Talk:Countries of the United Kingdom by GVA per capita

UK geography Mid‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Out of date?[edit]

The source here is now almost three years out of date, and it was not a particularly sophisticated survey to last for the long-term. Living in Britain, I would very much doubt that the South-West is in the top half. I would suggest either updating this article with a more recent survey or deleting the page. 86.137.179.210 (talk) 13:54, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure the South West has far less deprivation than the areas in the North. Where would you expect it to be? Certainly the western areas of the South West are relatively propserous (i.e. excluding Cornwall), for example Bath, Bristol, Portsmouth and so on. As for them being out of date, find some more recent ones and feel free to update the table! The Regions of England templates definately need some sort of economic value, so this will have to do until a suitable replacement can be found. Asdfasdf1231234 (talk) 18:12, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Goodness knows who thought it a good idea to use 2002 Eurostat data which had been converted back into pounds at some contrived exchange rate. Meiktila (talk) 18:45, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GDP or GVA?[edit]

I've not got a background in economics, but why isn't this article called Countries of the United Kingdom by GVA per capita? The article seems to be a summary of quite a detailed ONS report, but this report uses Gross value added instead of Gross domestic product. I'm not looking for an explanation of both, unless somebody can prove to me there's absolutely no difference. Of course, if there's no difference, why does Wikipedia have both as separate articles?--ML5 (talk) 20:03, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GVA is commonly used for smaller divisions within a national economy like here where the figures being compared are of different regions of the United Kingdom.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.163.25.85 (talk) 02:16, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Page moved. Uncontroversial. -- Hadal (talk) 20:14, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Countries of the United Kingdom by GDP per capita → Countries of the United Kingdom by GVA per capita – Source used clearly states that values are Gross Value Added and not Gross Domestic Product. Article should be renamed to reflect content. Angus McLellan (Talk) 13:57, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.