Talk:Statistical area (United States)

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Urban studies and planning Mid‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Urban studies and planning, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Urban studies and planning on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Urban studies and planningWikipedia:WikiProject Urban studies and planningTemplate:WikiProject Urban studies and planningUrban studies and planning articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Statistics

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Statistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of statistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.StatisticsWikipedia:WikiProject StatisticsTemplate:WikiProject StatisticsStatistics articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Archives: 1

"Primary statistical areas" - do these really exist?

Over the past few months, I went through and updated the state-level statistical area with 2023 population statistics and delineations provided by the OMB in their latest bulletin. I was reviewing the talk page history for the old version of this page and noticed a discussion about whether or not the concept of a "primary statistical area" actually exists, or if this is a neologism. I think this discussion is still relevant and am wondering if anyone watching this page might have thoughts on if we should continue to count and rank "primary statistical areas" on these pages.

Currently within the ecosystem of these pages, "primary statistical areas" are any "top level" delineated statistical area. This always includes all combined statistical areas, and also includes metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas which are not part of a combined statistical area.

While in my subjective view, this distinction makes sense, reading the discussion as well as reviewing the sources we have available is leading me to wonder if we need to abandon the term "primary statistical area" and have this page rank the core-based statistical areas and combined statistical areas separately (and cascade this change down to the state-level pages as well). The OMB bulletin does not refer to "primary statistical areas" in any way, and searching for "primary statistical area" in quotes in a search engine does not bring up any primary sources (pardon the pun) from the US government or elsewhere.

I'm currently of the opinion that we forego the notion of a "primary statistical area" entirely and rework these pages to reflect this, but I can't claim to be an expert on this, so I'll leave this discussion item up for a while to see if anyone has thoughts on this before I start making any changes. I had intended to update this page just to update the populations and delineations/naming of the areas, but this realization has given me pause. Rhonetalsma (talk) 21:36, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The concept of a "primary statistical area" is 100% WP:OR and does not belong here. We already have lists of CBSAs and their subsets (Metropolitan and Micropolitan statistical areas), as well as a list of Combined statistical areas. Information about primary statistical areas can be removed, because all of its information is redundant, as well as being inappropriate. Please see my reasoning at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Primary statistical area. - Eureka Lott 23:17, 15 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly object to the removal of the list of what had been called "primary statistical areas". The now-removed list merely consolidated the list of combined statistical areas and the list of metropolitan areas, and that was a very useful resource. The "redundancy" here is not something to spurn. Whether or not "primary statistical areas" are a Wikipedia invention, there is now no way to compare the largest grouping to which any city belongs. It may be the case that CSAs and other areas are technically not meant to be compared directly, but large metro areas like San Diego and Phoenix are entirely absent from the CSA list, making that list wholly inadequate for assessing at a glance what the largest grouping each city in the US belongs to is. In my opinion, even if the term "primary statistical area" is Wikipedia-invented, it is still hugely preferable to keep the list in order to still keep that very useful information accessible. A rename and a disclaimer could remedy the problem of "primary statistical areas" not existing outside of Wikipedia. 2603:800C:1D01:1200:7881:F43A:472D:6E17 (talk) 06:41, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not that MSAs and CSAs are "technically not meant to be compared directly." They're explicitly not meant to be compared. The bulletin from the Office of Management and Budget that defines the MSAs and CSAs says, Because Combined Statistical Areas represent groupings of Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas (in any combination), they should not be ranked or compared with individual Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas. Nowhere in the document is the term "primary statistical area" mentioned. The concept is entirely WP:OR, and combining MSAs and CSAs in a single list is entirely inappropriate. - Eureka Lott 18:41, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree with the assertion that the now-redacted list was a simple consolidation of CSAs and CBSAs given that it excluded all CBSAs which were part of CSAs. CSAs are by definition inclusive of multiple CBSAs, so trying to compare the San Diego MSA to any given CSA is an unfair & inaccurate comparison anyway. The CBSAs within a given CSA are geographically near one another and have commuting ties, but they are explicitly not a single CBSA the way that San Diego is (for example). It's apples and oranges. Rhonetalsma (talk) 20:25, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]