Talk:Capital of the World

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

By a British newspaper? Ha! New York is obviously #1.

[edit] Article Content

While as a Londoner I am proud to see my city heading the list, I am not sure about the current status of the article. This is entirely taken from one study in one British newspaper and while I think London has a convicing case to be considered the leading capital of the world,I'm not sure the article should remain in its current form. It should either be considered for deletion, or expanded into a much larger article based on a number of different sources.

A further point about the composition of this list, why do some of these other cities such as New York, Los Angeles and Chicago even qaulify, being that their not national capitals? Lord Cornwallis (talk) 14:03, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Dumb questions like the one above are another reason why this article is redundant. It's capital of the world, not 'national capital of a country that is capital of the world'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.23.146.66 (talk) 04:14, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I still don't see why they should qaulify. How can a city boast to be capital of the world if they are not capital of their own country? Are there any other rankings by other organisations that could be added to the article? I still think it should be expanded rather than deleted. Lord Cornwallis (talk) 11:33, 14 May 2008 (UTC)