Talk:Durban
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Please remove the crest and the motto - they were phased out after 1994 and are no longer applicable. The only official symbol for Durban is the Dome symbol. Angela Spencer eThekwini Webmaster
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Durban article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This  level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small}
SA's biggest cities
If Cape Town is listed as having 2.9m people, and Durban at 2.7m, how does that make Durbs the second-biggest? :) Dewet 14:22, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- It appears that both Soweto and Johannesburg each have a smaller official population than Durban due to how municipal borders are drawn. See de:Liste der Städte in Südafrika for more information. – Wikipeditor 01:02, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
- At the top of that page it says "Die größten Agglomerationen in Südafrika sind Johannesburg mit einer Einwohnerzahl von 6.820.713, Kapstadt mit einer Bevölkerung von 4.302.014 und Durban mit einer Einwohnerzahl von 4.053.689." Presumably that would make Cape Town actually slightly larger?
- Largest South African Metropolitan Areas has different statistics, but Cape Town still comes out ahead. Based on this evidence, I'm going to be bold and remove the claim for Durban. - htonl 15:37, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
- OK, I'll accept that perhaps at some time Durban did overtake Cape Town. However, it seems clear that Cape Town is now larger, and I've edited to indicate that, rather than removing the claim entirely. - htonl 15:42, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
Pse explain why it is then stated:
'Cape Town is the second most populous city in South Africa ..... [...] population 2,893,251
Durban (Zulu: eThekwini) is the third most populous city in South Africa [....] the city has a population of almost 3.5 million'
- The Cape Town figure you're referring to is the 2001 Census result. The result from the 2007 community survey shows that Cape Town, now with 3,497,097 inhabitants, has passed Durban nowadays. You'll find the results from the community survey here (pdf-file). --Pjred (talk) 07:39, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
I've moved the part about Durban being the third most populous city to the start (it used to follow "DBN is largest city in KZN"). If I am not mistaken, Durban has historically been the third largest city in SA. Granted, and now the lead section goes like that; but "third largest" means metro size and not solely Durban, so isn't it sort of misleading to speak of Durban as the third largest? Or is that the custom when talking about chief cities and so on in geography articles? Thanks! GeoffreyA (talk) 08:56, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
Demographics
The statement that Durban "has the most Indians of any city outside India" was not accurate. For example, the 2011 UK census data shows that London has 432k ethnic Indian residents. If this is broadened to include the pre-independence borders for India then the total is 655k See https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160107125615/http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/census/2011-census/key-statistics-and-quick-statistics-for-local-authorities-in-the-united-kingdom---part-1/rft-ks201uk.xls and https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20160107125615/http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/publications/re-reference-tables.html?edition=tcm%3A77-327143
Indians
This is vague: The large number of Indians were brought to work on the plantations and as a result it has the largest Indian population outside of India. Do you mean the largest Indian population outside of India, for a city? But in any case isn't the whole project of linking South African 'Indians' with India is a little problematic: after many generations, the link is a bit tenuous - when do they become South Africans? Consider how odd the sentence would sound if it were changed to the following: Durban has the largest English population outside of England. Psylocybha 01:43, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
Merged text from Freeways of Durban
I merged the data from Freeways of Durban as the final result from Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Freeways_of_Durban. --Deathphoenix 05:20, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I have removed the reference to DURBAN DEEP in relation to the port. DURBAN DEEP is a gold mine in Gauteng, it had nothing to do with Durban. The reference to the Elton John song DURBAN DEEP has nothing to do with Container Ports.. rather it refers to Gold Mines. there are no gold mines in durban.. jimmyjazz 26 Oct 2005.. 20h00 GMT
Zulu name
eThekwini is the locative of iTheku. itheku means lagoon or harbour, iTheku means Durban, ethekwini means in/at/to/from the lagoon, and eThekwini means in/at/to/from Durban. Joziboy 14 March 2006, 21:15 (UTC)
Public Schools?
Isn't that a peculiarly British expression? Maybe Joburg is different, but to us the two forms of school were private and government. Joziboy 5 May 2006, 19:31 (UTC)
The South African Schools Act of 1996 recognised only two categories of schools: public and independent. Public schools are state controlled and independent schools are privately governed. All private schools were included in the independent school category. Raker 05:22, 6 May 2006 (UTC)
Why are the schools listed in this entry? Should this not be in another category? I don't really see the reason for it being on this Wikipedia page. I suggest that just the tertiary institutes be included with maybe a small write up as these are the ones that are of significance in Durban (147.110.251.38 (talk) 12:55, 29 January 2013 (UTC))
Latin motto
The Latin in that motto looks pretty odd. Sure it's right? http://www.translation-guide.com/free_online_translators.php?from=Latin&to=English
Says :- "To weaken Beginning Better Fortune The following" - compare "Better Fortune Follows A Difficult Beginning".
Looks fine to me.. Wizzy…☎ 13:07, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
This page is absolutely ridiculously written. Somebody has put everything in the picture box and it looks horrible.
Balanced? -Informal sector-
"A shack dwellers' movement Abahlali baseMjondolo that draws most of its membership from this sector has begun to vigorously contest the city's treatment of the poor and, in particular, its refusal to provide services to shack settlements and the ongoing illegal evictions in which people are either left homeless or, as under apartheid, forcibly removed to the urban periphery of the city"
I don't know anything about this topic, and that is excactly why I visited the page. However, the quoted text seems a tad bit biased. Anyone competent who can improve the text?
83.108.130.179 (talk) 23:50, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
Shack Dwellers
I have reverted the changes again as there was many problems with it.
- The page was badly formatted, the way you are quoting references is wrong, your edit was actually breaking the article, (at the bottom by the references). If you break the page then we must revert the changes rather than fix it as I have tried to do.
- The mercury cannot be used as you are asking people to subscribe. You cannot ask readers to register to check your references.
- The reference, Centre on Housing And evictions (p29), does not use the words routinely, illegally or unconstitutionally.
- The link to ODS, is broken, we cannot see page 14 and 15.
- The link you gave for the Freedom of Expression Institute, is a letter to Mike Sutcliffe, it does not mention words like unlawfully and unconstitutionally.
- The link to COHRE - South Africa, does not mention church leader, bishops or any statements made.
- The link to FXI, (Court victory for shack dwellers), and The Daily News, (Court declares Abahlali march legal), only mention legal actions against the marches, nothing about demolishing shacks. It does not say anything about the constitutionality of the evictions.
- The website http://www.abahlali.org/ cannot be used as it is not a reliable source. But more importantly Abahlali is a Shack dweller action group and we cannot expect their website/opinion to be fair as they were involved of the court cases/evictions/marches.
This whole section is not very neutral at all. FFMG (talk) 11:46, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
- Again I had to revert the changes, for the same reasons.
- Some of the links are broken
- The mercury requires a, (paid), subscription to view the references.
- Some of the links given either do not mention Durban or simply have nothing to do with the text been referenced.
- Abahlali.org is not an acceptable reference, some of the quotes given are mentioned nowhere else on the internet.
- The reference section is broken with bad links and references.
- Please, lets discuss these, (and other points), before we make any more changes. FFMG (talk) 09:19, 29 March 2008 (UTC)~2025-43175-36 (talk) 11:06, 27 December 2025 (UTC)
Demographics and unemployment
Original text: "27.9 percent of city residents are unemployed. 88.6 percent of the unemployed are black, 18.3 percent are Coloureds, 8.2 percent are Asians or Indians, and 4.4 percent are White.[6]" The data is inconsistent, because the percentage of unemployed black, Coloured, Asian/Indian and white population sums almost 120%. The source is not precise to verify the origin of the inconsitency. Please provide a precise source or explain the reasons of the (apparent?) inconsitency. Just as a guess: It might be a typo: if the black uneployed population is 68.8 percent, the sum of all groups would be 99.7%. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.23.247.13 (talk) 11:03, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
