Talk:Cape Town/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Households made up of individuals?

what is "16.1% of all households are made up of individuals." supposed to mean? Moe Aboulkheir 15:20, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Probably lone inhabitants, as opposed to families. --Piet Delport 15:55, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
"16.1 percent of households are headed by one person" means that they are single parent families chrisboote 15:19, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Replace Gauteng map

PLEASE replace the map on this page (of Gauteng) with one of Cape Town! Mark

Victoria & Alfred

Is it the "Victoria & Alfred" rather than "Victoria & Albert"? Yes it is, and that's what is says now...

'Victoria & Albert' is the obvious association since they were married, but 'Alfred' is correct because the two original docks were named after (a) Queen Victoria and (b) her son, Alfred, who made an official state visit to South Africa on her behalf as a young teenager.--66.8.31.110 12:43, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Remove promotional links?

Should anything be done about all the promotional external links popping up on this page ? Wizzy 16:11, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

Major clean up

  1. I prefer Image:Capetown.jpg ?
  2. When leaving Cape Town - lose it ?
  3. My problem with these huge edits is that stuff creeps in - There was also a shortage of women in the colony, so the Europeans exploited the female slaves for both labour and sex.
    1. Can you either re-arrange, or edit, but not both ?

Lots more like this. I am inclined to revert, and please ask PZFUN to do the edits piecemeal ? Wizzy…☎ 14:13, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

Be bold. I am just bringing Cape Town into the same format used in Johannesburg, the only South African featured article about a city at the moment. And there was a shortage of women at the Cape Colony, and female slaved were exploited for sex. Where do you think the Cape Coloureds come from? Páll 18:21, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Exploitation (one presumes). Some might think otherwise. My point is not that edit, but that it has been slipped in with a ton of other stuff. What else slipped in ?

  • so the VOC was forced to import - I thought there were strict rules about fraternising with the natives, so VOC wanted to import.
  • the VOC was nearly bankrupt - no, I thought it was machinations in the Napoleonic wars.
  • Bubonic plague gave the government an excuse to introduce racial segregation - references please ?

But, please, I am not arguing the merits of these edits, you could be right.

My argument is the manner of their introduction, obscured under a Major clean up. Do you see ? It is very hard to spot these changes in the wikidiff.

Might I suggest that when undertaking something major like this again, you re-arrange without changing content, and say so, and then edit in a few big chunks.

It is not about Boldness, it is about Obscurely introducing edits that become difficult to undo. It is unfriendly editing. If I wanted to hijack a page, I would do something like this. Lots of good stuff, and a bunch of my own POV stuff tangled up in a good-faith edit. Not you, I. Wizzy…☎ 18:57, Mar 23, 2005 (UTC)

Adding a comment here as the line I have questions about was mentioned above, though not in the same context. I have two issues with the sentence below: Grammar and POV The city grew slowly during this period, as it was hard to find adequate labourers, thus forcing the importing of slaves from Indonesia and Madagascar; many of whom would come to form the first of the Cape Coloured communities.

Grammar: Very awkward sentence, but it is easily fixed by splitting it into two. POV: "forced the importing of slaves"? I have a REALLY hard time believing that ANYBODY was forced to import slaves. "Oh, I really didn't WANT to have to enslave another human being, but gosh, it is SO hard to find good help these days!" Not.

This can be solved with a more cause and effect type of statement: The city grew slowly during this period, as it was hard to find adequate labourers. This labour shortage prompted the importing of slaves from Indonesia and Madagascar; many of whom would come to form the first of the Cape Coloured communities.

I rarely make changes on a FA, but this one is a little too much to let go.

Otherwise, a very interesting article. I am adding it to my list of places to fill my passport with someday! Thanks to the contributors!Thepearl 14:52, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Xhosa name

Currently the Xhosa name is given as eKapa or SaseKapa. Any source on that? I don't know Xhosa well, but it looks quite suspect. I suspect it should be iKapa. eKapa: in Cape Town. SaseKapa: (something unspecified) of Cape Town.

Yeah, you're right. I've changed it to iKapa. I can't speak Xhosa, but I do speak Zulu and they have very similar grammar - the e- prefix is a locative, meaning, as you say, 'in / at / to / from Cape Town' This is always the case (ekhaya means 'at home', ikhaya means 'home'). As for SaseKapa, that: 1) makes no sense on it's own (of Cape Town), 2) Is conjugated to agree with a noun of the isi- class (Sas), so I've added Isixeko (city).

Al, Joziboy 24 Feb 2006, 12:52 UTC

Ja, I suspect that the "SaseKapa" that was there comes from the the fact that the City of Cape Town (the municipality) is called "Isixeko saseKapa", and someone who doesn't understand Xhosa conjugation assumed that SaseKapa was just the name for Cape Town. What I remember from Xhosa lessons at school agrees with what you know from Zulu - "Cape Town", standing alone, is "iKapa". - htonl 19:59, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Infobox

Great infobox - please fix the map ?? Wizzy…☎ 11:58, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

Yes yes, I just haven't made a map of the Western Cape yet! Páll (Die pienk olifant) 17:11, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Another point of view

I've travelled to ZA every year for the last decade (sometimes twice a year)

  • I always fly into Cape Town first, and almost always leave from there
  • I've always flown BA (all four classes), and never had any problems except with the heat in the plane on return journeys - the crew have always been superb, yes they are sometimes late, but show me an airline that isn't!
  • I only tip parking attendants on return to the car - and make sure they know that. Tipping is small change for most Europeans & Americans - R10 per hour seems to be generous
  • ALWAYS claim back the VAT. Flying out of Cape Town it is simple & efficient - so what if you don't get all the VAT back, it still pays for your meal while you're waiting
  • Leave plenty of time - possibly as much as 2 hours for 1st & Club class, 3 for economy and economy plus - when checking in for international flights at Cape Town, security staff are slow.....
  • For domestic flights, however, 30 mins is fine (unless you have reams of luggage)
  • Best internal flights are from Nationwide
  • Like every city in the world, Cape Town has its rough bits, but there is lots to do in the safe areas - which is most of it
  • DEFINITELY drive along the [Garden Route] if you have time
  • Do not miss Boulders Beach near Simonstown, the penguins are very friendly. If you go to the south beach, there is no walkway, and you can paddle & swim with them
  • Robben island is fascinating, and you do NOT have to be a diehard BP fanatic to enjoy the tour
  • Car hire is very very very cheap compared with most of Europe - it's only expensive if you book in advance with foreign currency

chrisboote 15:39, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Location of Ndabeni

I changed the sentence that said that Ndabeni was located on the "western flanks" of Table Mountain as this was simply wrong. Ndabeni is in fact east of Cape Town.

Mayor of CT

"There hasve been many instances of the mayor giving out tenders to unqualified persons: in December 2005 it was exposed that she had given out a so-called Diamond District feasibility study tender to someone who knew absolutely nothing about diamonds. A parking metering tender was also reversed by the courts in Nov 2005 owing to corruption."

Removed this text as currently unreferenced and therefore possibly slanderous. If anyone wants this info to go in, perhaps they can rewrite it in the wiki way for contentious stuff - there are examples of how to use newspaper articles to communicate contentious stuff at Wikipedia:Verifiability, WP:CITE, eg, "The Cape Sugra reported, 'The Mayor has two heads' (30 Feb 2017)".

Also, earlier text refers to Mayor as "he", later as "she". Perhaps same contributor can sort this out. (I'm not in Cape Town and don't have resources to do all this.) JackyR 15:25, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I'd suggest that most of this stuff about the mayor and corruption is somewhat POV and out of context in the page about Cape Town. Also, by being heavily political on a largely non-political page, it encourages edit wars. What about creating a page about the mayor herself, and letting debates about the mayor happen there? Zaian 18:52, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, even if true and verified, this stuff really doesn't belong with CT itself. A new article is certainly a way to address that. I was about to ask, does the topic warrant such an article, but then thought of the endless dross about very minor politicians all over WP: clearly someone thinks so. Can't summon the enthusiasm to do it myself, tho... :-) JackyR 23:12, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
I've created a page for Nomaindia Mfeketo but it's only a stub. I don't feel like filling the page with someone else's text about how corrupt she is. If someone else wants to move this text from the Cape Town page to the mayor's page, please do. Some interesting trivia I read about the unusual name "Nomaindia": I read that someone else in her family is called Nomaengland or Noma-something else. If someone has the source, it might be worth including. Zaian 10:42, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

The Indian Ocean is at Cape Agulhas

Fine, I'll do this as a discussion point even though it is common knowledge among everyone except the tourists. Cape Town is NOT sandwiched between the Atlantic Ocean and the Indian Ocean. It is wholly situated on the Atlantic Ocean. The border between the Atlantic Ocean and the Indian Ocean is 120km away at Cape Agulhas. See http://www.capeinfo.com/WCregions/Agulhas/agulhasOceans.asp

Not by any stretch of the imagination is this a Cape Town sandwich. If you won't let me fix it, then you do so.

While I agree with you about this fact, sarcastic edits such as "or would be, except that the Indian Ocean is actually 120km away at Cape Agulhas" is certainly not the way to go about correcting this ... please be civil and constructice if you want to edit Wikipedia. Elf-friend 08:41, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. I actually corrected this nicely but it was reversed by dewet, I also corrected some basic spelling errors and also had those reversed, which I felt was unnecessarily pedantic. This annoyed me. I will now give my reasons for changes beforehand.

Unless its obviously controversial, you probably don't need even to do that: the Edit summary box is where to leave a quick note about your change/reasons. Just don't expect facetiousness to survive in the article – and of course, a revert takes any good changes go with too.

The Indian Ocean statement reappeared in the article following a recent edit. The definitive reference for the Indian Ocean ending at Cape Agulhas is the International Hydrographic Organization's Limits of Oceans and Seas. According to the link given earlier in this discussion, the SA Navy and the Oceanography department at UCT accept this boundary. Only the tourist bodies (and proud locals) seem to claim that the Indian Ocean ends at Cape Point, so this is hardly encyclopedic. I've removed the claim from the article. Zaian 01:24, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Names on the side

Does anyone know how to do the big lettering above the infobox? Both this article and Joburg have it, and I'd like to do the same for Durban but don't know how. Any help would be much appreciated! Joziboy 11 March 2006, 16:25 (UTC)

City of Cape Town vs Cape Town

The intro paragraph and the title of the info box are back as City of Cape Town. It seems to me that there is a useful distinction between Cape Town itself, and its municipality, which is called City of Cape Town. Since this is the city page, the title, intro paragraph and info box should be Cape Town, plain and simple. Using City of is not a Wikipedia standard - can I ask why is was reintroduced? Zaian 08:56, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

You'll have to ask PZFUN - he's the one who insists on "City of Cape Town" on the article and the infobox. As I see it, "City of Cape Town" is the name of the municipality - which has its own article at, not surprisingly, City of Cape Town; the city is called "Cape Town". But I hope that he will explain his position here. - htonl 09:45, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
This naming is out of line with all the other city pages I have looked at, and the intro paragraph and info box should be changed back to Cape Town. I say this with great respect for PZFUN's many excellent contributions, and not wishing to distract him from his work on the history section! City of Cape Town is not the full name of Cape Town, it's just the name of the municipality. The only time I ever see it used is on my bills from the council. Zaian 12:01, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
I absolutely agree. PZFUN is a great editor; I just hope he'll come here so we can reach some consensus. Similarly to you, the only place I see "City of Cape Town" is on the rates bill and other communication from the city council. I'm not going to change it back to Cape Town myself as I've already done it twice and don't want to step precariously close to 3RR; and also because I hope we can reach a consensus. - htonl 13:30, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry guys, I remember adding the City of to the infobox a while back because the Xhosa name was SaseKapa, and as I mentioned earlier, that makes no sense without Isixeko. But I agree, it should just be Cape Town, Kaapstad and iKapa Joziboy 12 March 2006, 18:21 (UTC)

Because it is the standard to include the full name of the entity as dictated by the Manual of Style. Thus, the article for South Africa has the infobox title of Republic of South Africa, etc. New York City's main bolding is the City of New York. Páll (Die pienk olifant) 04:20, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
I have no problem with including "City of" in the Cape Town article, in a similar fashion to New York City; i.e., "Cape Town, or officially the City of Cape Town, is ..." dewet|™ 06:05, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
What we're saying here is that "City of Cape Town" is not the official name of the city - it's the name of the city administration, and therefore shouldn't be used in the intro paragraph. Zaian 07:27, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
*shrug* It really doesn't matter to me one way or the other. As another suggestion, how about: "Cape Town (Afrikaans: Kaapstad /ˈkɑːpstɑt/; Xhosa: iKapa) is the third most populous city in South Africa, forming part of the metropolitan municipality of the City of Cape Town." I'd remove the dablink right above it, then. dewet|™ 10:08, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

I think the reason New York City has the 'city' included is to differentiate it from New York (the state). It's also sometimes known as NYC, whereas Cape Town is never known as City of Cape Town. London doesn't have 'city of' either. I like Dewet's suggestion. Joziboy 14 March 2006, 12:30 (UTC)

That's because the City is a suburb of London, not the name. Also, NYC has always been known as NEw York City, it has nothing to do with New York State. If Cape Town is never known as the City of Cape Town, why is its website, at [1] called "The City of Cape Town", etc? Páll (Die pienk olifant) 16:06, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
That's because that website is is the official site of the governmental or administrative entity, which is called (in full) "City of Cape Town Metropolitan Municipality" - and that has its own article at City of Cape Town. This article, however, is about the geographical or cultural/demographic entity. That is somewhat - but not exactly - contiguous in area with the governmental entity; for example, Somerset West is not generally considered to be geographically part of Cape Town (it is a separate town) but it is administered by the City of Cape Town. They are two separate things: the city, and the city's administration; it's like the difference between Pretoria and the City of Tshwane. If we're talking about London, then using "City of Cape Town" as the highlighted name for this article would be a bit like using "Greater London Authority" as the highlighed name in the London article. But if we're going to bandy about other city articles as precedent, what about Boston? I should add that I also like Dewet's idea. - htonl 19:31, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
I also support Dewets' suggestion. Elf-friend 06:56, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
I like Dewet's suggestion too. The Council page at [2] says "The City of Cape Town is a brand new, single municipal structure that replaces the Cape Metropolitan Council and the six Metropolitan Local Councils". I think this makes it clear that "City of" is the name of the government structure, not of the city itself. Zaian 08:47, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

N2

Hi, the image labeled "The N2 on the way out of Cape Town." actaully shows traffic flowing into Cape Town on the N2 near Athlone power station. If you were coming out, you wouldn't see the mountain.

Fixed, thanks. Zaian 15:52, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Good article

A "Well done!" to the contributors. Metamagician3000 10:26, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Images

For such a beautiful city, the article is a bit low on pretty pictures. I happen to live in Cape Town and will try to add some, but I was wondering if anybody else happens to have some handy? Banez 16:02, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

I took lots of great photos in Cape Town over Easter (including some great panoramic stitches), I'll try adding some soon. --ClaudeS 10:53, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

To Do list

Work on the To Do list at the top of this page has gone quiet. Any objections to removing it from this page? Zaian 08:14, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Featured Status?

This article is starting to look real good - isn't it time to consider a nomination to Featured Status? Or should one hang on a bit? I am considering listing it for peer review - any objections? -- Chris Lester talk 18:24, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I know Páll has been planning on doing this; he's asked me to take a few photos, which I plan on doing this coming week, should the weather allow... I feel the article is very close to being ready for FA; maybe a peer review so long would be just the thing? dewet|✉ 19:14, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
There's still a lot more I'd like to ad. Please don't nominate it yet! I need to do a lot of work to the tourism secton. Páll (Die pienk olifant) 22:08, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
I have listed it for peer review (see above)... -- Chris Lester talk 18:44, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Proposed merger of Cape Town City Hall

User:Hellahulla proposed that Cape Town City Hall be merged to this article. I'm not opposed to the merger, but I was wondering whether it would be better merged here or to City of Cape Town. Is the City Hall still the official seat of government (as it were) of the council? And what do the rest of you feel about the merge? - htonl 21:39, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

I don't see why it should be merged anywhere, personally. Páll (Die pienk olifant) 22:16, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
Upon mature reflection, I agree with you - although the article is really short at the moment, a quick Googling brings up enough info to fill it out to no-longer-stub size. After all, the fact that Nelson Mandela's first public speech after his release was made at the City Hall is enough to make it worthy of an article even ignoring any other considerations. If nobody else gets to it first, I'll expand it tomorrow. - htonl 22:34, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Something is wrong...

"As a result of the Dutch entering the war, the British invaded the Netherlands in 1795. By this time, the VOC had lost almost all of its influence in Cape Town and was almost completely bankrupt. When the Netherlands fell to the British, British soldiers were moved to the Cape in a garrison to prevent a French invasion." According to Dutch Republic, "The Republic of the United Provinces was officially recognized in the Peace of Westphalia (1648), and lasted until French revolutionary forces invaded in 1795 and set up a new republic, called the Batavian Republic". The article American Revolutionary War says "also in 1780, the British struck against the United Provinces of the Netherlands in order to preempt Dutch involvement in the League of Armed Neutrality". According to the article, the war between the British and the Dutch ended i 1784. (Fourth Anglo-Dutch War). What is correct? Did the British invade Netherlands in 1795? And if this is correct, could you give me a citation... Shauni 11:43, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

It was the French who invaded in 1795. I have hidden it until it can be rewritten --Astrokey44 01:50, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

refuelling station

I think this statement should be changed to "restocking" or something like that, because i imagine they would also get food and water ect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by User:Rorrenig (talk • contribs)

This seemed a little anachronistic to me too, doubtless fuel (for galley stoves etc) would have been taken on, but the major stuff loaded (since we're talking age of sail) would have been fresh food (meat and vegetables) and water. Victualling station might be the most accurate description. David Underdown 08:18, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

featured

Congrats on getting the article featured today guys! It's excellent :) Joziboy 09:13, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Crime

I'm kind of surprised that the word "crime" is only mentioned once in this entire article. If it's really that high, which I have heard, then there should be more than one sentence on it. It's kind of the reason I'm too scared to ever visit Cape Town. -newkai | talk | contribs 10:55, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Don't be scared!
Crime is actually very low in Cape Town in comparison with, say, Jo'burg or Durban. In my 10 years as a tourist there, I've never suffered even petty theft or vandalism, which are the most common mishaps to befall those few travellers unluckly enough to encounter crime
Yes, there are 'bad bits', buit common sense and ASKING THE LOCALS will keep you clear of them
Use the tourist buses if you're worried about travelling on foot, stay in Clifton or Simonstown and travel into CPT by bus each day if you're worried about the city centre
I urge you to visit the world's friendliest city 8-)
chrisboote 15:45, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
OK, maybe I will! -newkai | talk | contribs 23:18, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh don't be such a baby! Go visit Cape Town. I'm sure you've flown on a plane before, and that's also dangerous. PS How is it that you were born in Germany and yet declare yourself to be a mother-tongue speaker of English? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.207.33.197 (talk) 19:47, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Inaccuracies and anachronisms

This article contained several inaccuracies and anachronisms which I have corrected. They were: that the British won both Anglo-Boer Wars (they only won the second), that gold was the cause of both wars (it was only a factor in the second) and that the Union of South Africa was formed in 1910 out of the former South African Republic, Orange Free State, Cape Province and Natalia (when in fact the Natalia Republic had been annexed by Britain as early as the 1840s). Booshank 15:13, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, but the Union itself was only formed in 1910, right? The Natalia Republic wasn't part of the Union from 1840. Anyway. FlyBang 23:40, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Spammy links

I just removed 2 spammy links from the "External links" section, but there are 3 more that I am not sure about. These are they:

What do you think? Are they spammy, or are they useful enough to include in the article? - htonl 10:47, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I tend to agree with htonl on this one. This is why:
  1. Websites for profit should not be included, unless it is central to the article. (E.g. expedia should not be linked to the Delta Air Lines page, but can well be linked to the Expedia page). This therefore means that [3] should really be the first to go - it simply advocates various accomodation options. My vote is to delete it.
  2. Websites with information pertaining particularly for tourists, may not really be relevant in a broad-based encyclopedia - the call with regards to [4] is far closer: maybe a move to WikiTravel is on the cards?
  3. A website seeking advertise should also not be allowed. This one [5] has hotel specials, etc. and so it too should be deleted.
It may well be worth the while deleting the lot from this page. If there is no disagreement, I'll do it soon. -- Chris Lester talk 19:36, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
I disagree on Cape Town Magazine: The offical newspaper site Cape Times, News24, or Iol.co.za seeks advertising. Cape Town Magazine features different South African artists every month, different social projects, media, and movies, many articles, and things to do. The hotel specials are less then 5% of the size of the site and less then any other booking site. They are a first magazine making this effort. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.241.24.51 (talk • contribs)
I think it is a matter of degree. The Cape Times and Argus (i.e. IOL) (as well as Die Burger) are the newspapers of record (as it were) for Cape Town; the articles on their websites can be expected to be of general use as references for all sorts of information about Cape Town. Cape Town Magazine, as far as I can tell, is specifically information for tourists. As Chris points out above, websites specifically for tourists are quite probably not relevant to a general newspaper article. In any case, what makes Cape Town Magazine more relevant or useful than any other of the multitude of Cape Town tourist-related websites? - htonl 17:52, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
I should have been clearer. In order for a link to be put on Wikipedia, it must be:
* Relevant to the article
* Not have an amount of advertising which outweighs the benefit of the link being there
The reputable papers are relevant to the article, and the amount of advertising does not outweigh the use of them, whereas for the Cape Town Magazine, it does. I would guess that someone placed the link there for direct financial benefit. Also, I would challenge the use of such a link in a general encyclopedia. It looks like this view is consistent. -- Chris Lester talk 07:53, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Exactly. Is there a WP policy page somewhere that lays out these guidelines? If not, maybe we should start one? - htonl 12:42, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
Was reading this page and it's interesting. both Capeinfo.com & CapeTownMagazine.com are - in my eyes - highly relevant sites and reputable in cape town, and yet there are some terribly (only tourism related) sites as external link - ghoemalive 12:42, 28 October 2007

Seal of Cape Town

There is an article about the Seal of Cape Town, but I can't see how to work in a link to it on Cape Town or the history article. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 03:15, 22 November 2006 (UTC)


There is an error in the layout of this article with IE (but not in Firefox). The first image, a panorama overlaps the lateral content.

No it also happens in FF 2.0 (or whatever the latest version is) Pure Oxygen 16:53, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Layout

There seems to be a bit of a problem with the layout in FireFox. Does anyone know how to fix it or should that panorama view be moved lower down? -- Chris Lester talk 17:14, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

To be perfectly honest, there seems to be more of a problem with the Internet Explorer version of the page. Dannpm 17:09, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Accurate Record Maximum Temperatures

I'm pretty sure after having temperatures in the 40's and some places in the Western Cape close to 50, that a few monthly records were broken in Cape Town, and thus the temperature table should be looked at and seen if it needs updating. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.171.82.181 (talk • contribs)

I notice that the figures for the extreme recorded temperatures have been changed and a different source has been used, and that the new figures are more extreme. The previous figures came from the South African Weather Service (SWS) for the 30 years from 1961. Perhaps the new figures are more recent or cover a longer historical period but there is no primary source quoted by the BBC, neither do they say what period they are from. In my opinion the SWS is a more reputable source than the BBC page as it is a primary source and gives dates for the figures. Booshank 19:38, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

First European Permanent Settlement in Sub-Saharan Africa?

I'm not sure this is the case. The Portuguese were active in sub-Saharan Africa prior to 1652, and it wouldn't surprise me if one of their posts actually became a permanent community. Sao Tome comes to mind, founded in 1485 (it's not on the mainland, but I'm quite sure it qualifies as sub-Saharan Africa).

Yeah, Luanda in Angola's older than Cape Town... it was founded by the portuguese in 1575... ie 77 years before Cape Town. ThatDeadDude 16:43, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Well, I've changed that statement in the article to "first permanent European settlement in South Africa". - htonl 17:56, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
This was brought up at WP:ERRORS today[6] because Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/April 6 still listed it as Subsaharan Africa. I'm changing it to South Africa, but can we get an actual cite to add to this article to confirm the South Africa claim, or have we been doing some original research here? --Elonka 08:32, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Do I understand correctly that you want a cite for Cape Town being the oldest european settlement in South Africa? To South Africans that would be like requesting a cite for the wetness of water. It really does fall into the common knowlege category and thus might actually be hard to find a good citation. Roger (talk) 21:03, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
I agree with you that it is common knowledge. But if we need a cite, there is, for example, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/world/countries/southafrica.html#history which says:
Although European vessels frequently passed by South Africa on their way to E Africa and India, and sometimes stopped for provisions or rest, no permanent European settlement was made until 1652, when Jan van Riebeeck and about 90 other persons set up a provisioning station for the Dutch East India Company at Table Bay on the Cape of Good Hope.
I assume the Washington Post would be considered reliable, although I can probably dig up a cite from a more 'appropriate' historical source if necessary. - htonl (talk) 14:58, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
The Washington Post is an extremely reliable source, that looks great, thanks. --Elonka 01:13, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Map of Cape Town to show where it's located in relation to the rest of South Africa

The map in the Infobox doesn't give anyone that isn't familiar with the area of South Africa an idea at what they are looking at. Sure I don't know the area at all but I'm completely lost at what I'm looking at. The description says "Location of the City of Cape Town in Western Cape Province" which doesn't even appear to be the exact area of what this article is covering? Am I lost or...? Strawberry Island 23:44, 8 September 2007 (UTC)


Tourism

Are there really ferries going from the Waterfront to Hout Bay? I know Cape Town extremely well, but have never hear about this. Any source? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghoemalive (talk • contribs) 20:53, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Removals POV

The following sentence I think is blatently POV and emotional: "Cape Town, like Durban, has become notorious for trying to implement apartheid style forced removals of shack dwellers from the centre of the city to transit camps on the periphery."

To call removing squatters "apartheid style" is very POV. Authorities in most countries will remove people who occupy land illegally or build without planning permission and so to call it "apartheid style" is over emotional. Further to say the city has become "notorious" is also POV as it assumes the removals are in themselves a bad thing. Would one write that New York was "notorious" for arresting pickpockets or London was "notorious" for removing illegal traders? 79.72.241.210 (talk) 18:57, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Agree it's probably POV, and now also uncited as I've removed the unreliable source it was using. Socrates2008 (Talk) 02:19, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Page layout

There is a lot of empty space in the upper part of the page - so much that one gets an impression that the intro paragraph and the infobox is all there is! Unfortunately I don't know how to fix it, could someone who does please do so. Roger (talk) 13:26, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

CBD?

The abbreviation "CBD" is used twice in the article without definition. David (talk) 13:38, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Central Business District Roger (talk) 22:50, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Soccer vs football

I'm not sure I buy this edit. "Soccer" seems to be the SA term of choice: it is the Premier Soccer League, after all. And a straight Google in the .za space has soccer at almost half again the number of pages that football brings up. But the closeness of the count when it comes to use in the media (football vs soccer) has me worried. Thoughts? 9Nak (talk) 16:59, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

No, soccer is not an American term - I've reverted :) Greenman (talk) 20:28, 18 November 2008 (UTC)


Ma maman elle m'a dit que j'ai pas le droit de venir ici , mais moi jde men fiche —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.11.236.32 (talk) 12:35, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Cape Town Virtual Map link removed

Hi, I added information to the tourism section with an external link to a virtual street and suburb map of Cape Town - www.capetown4u.co.za/capetownmap.aspx. I feel this link and info is very relevant and particularly useful as it allows you to zoom and pan and scroll up to street level.

This link has been removed twice and I think their is merit in having it there, as there is no advertising on this map and it cannot benefit from search ranking because of no-follow directives, it is specific to Cape Town and is extremely useful because of it's virtual features.

It is always very handy to have a virtual map of a place that is not static, but virtual live, which can help people find their way in Cape Town.

Kind Regards Ryan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.25.159.216 (talk) 12:51, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

Because:
  1. The map you linked to doesn't actually have most of the streets in Cape Town. Scroll up to street level, and much of the map is just blank spaces where streets should be. This means that it's not actually particularly useful for finding your way in Cape Town.
  2. It's actually just Microsoft's Bing Maps loaded onto the page with Javascript. It's not actually specific to Cape Town; it just starts out with Cape Town as the default location.
  3. Why should we choose that map rather than streetmaps.co.za or Google Maps or OpenStreetMap, particularly since they all have more comprehensive coverage of Cape Town?
  4. In what way does a link to a scrollable map actually enhance the Wikipedia article? It's an encyclopaedia article, not a tourist guide.
- htonl (talk) 18:46, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the contribution Ryan. However, there is already a comprehensive list of maps available if you click on the geo-coordinates in the top right. If a map did need to be linked elsewhere, the best choice of map would be one with a more compatible licence, such as OpenStreetMap, rather than a copyrighted one from Microsoft. Also, see Wikipedia:COI and WP:SPAM for policies relevant here. Greenman (talk) 13:25, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Demographics are out of date

Atleast the education is.

http://www.capetown.gov.za/en/stats/CityReports/Documents/2007%20Community%20Survey%20Summary.pdf (page 5) Ages 20+ 2007: No schooling 2.0% Grade 0 - 3 2.9% Grade 4 - 7 14.3% Grade 8 - 11 40.1% Grade 12 20.9% Certificate/Diploma 9.6% Degree 8.8% Unspecified 1.4%

I'm not interested in changing it, maybe someone else will. ^__^ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.228.13.117 (talk) 20:47, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Picture of Cape flats / shanty towns

I believe that this wiki page of Cape Town is not representative of the city as a whole. It's quite clear that the majority of the city's residents live in shacks and insanitary conditions in the cape flat region and I think a picture of this needs to be included on the Cape Town article to indicate to visitors (and maybe residents!) that most people don't live in the pretty and heavenly city of cape town. It's almost as if the majority of the city residents have been pushed aside and forgotten about because they've not got the money that the minority living in the city centre and toward cape point have.

Just my thought. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.157.19.213 (talk) 07:47, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

After seeing this I added an entire section on the Cape Flats.(Wikimastername (talk) 16:26, 11 November 2009 (UTC)).

Sport stadium capacity missmatch

I have just compared the seating capacity of Newlands and Athlone stadiums listed here with the capacity mentioned in the stadium's main articles - they do not agree! Unfortunately I don't have time to verfy them all so please help if you can. Roger (talk) 14:46, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

South African definition of "mountain"?

The first paragraph under Geography says this:

There are over 70 peaks above 1,000 feet (300 m) (the American definition of a mountain) within Cape Town's official city limits.

I don't think it's appropriate to define how many mountains there are in a South African city using an American definition of "mountain". Is there not a South African definition? Perhaps this can be replaced with a citation from a South African source (the sentence currently is not sourced). — Athelwulf [T]/[C] 01:13, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

A few road transport errors

The N7 does not begin in Mitchells Plain as stated. All my maps show the N7 beginning at the N1 interchange. However Google Maps shows Wingfield Road and Vanguard Drive as part of the N7 south to the N2 interchange. I suspect this is an error because it goes against local convention. Neither show the southern part of Vanguard Drive in Mitchells Plain being part of the N7.

The R300 is not informally known as the Cape Flats Freeway, that is the official name of the section of the route between Vanguard Drive and the N2 interchange. North of the N2 the R300 is the Kuils River Freeway. Many if not most N, M and R-designated routes in the metropolitan area also have names for certain sections and these names are not just informal. For example if you're on the R102 at Goodwood the name Voortrekker Road is not informal, the properties there have it as their address, it's on the street signs and maps etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.72.129 (talk) 14:41, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Bus Rapid Transport - Future Glory

Deleted a section detailing how great Cape Town's new integrated transport system is yet to be. It is both POV and unverifiable. In fact, as a measure of how inappropriate it is to have encyclopediac entries concerning future events, it is worth noting that even the promised BRT service for the Fifa World Cup, which I have not deleted and which is reported as being a sure thing in the article, did not materialize. BlandBaroque (talk) 18:12, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

I am in full agreement with your edit - in fact the text you removed looks like it came from some marketing blurb. As far as I can see, though, the promised World Cup service did in fact materialize basically as described - though of course the text in the article needs to be reworded given that the WC has passed. - htonl (talk) 18:59, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
OK. Thanks. Take your point that W.C. transport did materialize. BlandBaroque (talk) 19:40, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

How Notable are Future Events?

There are a number of instances where things that are yet to happen in the city are cited. There will be a 26 storey building built in the future. So much money is expected to come in to CT coffers. The QE2 will berth during the World Cup. It all seems rather 'government think-tankish' and 'please invest in our city-ish'. Surely there's enough stuff that has already happened over 350 years or is already present in CT to be included in the wikipage of such a notable city. Cutting, unless major objections.BlandBaroque (talk) 20:51, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

I agree, go ahead and cut it, none of it seems notable and verifiable enough to keep. This is kind of covered by the "Wikipedia is not a crystal ball" policy. - htonl (talk) 21:40, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
Ah. Didn't know the crystal ball metaphor. Sums it up nicely. Been struggling to find a name for it. BlandBaroque (talk) 03:07, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Population

Cape Town and the City of Cape Town metropolitan municipality are not the same thing. Cape Town's "3.7 million inhabitants" include cities such as Simon's Town, Somerset West and Durbanville, of which they are even Geographically separate. Bezuidenhout (talk) 19:43, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

We will have to confirm the demarcation that the official Census uses. Roger (talk) 19:56, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
It's a bit complicated. In the 2007 Community Survey, which is where the 3.7 million figure comes from, the smallest area covered is the municipality. If we go back to the 2001 Census, the municipality is divided into Main Places, which are in turn divided into Subplaces (which are approximately equivalent to individual suburbs). In the City of Cape Town, the census identified 46 Main Places, as follows:
Name Population Name Population
Cape Town 827,218 Fish Hoek 15,851
Mitchell's Plain 398,650 Unnamed rural areas 14,498
Khayelitsha 329,002 Houtbaai 13,253
Blue Downs 150,431 Lwandle 9,311
Bellville 89,732 Du Noon 9,045
Elsiesrivier 86,685 Masiphumelele 8,249
Milnerton 81,366 Imizamo Yethu 8,063
Guguletu 80,277 Mamre 7,276
Brackenfell 78,005 Simonstown 7,210
Parow 77,439 Melkbosstrand 6,522
Somerset West 60,606 Sir Lowry's Pass 5,766
Nyanga 58,723 Fisantkraal 4,646
Kraaifontein 57,911 Joe Slovo Park 4,567
Atlantis 53,820 Noordhoek 3,127
Langa 49,667 Gordons Bay 2,751
Goodwood 48,128 Witsand 2,405
Strand 46,446 Briza 1,959
Kuilsriver 44,780 Lekkerwater 1,410
Durbanville 40,135 Pella 1,044
Crossroads 31,527 Scarborough 723
Eersterivier 29,682 Excelsior 189
Mfuleni 22,883 Robben Island 176
Nomzano 22,083 Hottentotsholland Nature Reserve 18
Total 2,893,255
The problem here is, that some of these other than "Cape Town" are part of what I would call Cape Town; for example Milnerton, or Langa. And in some cases the demarcation is—I won't say "racist", but "showing the legacy of apartheid"—for example, Langa is separate from "Cape Town", despite being completely surrounded by it. Some of them are just silly, like Briza, which as far as I can tell is just a random chunk of Somerset West.
We could do what I've done with Port Elizabeth, which is to list both the smallest sensible figure (the population of the main place with the name, so in this case 827,218) and the largest (the population of the metro, so 3,497,097) with a note explaining the context. Obviously in the text of the article we could go into more detail—we could, for example, use (a shortened version of) the table I've given above. — htonl (talk) 21:43, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Vasco and the Bellville Stadium

Someone was seemingly trying to enter Vasco to the page, but was struggling with the formatting and gave up. I've added them to the text, but is the Bellville Stadium, where they play according to their article,, the same as the Bellville Velodrome? Greenman (talk) 09:52, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Population (again)

Hey, sorry to bring this up again, but the new 2007 com. survey Demographics information is once again, only for the City of Cape Town and not for the settlement of Cape Town. The figures still include places like Atlantis and Somerset-West, which I think you would agree are not part of Cape Town. The information is displaying false information, which I am thoroughly against. Bezuidenhout (talk) 11:31, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Racism issues

Why no mention of the open sore of racism in cape town? The whole article reads like a tourist brochure for potential rich white middle class tourists. Almost all the blacks are kept as menial workers, out of executive positions, and many places refuse or discourage black patrons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.54.32.178 (talk) 08:07, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Climate section

Cape Town's climate seems to me to be more like Köppen Csa than Csb due to the warm summers. Can anyone please double-check ? 161.24.19.112 (talk) 19:02, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that's correct - have fixed this. Greenman (talk) 20:41, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
No, it is Csb due to the fact that all months average below 22C. Durban is Csa. Jim Michael (talk) 02:53, 15 January 2013 (UTC)
At least one month has to have a 24 hour average of at least 22C for it to be Csa. An average daily peak temperature of above 22C is not sufficient. The two warmest months in Cape Town each have a 24 hour average of 21C, hence it is Csb. 188.28.156.45 (talk) 17:06, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
Isn't this sort of thing original research? We should find a reliable source that says what Köppen classification Cape Town falls into. - htonl (talk) 19:11, 22 January 2013 (UTC)
It's not OR: Koppen climate classification states the criteria for each category and Cape Town is one of several examples of Csb listed. It is at the warm end of Csb, similar to Porto, although it does not have Porto's high winter rainfall. Porto's climate chart shows the daily mean as well as the maxima and minima, clearly showing that it's Csb. 188.30.19.50 (talk) 18:15, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Primary units of measurement

In some places the article uses non-metric units (such as miles) as the primary units. This is incorrect, South African subjects are supposed to primarily use metric units with parenthetical converions, using the {{convert}} template, to other units where relevant. Unfortunately I don't have the knowlege to do it myself, please help. Roger (talk) 17:33, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

I've fixed the two I could find - if there are any more please point them out. - htonl (talk) 23:22, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Twin towns/sister cities

The text mentions Cape Town as having six twin towns or sister cities, but the accompanying table lists only five. Obviously, this needs to be changed, but I've no idea which is actually wrong.--172.191.112.82 (talk) 23:24, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Events

This page could be improved by adding a section for events that are of interest for tourists for example, The Cape Argus Pick and Pay Cycle tour and the Cape Town International Jazz Festival which take place annually and have around 30-40 000 participants each. Nadia-Kamies (talk) 18:44, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

There is a Sports events section, which includes a link to an entire separate page of such events. Arts and culture events are not well covered in the article. However, keep in mind that Wikipedia is not a tourism or event guide and that advertising and promotion is also prohibited. Many of the notable regular events that happen in and around Cape Town are also covered in their own articles anyway. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 19:35, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Cape Town International Jazz Festival still needs to be written. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 19:43, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Cape Town International Jazz Festival has been written, please add it to the apropriate section. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:11, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Median Income

Regarding this revert. The original edit was uncited (the citation at the end was there before, but is now a dead link, and was presumably used for the previous figure). It's also fairly obvious to anyone living in Cape Town that the median (not average) individual MONTHLY income in 2001 was not R25 000 :) I haven't reverted again, but will leave to someone else to revert and trace a new source. Greenman (talk) 21:33, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

I have restored the original apparently sourced wording, which was corrupted without any new sources here and here. Of course, these figures are horribly outdated now. HelenOnline 09:29, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
(ec)It's a reasonable number for annual income but as a monthly income it makes no sense - R300 000/year puts one in the "fairly wealthy" bracket. When does the 2011 census data become available? Does the 2007 "Household survey" include income data? Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:39, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
I am just waiting for the technical savvy among us to get their hands on the detailed census 2011 data. HelenOnline 09:45, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
Pinging User:htonl, we need you... Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:52, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
I understand he is working on it. :) HelenOnline 10:12, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Map showing flights?

I'm not sure I see the value in the "Map showing flights from Cape Town International Airport to destinations outside Southern Africa." This is the kind of thing that is not only bound to be incomplete, it changes somewhat frequently - leading to a maintenance headache (i.e it gets out of date). Finally, I don't see how it adds much value to the article or a readers understanding of Cape Town. I was tempted to be bold and just delete it, but got to wondering if someone could think of a strong argument that it should be kept. —Mrand Talk • C 15:01, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Go ahead, you're right that it's almost inevitably out of date. - htonl (talk) 16:49, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Census area for demographics should be City of Cape Town

This article describes Hout Bay, the Northern Suburbs and Cape Flats as being part of Cape Town (and as a Capetonian I would certainly agree with that). However, the race and language breakdown in the infobox is for the census "main place" of Cape Town which excludes all of these (IMO it has very weird boundaries -- it's not even connected). These be changed to use the City of Cape Town stats ([7]) since that matches more closely the area described by the article (and the maps in the article). But I couldn't figure out the appropriate template-fu. --Taejo|대조 16:53, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Agreed, and done. - htonl (talk) 11:20, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
I agree that the census definition of main place is illogical and arbitrary, but now we've gone from one extreme to the other. The metro municipality includes towns like Somerset West which are very far from Cape Town proper. One possible solution would be to pick a number of suburbs which we all agree are part of CT, as it was done for the Hermanus infobox which includes neighbouring census places like Sand Bay and Zwelihle, and use them to calculate all the demo statistics including area and population.--eh bien mon prince (talk) 06:41, 15 December 2013 (UTC)

Timeline of Cape Town

What is missing from the recently created city timeline article? Please add relevant content. Contributions welcome. Thank you. -- M2545 (talk) 15:27, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 7 external links on Cape Town. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:36, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Cape Town hosting the fifa 2010 world cup

The fact that Cape Town hosted the world cup, seems to have been mentioned twice in the same context and have been edited to provide a more coherent flow in the article

M* — Preceding unsigned comment added by 51.175.90.187 (talk) 23:47, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Cape Town. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 08:30, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Demographics vs. Sidebar

Why is the racial profile and language makeup in the sidebar so at odds with that described in the demographics section? Sidebar has, for example, 34% white (unlikely) while demographics has 18% white and 38% black (reversed from a figure in the low teens on the sidebar). — Preceding unsigned comment added by SingeMonkey (talk • contribs) 09:48, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Seems to have been some vandalism Andynct (talk) 09:58, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Cape Town. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:22, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Missing total city population

Hello Andynct, what do you want to discuss here? Andynct keep reverting my attempts to add total city (not metro area) population into the infobox.

1) Why there would be a need to firstly discuss, before adding any info into infobox? I have never did this.
2) Andynct also argues, that because this info is 20 years old, it is forbidden to add it into the infobox. Can you explain me Andynct, where is such a thing in wiki policy? In my opinion, it is common, if no newer data is not avaible, anyone can add newer data later with no problem. Jirka.h23 (talk) 11:33, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
The 2011 official census data is already included and it is the latest official data - there is no need to use outdated information, the 2006 data is no longer valid. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:31, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
Great, thak you Mmatshipi. Jirka.h23 (talk) 13:48, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 13 external links on Cape Town. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:46, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 18 external links on Cape Town. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:33, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Cape Town. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:35, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Cape Town. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:02, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Useful reference

The City of Cape Town provides a free access GIS map website at https://citymaps.capetown.gov.za/EGISViewer/, which includes a lot of official data on the city which is easily checkable by anyone who knows how to use the system. Instructions are available at https://citymaps.capetown.gov.za/egisviewer/images/help.pdf , which is linked from the map, but not obviously. The tools in the top menu bar can show a lot of things not normally displayed, such as official suburb borders. For some features it is necessary to zoom in to activate, and to have the right layer visible. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 10:50, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Language

The infobox claims that 67.7% speak English at home, 22.5% Afrikaans and 2.7% Xhosa while the Demographics section paints a very different picture (35.7% Afrikaans, 29.8% Xhosa, 24.8% English). One must be very wrong. 2602:306:CFEA:170:AC70:3F64:AF11:3998 (talk) 02:26, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

Clearly. It is possible that the data are from very different dates, or from different definitions of Cape Town. The infobox is probably decades out of date. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 10:55, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
The definition of Cape Town used in the Infobox reference refers to only a part of the city - it omits the Cape Flats, Northern Suburbs, Helderberg and other parts, and is a few years out of date. The demographics section main reference is from the same year, but probably covers the whole city. Unfortunately it is a dead link. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 11:07, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
The infobox refers to the apartheid political definition of Cape Town. I've tried many times to correct it to the post 1996 political definition of Cape Town which includes black townships, Simon's Town, Belville etc. but have been rebuked every time and it has been changed back. Protectors of this page wish Cape Town to appear more white, English and less black than it actually is.Andynct (talk) 11:26, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Water crisis?

Anyone heard anything about this from a citable source? ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:19, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

This has been addressed in History of Cape Town, Timeline of Cape Town, and Cape Town water crisis pages. Dtwedt (talk) 13:56, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

KhoeKhoe history in this article is too shallow for the vast amounts of it available let alone the Xhosa people's story; this is deliberate selective writing

For an article about Cape Town not to have depth about the region is suspicious and obviously terrible. Ulterior motives about writing up dubious precedents to affect how people view Cape Town won't end very well, it's either you write the truth or leave the article. You can't be selective about the indigenous populace in the area or what are you trying to do? Untrammeled (talk) 16:00, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

This article is not specific to the History of Cape Town and so by definition the history section should be short. I can see room for improvement but this would not be the article for significant content expansion. I suppose we could add something to the lede too. Wikipedians are undoubtedly not as well-informed about Khoekhoe history as they could be, but it is a little uncalled for to suggest that this is deliberately selective, it does suggest that we need more Wikipedians that have this kind of interest though. I think your complaint is legitimate for the History of Cape Town article though - very little Khoekhoe history is present there. If I have time I will make some additions there. But you could be doing the same! Francoisdjvr (talk) 16:14, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
Untrammeled you are right about the need to expanding the sections on the inhabitants (KhoeKhoe and other peoples) of the area now covered by Cape Town prior to the arrival of Europeans. In an abridged form of course. More does need to be said about them. However you seem to assume bad faith (which is contrary to Wikipedia's AGF policy). I doubt that writers have have "ulterior motives" is the cause of this but rather that no one with detailed knowledge of the subject has chosen to add that information to this article. I would encourage others with such knoweldge and interest to add such content to this page and the accompanying History of Cape Town article.--Discott (talk) 10:20, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Logo of Cape Town, South Africa.png

File:Logo of Cape Town, South Africa.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a non-free use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

-- Marchjuly (talk) 05:08, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi Marchjuly, I see the offending logo has now been deleted so much of what I am going to say is mute now... until someone uploads the logo again that is. ;-)
Anyway, you bring up an interesting point. Fair use rational needs to be given for the use of logos however these days Wikipedia provides a boilerplate fair use rational for organisation logos which would be satisfactory in this case. The other rational that can, I and would argue should, be used for the City of Cape Town's logo (CoCT) is that it is just a collection of simple shapes that do no meet the Threshold of originality (like the Microsoft logo). On the issue of Fair Use its self. South Africa does not have fair use... yet. We have fair dealing instead. Thankfully something like Wikipedia meets the education public benefit criterion of Fair Dealing so it would be sorted there... assuming it did meat the threshold of originality (which I argue it does not). --Discott (talk) 16:48, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Cape Town and City of Cape Town

What is the point of this article, if users are insistent on using demographics and statistics for the metro that has its own article. This article is about Cape Town, not the municipality and hence including areas such as the Helderberg is nonsensical. Either this article should be edited to show the details for Cape Town itself (the metro numbers can also be included as it is in other cities such as London which give details on London, the urban area, as well as the metro). Otherwise if the metro figures are the only figures we might as well merge this article with the city of Cape Town article. --Duncanza (talk) 15:03, 17 September 2020 (UTC)

I changed it to use the metro figures because there are no other reasonable figures to use. If someone can come up with a sensible definition of "Cape Town itself" that is different from the metro area, then I'll be happy for us to use it. But does anyone seriously contend that Athlone or Langa or Mitchell's Plain or Khayelitsha are not part of Cape Town? Because that's what we would be implying by using the census main place boundaries. Indeed all these places are part of Cape Town according to the "Suburbs" section of the article, so it would be rather inconsistent to exclude them when we are talking about statistics. - htonl (talk) 18:51, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
I agree that most sources and people would consider those areas to be part of Cape Town, but on the other hand areas such as Somerset West and Gordon's Bay would not. We do have the problem of a lack of statistics due to how places are broken up. The figures before were I believe that was designated as the place Cape Town in the census. I think we should look for additional sources, but in the mean time I do think that instead of stating total under population and area, it should state Metro. The demographics section on the other hand sufficiently makes this fact clear, a clarity that we currently lack in the infobox.--Duncanza (talk) 19:04, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
Duncanza, What definition for Cape Town are you proposing to be used to define the scope of this article? Please provide a reliable source to support that usage. · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 04:44, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Inaccurate information

Some of the information on this page is extremely outdated as almost 7 years is quite some time. I'm confused as to how one can try and add relevant facts, remove fact that is not even applicable and it still ends up getting reverted.... I have always believed Wikipedia is factual untill having read this Article about Cape Town,having seen that some of these statements are way off. Worldometer Stats Population of South Africa — Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|--Fenixs619 (talk) 02:29, 9 December 2020 (UTC)]] comment added by Fenixs619 (talk • contribs) 02:17, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Fenixs619, welcome to Wikipedia, all changes and additions must be supported by a reliable source. Feel free to be bold and make necessary edits, but be aware that if they are inaccurate or not supported by a reliable source they will most likely be reverted. If you need help, let me know. comrade waddie96 (talk) 11:29, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:15, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

Adding more Info about Crime

Good Morning

I was wondering if we could add more information relating to the nature of crime and its effects on the people of Cape Town? For instance the formation of Vigilante groups and so on? It doesn't have to be exactly that but an expansion might assist readers with understanding the context that crime takes place in.

Good Morning 

Following up AfroManTyg (talk) 06:25, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Possible split of Geography of Cape Town

The geography section is already large enough to be a solid article, and it is incomplete. I suggest that it be split out as the history and government sections are already summaries with main articles. Similar splits will doubtless be necessary for other sections at some stage, but I think geography is the one to do next.· · · Peter Southwood (talk): 06:20, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Highest Point

Does anyone have a source for the highest point? Because if we're talking Cape-Town-the-town, it'd be Maclear's Beacon at 1,086 m. And if we expand to the region, it's probably this point with 1,800+ m. Either way, I can't figure out 1,5xx m. K. Oblique 12:06, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Karl Oblique your linked area does not appear to be in the City of Cape Town. Could you be more specific in identifying the point to which you refer? · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 11:44, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
1590.4m is the height of Somerset-Sneeukop, which is actually the tripoint of COCT and the Stellenbosch and Theewaterskloof munis. - htonl (talk) 14:47, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:06, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

"CapeTownMagazine.com" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect CapeTownMagazine.com and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 18 § CapeTownMagazine.com until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Vahurzpu (talk) 21:16, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Cape_Town/Archive_1&oldid=1173526228"