Talk:Belgrade

I'm wondering about the pronunciation? The article cites a source showing three pronunciations but then consigns all but "Bel-grade" to a footnote, but I swear growing up in the US I always heard it "Bel-grahd" until a few years ago, and frankly, I think the growing preponderance of "Bel-grade" might be a bit of "citogenesis." I think all three ought to be in the header, rather than consigned to a footnote? Twin Bird (talk) 12:14, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

It looks much different now. There are many new buildings. 46.16.111.216 (talk) 14:37, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

I restored the previous panoramic picture:

• the latest image is not a photograph at all; it is a computer-generated rendering of what the area is expected to look like in XY years when completed. It includes non-existent buildings and bridges.
• I also skipped the previous photo because it is already included in the article.
• Belgrade Waterfront is far from the most prominent part of Belgrade. Almost universally despised, it stands as a blemish on the city's urban landscape in every sense. Built on blood money linked to crime, theft, money laundering, prostitution, narcotics, human trafficking, and arms smuggling, it remains a symbol of corruption.

PajaBG (talk) 22:08, 21 March 2025 (UTC)

I agree with Belgrade Waterfront picture. It's not the most popular nor the most prominent part of Belgrade which has a lot to offer besides the urbanistic-futuristic buildings on waterfront. Also panorama view is not visible as a shortcut of Belgrade. SatelliteChange (talk) 03:25, 23 March 2025 (UTC)

I agree with PajaBG about image choice. File:Panorama Belgrad.jpg is an optimal first image.—Alalch E. 23:24, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

I am going to treat any addition of a Belgrade Waterfront image as the first image as WP:PROMO. Change my mind. —Alalch E. 23:26, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

These poor city articles..... accessibility scrolling nightmare.... not sure why people think 15 images/files in a lead for 4 paragraphs seems reasonable. Mass image spam in my opinion... that is the norm for these poor city articles. Probably our worst series of articles for image spam related to accessibility.... as we know most only scroll a few times and move on to something else. Moxy🍁 23:31, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

Same here, the panorama image is more likely to be recognised as Belgrade rather than a project that is recent enough to not ring any bells. Jurta ^talk/_he/they 23:43, 25 March 2025 (UTC)

@SatelliteChange and Whatismyname2000: I've protected the article for a second time. Please discuss here (using a request for comment if necessary) instead of edit-warring. Further disruption may result in blocks.

Thank you, Sdrqaz (talk) 16:45, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure what is being measured area-wise in the infobox. "Capital City" should be the area and population for the territory under jurisdiction of the city. So, I have no idea what "Capital city" is measuring, what the 140 square miles represent. "Urban" I imagine is probably like it's used on other city articles to describe the spatial spread of the city regardless of administrative boundaries. Criticalthinker (talk) 23:21, 7 June 2025 (UTC)

I'm eventually going to correc this whole thing. There are only two measurements that I can find actual sources for, and that's the city (the entire administrative area), and the urban expanse. There is no "metro" number, here since the metro is the city administrative area. Criticalthinker (talk) 20:59, 14 June 2025 (UTC)

There are three types of statistical or administrative subdivisions in regards to Belgrade.

1. Settlements

These are statistical-only constructs that are used for census purposes only. There are two types of settlement: urban (cities and towns) and rural (basically villages).

Belgrade settlement (naselje Beograd) is designated as urban settlement and it encompassed what was the urban area of Belgrade, Belgrade in stricto senso, but not anymore, and I explain you why. Scope of the settlement is designated internally by the Statistical Institute of Serbia and they from time to time (from census to census) used to change the "borders" of the settlement i.e. settlement of Belgrade itself grew over time: they enlarged it for 1961, 1981, and 1991 censuses, respectively. Problem is that, for some unknown reasons (except bureaucratic laziness) since 1991 census they didn't change the scope of the settlement, despite the fact that urban area of Belgrade has since spilled over the "borders" of 1991-designated settlement of Belgrade. Now there are three urban settlements that are adjacent to the Belgrade settlement and form contiguous urban area: Borča, Surčin, and Kaluđerica (with ~100,000 inhabitants in total). There's no empty spaces between Belgrade settlement and these settlements whatsoever and they combined form what is the urban area of Belgrade nowadays. Therefore in order to have accurate facts listed in the infobox and article in general, figures of these three settlements should be added to the figure of settlement of Belgrade itself with note that this is urban area of Belgrade as of 2022 census, and that's what I did with my recent edits.

2. Municipalities

Municipalities (opštine) are administrative subdivisions of the City of Belgrade. There are two types of municipalities in the City of Belgrade: urban and suburban, in regards where most population of respective municipality live (in urban or rural/suburban settlements). The most of urban municipalities are in their entirety to be found within urban area of Belgrade (Stari Grad, Vračar, Savski Venac, New Belgrade, Zvezdara, and Rakovica). Confusion happens with those urban municipalities (Palilula, Zemun, Čukarica, Surčin) where parts (minor parts but still) of their population within their administrative limits live in rural settlements i.e. villages. It often happens when measuring urban population of Belgrade, that people usually just add up figures of all the urban municipalities and calculate the total sum to provide the figure for urban population of Belgrade, which is wrong because, as I explained, many of those urban municipalities encompass rural areas outside the actual urban area of Belgrade. To give you example: Palilula is urban municipality but it encompasses villages such as Besni Fok which is some 25 to 20 km away from the nearest part of urban area of Belgrade. Same with Voždovac, which is another urban municipality. Other usual misinterpretation of the statistical data is when people add figures of all the urban settlements of the City of Belgrade as a whole, including urban settlements of suburban municipalities which are not a part of urban area of Belgrade whatsoever. That was the case before my recent edits. Example: Lazarevac is main urban settlement of Lazarevac municipality but is located some 40km of the nearest outskirts of the urban area of Belgrade.

3. City

City of Belgrade is administrative division of Serbia, but only small part of its area is urban, as administrative City of Belgrade encompasses within its limits some relatively far-flung towns (such as Obrenovac, Mladenovac, Lazarevac) and vilagges, but also large swaths of uninhabited areas (such as forests, pastures, etc.). Thus, City of Belgrade should be and is generally considered some rough equivalent of the metro area since all the area is gravitating towards Belgrade proper itself, transportations system is unified and covering all of the administrative area of City of Belgrade, etc. Although some areas outside the administrative limits of City of Belgrade should be included too (such as municipalities of Stara Pazova and Pećinci, as well as the City of Pančevo), but criteria for their inclusion is rather voluntary, generally metro area is confined on the administrative area of the City of Belgrade.

Regards, Klačko (talk) 08:29, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

As for area, that figure of 150 sq mi is for the settlement of Belgrade. Clearly the figure for "Urban" (1,035 km2 or 400 sq mi) is misinterpreted with the total area of urban municipalities (minus Surčin urban municipality), but it is not the actual area of the contiguous urban area of Belgrade itself. As I wrote above, some urban municipalities are consisted mostly of rural areas (70-80% in case of urban municipality of Palilula, something like 50-60% for Voždovac urban municipality). Clearly that data should be corrected. Klačko (talk) 08:44, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

Surface of urban area of Belgrade (Belgrade proper+Borča, Kaluđerica, and Surčin) is 506,1 sq km. Klačko (talk) 09:25, 27 June 2025 (UTC)

There is no source for the figures of 389.12 km2 and 506.14 km2; the link provided in the citation is dead.

As for the population, I do think I understand, now, though I think as it concerns the "urban" area figure, this is probably original research. Though, it would make logical sense if we have spatial maps to confirm that the "urban" areas in the various adjacent municipalities are themselves adjacent with Belgrade settlement and the only settlements within these municipalities. Theoretically, even within the inner municipalities you could have non-contiguous settlements whose population would be considered "urban" without some of them abutting Belgrade settlement. Maybe that's not the case, but we need something confirm that since apparently, none of the sources give specifically give us a population figure for the Belgrade urban agglomeration/urban area (Belgrade settlement + adjacent/contiguous settlements). Criticalthinker (talk) 05:52, 29 June 2025 (UTC)

Comment: @Criticalthinker: Hi. This edit literally wiped half of infobox. Can you revert it? 188.120.118.136 (talk) 02:55, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

Huh? Why are you mentioning me? What do I have to do with this? What are you talking about? Criticalthinker (talk) 04:18, 25 July 2025 (UTC)

The redirect Belgrado has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 13 § Belgrado until a consensus is reached. Thepharoah17 (talk) 10:42, 15 October 2025 (UTC)