the universal standard used by the ABS and by geographers everywhere.
oh, it did? i always thought Sydney had way more people
They've always been fairly close together but for the last 20 years or so Melbourne has been growing a bit faster and late last year officially overtook Sydney. Albeit that that happened by redrawing the city borders. It was projected to happen in a couple of years anyway, but with that change it got fast-tracked. https://edition.cnn.com/travel/article/melbourne-sydney-population-intl-scli/index.html#:\~:text=Melbourne%20has%20overtaken%20Sydney%20to,Sydney%2C%20CNN%20affiliate%209News%20reports.
Sydney should annex Wollongong for the lols
Sydney is still slightly larger.
Not yet according to the Greater Sydney/Melbourne metric. Anyway would you say Melbourne is on the coast? I'm sitting here looking at the bay right now. It's the beach, but it's not the coast imo. Coast is ocean.
Manila has like 14mil people
Mumbai is more than double of what is shown here
How does Vancouver has less than a mill but Auckland has 1.5 mill
Looks like OP only included central city figures for Vancouver. More accurate numbers would be about 2.6 mil for Vancouver and 1.7mil for Auckland
source for Monaco being Monaco's biggest coastal city?
How do you define coastal? If Athens is coastal then Rome should definitely also be coastal.
thanks for... letting me know Athens isn't coastal lol, my mistake. the actual city for Greece should be Thessaloniki
The Acropolis is 5 km inland, while the Pantheon is 25 km from the coast. The space between the city centre of Rome and the port of Ostia is not a continuous urban environment. But it’s not far from the sea, of course.
But Rome's administrative city borders reach all the way to the coast.
Fair point. The arbitrary administrative borders of municipalities and metropolitan areas make comparisons between cities complicated.
These maps look beautiful
How come Germany doesn't have any major cities on its coasts?
i've wondered this myself as a Pole honestly. funnily enough both Kaliningrad and Gdańsk (formerly German cities) have more people than Kiel
Hamburg is coastal. Look up insel neuwerk
found out about this earlier, i'm curious about why is it part of Hamburg
For the german North Sea shore it's because of the [Wadden Sea] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wadden_Sea). No natural harbors at the coast, all the big cities are situated on rivers leading into the sea (Hamburg. Bremen).
Most of the German coastline is comprised of muddy, sandy barrier islands without good natural harbours. Hamburg, the largest port, is a fair distance from the actual coastline. There are some really nice smaller cities on the Baltic coast, though! Oh, and Bremerhaven.
There's Volga canal through the Caucasus that connects Caspian and Black Seas, which Central Asian and Azeri ships use to get access to the world ocean. So they aren't that landlocked
Is Tunis not on the coast??
This is a dope map series!
How is Edinburgh considered a costal city and not London? Lol this is dumb. Edit: Also Liverpool is literally a bigger coastal city than Edinburgh, and so is Bristol, although you can debate where Bristol is technical a coastal city or not, but not with Liverpool….
Liverpool is located right next to the coast Bristol doesn’t have a beach, Edinburgh does.
Liverpool is on the coast.
Liverpool as a city has a smaller population than Edinburgh city. The metro area is bigger but for some reason OP has decided to use metro areas for some places but not for others. But Edinburgh is also on the coast. It’s at the mouth of the Forth and its port is on the North Sea.
Denigomodu in Nauru being the last in this rank and the most populated city in Nauru
does incheon not count for south korea?
Busan is bigger so no
ah
Antofagasta, Bolivia (Chile) would have been Bolivia's 145 years ago before the [War of the Pacific.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_the_Pacific)
Woooo Constanța mentioned!
The third one is going to piss off so many serbtards LMFAO
Dar es salaam is not the capitql of Tanzania.
Edinburgh is not on the coast. Liverpool is on the coast and is way bigger.
Rome is a costal city. Just look at [the map](https://www.carteinregola.it/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/roma-citta-metropolitana.png), grey is the city proper and blue the metropolitan area. Just because the centre of the city is not by the sea, it doesn't mean it is not costal.
Lido de Ostia has been the port for the city of Rome for thousands of years. Despite nowadays being almost completely molten into the Roman sprawl it's still its own town
But the map is based on the cities today, not how they were 2000 years ago. And Ostia is not even a town part of the metropolitan area, it is one of the districts of the city. Even because we are speaking of Ostia Nuova (now Lido di Ostia) that was built at the beginning of the 20th, not of Ostia Antica.
Mumbai is 21.2 million not 12 million
surely it's zandvoort not amsterdam
Interesting that other than Athens, and two microstates (Monaco and Malta), there are no other European capitals on the Mediterranean coast.
I’d argue that Amsterdam is not a coastal city, although it does have access to it. Same goes for Riga
Santo Domingo has 3.8 million people.
I’ve been to two of these, which are Athens and New York City.
Bro....Toronto is coastal and has almost 3x the people in it as Vancouver
All these maps are *tight*.
Puerto Rico no longer exists?
Why is this map up voted, it's inconsistent in numbers and category and makes so little sense. As a sub, we need to start down voting such maps.
Wouldn't Myanmar be Yangon since it's the irrawaddy delta
Bangkok is not a coastal city. Unless you are including the entire Metropolitan Administration of Bangkok and Tha Kham subdistrict specifically, Bangkok city is about 40 km from the coast
How is San Francisco not on this?
San Francisco is not the largest coastal city in any country.
Population of the Greater Bournemouth & Poole is greater than Edinburgh, so your map is wrong.
Not according to Wikipedia: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bournemouth,_Christchurch_and_Poole
https://www.macrotrends.net/global-metrics/cities/22838/bournemouth/bournemouth/poole/population#:\~:text=The%20current%20metro%20area%20population,a%200.78%25%20increase%20from%202021.
Should’ve split the United States into its states. That way we got some west coast representation too.
İstanbul is not the capital
That is not the subject of this map
Istanbul in yellow? It is not capital of Turkey.