Talk:Rural area

This  level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Geography High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Geography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of geography 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.GeographyWikipedia:WikiProject GeographyTemplate:WikiProject Geographygeography articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Geography To-do list: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : See Requested articles/Social sciences/Geography, cities, regions and named places and Missing articles about Locations Assess : Tag related article talk pages with {{WikiProject Geography}}. To help assess the quality and importance of geography articles, please see: Unassessed geography articles and Unknown-importance geography articles. Cleanup : See Geography articles needing attention Deletion sorting : Listed at Geographic related deletion discussions Geographical coordinates : See Articles missing geocoordinate data by country Infobox : See Geography articles needing infoboxes Map : See Wikipedia requested maps Notability : See Geography articles with topics of unclear notability Photo : See Wikipedia requested photographs of places Stubs : See Geography stubs Home Living High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Home Living, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of home-related articles 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.Home LivingWikipedia:WikiProject Home LivingTemplate:WikiProject Home Livinghome articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale.

Hey everyone I just added a section to North America-->Rural Gender. This topic explains a number of research articles that I have found and used to explain rural gender. Please let me know if you have suggestions to improve this or any additions for the section. Thanks!Lauren Taylor 455 (talk) 22:52, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Should this really have an adjective as a title? How about a move to Countryside, which currently redirects here? -- Oliver P. 02:57, 22 Aug 2003 (UTC)

You are correct that an adjective doesn't make a great titlem though we also have "urban."

However, "rural" is probably the operative word; countryside has a subtley different meaning. So I don't recommend such a move. A move to "rural geography" or some such might be more appropriate.

Kat 12:26, 22 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I now question why Rural was moved to Rural area. Tha Urban article is not a redirect but a disambiguation page. Surely the terms urban and rural are both adjectives but as they are also antonyms they should receive similar treatment. While I agree that the content of this article has morphed into an article about Rural areas, I think there is still a need for an article about the concept of something being Rural. I have started discussion by raising the question on Talk:Rural. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 23:59, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For the newest update on my plans for the Wiki page I will still be adding a subheading to Rural Areas North America but since there is one on rural schools and rural health I will add the section "Rural Gender". This will have information regarding views,ideas, and social norms that are acceptable in the rural areas of North America. To introduce the idea of gender I think there needs to be an explanation of what gender is and how it can be learned and so forth for this I will use out class text and a website I found in my annotated bibliography research that helps explain gender. This will help add more to the Wiki edit rural areas page because a large part rural areas work differently then urban areas, especially in North America so having this will be an informative contribution. In order to make my Wiki edit I plan on setting it up as such: first reflecting the generalized ideas that exist in these areas. This means the roles that men and women play, for this section my sources "Families in troubled times: Adapting to change in rural america" and "Gender equality in the rural sector: The ever-present challenge" will help talk about what the men and women feel they need to accomplish to be a socially accepted member of society in a rural area. Then I will go on to explain the differences that they face when these gender roles are placed in rural areas using the source "Gender and rural poverty" which explains problems that women endure that men do not in rural areas. Finally, my last piece will be the gender differences and how gender related "problems" such as homosexuality is not tolerated and not really introduced in rural areas. I have a couple of good sources for this such as " Explaining Comfort with Homosexuality in Rural America " and "Just Queer Folks: Gender and Sexuality in Rural America". These three topics I feel are overall views about gender and they come hand in hand with each other. These issues are important to understand when understanding and learning about gender. I do think a main point that I want to make when giving a definition of gender is that gender is learned and means different things in different societies. Lauren Taylor 455 (talk) 06:14, 7 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please either cut this section down significantly or make a new wiki page. Gender issues are a very minor part of the overall concept of rural areas and, as set up today, nearly a third of this article now deals with the topic. That's WAY too out of balance. 108.64.125.7 (talk) 17:58, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with above. There may be room in this article for discussion on cultural, political, and economic differences between rural and urban communities (that's what I was hoping to find when I browsed here today). But the rest of the article needs to be complete first, and besides, gender issues are not likely to be most salient of these differences. 151.190.40.1 (talk) 19:02, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are plenty of other synonyms for rural areas, some of them derogatory (depending on who you ask): sticks, boonies, boondocks, middle of nowhere. I usually use the term “northwoods” in reference to Central Minnesota since it’s so heavily forested and rather far north. I think we should include some of these. Lmeister (talk) 15:33, 8 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to portray rural areas as lacking services, when in most cases a majority of those mentioned will exist in rural towns of say 1000 people. Outside of rural settlements the mentioned lack of services is far more applicable. Nbound 01:41, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In Canada, there is a thing called a Census metropolitan area which has census collection from both rural and urban portions. Also, the Metro Detroit area is a metropolis consisting of counties rather than contiguous cities; I also believe that some rural parts of the counties are considered part of the Metro Detroit area. Should we make an article called Rural metropolis since some rural land is considered part of metropolises for major cities? --SuperDude 01:12, 9 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Due to limited to nonexistant law enforcement, those living in these areas will shoot and kill any and all intruders. Martial Law 05:49, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This very short article seems to me to be a stub, but I do't know what category of stub to put it under. Brbigam 23:38, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In Brazil, "Rural" was the name given to Wyllis' old Jeep station wagon. [[1]] - Stormwatch 05:11, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think there might be something to add into the article about that many as much as about 56% of people who live in rural areas in North America are on the autistic spectrum. I think I read it somewhere but I forgot the source if anyone can find it.

The Rural town oxymoronic expression has about a million google hits. Can someone add a couple of words about it? `'mikka (t) 01:15, 18 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed the following text:

Rurality can also be determined by the amount of people per square mile (population density). An area with a low population density can be determined as more rural than a place that has a high population density.

I am not an expert on such things but I think that would depend not only on the country (Australia versus the United Kingdom for example), but would also depend on the region. The "per square mile" measurement is not used in those countries which don't use the imperial system (which is everywhere besides the UK and the US). I didn't see the point of clarifying that so I removed the section. I also removed the parts about rural communities in the UK - this is an international article and should describe the universal characteristics of rural communities, not the system used by one particular country. Graham87 11:46, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

rural areas are empty areas of land with lack of people as opposed to city life. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.73.100.217 (talk) 08:52, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have sympathy with the removal of this waffling essay, but the referenced content might be worth boiling down to some concise points. Johnbod (talk) 05:43, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the India section needs to be completely reworked, as it almost seems promotional. COI perhaps? None of the information is relevant or backed up by citations. --Skirts89 (talk) 15:39, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For an inhabitant of rural Bavaria (like me), the section on Germany here could leads to some smile, since the Nigerian scolar on whose article the section is based makes the same mistake that many foreigners do: Writing/saying "Germany" while meaning "Bavaria". Yes, what is true for most areas in Bavaria (and also other parts of south Germany), but, 1) not only because of government measures but especially the fact that internationally active manufacturing companies are based in small towns and even villages (providing skilled jobs and tax revenues), 2) the situation is pretty differnet for the sparsely populated rural areas in eastern/northern Germany. Here, the situation is simialr to most other countries; the younger and skilled move to the cities, the old and the unskilled remain, lack of larger companies mean higher unemployment, infrastructure is expensive in upkeep for the local authorities, investments won't pay off...--Antemister (talk) 12:11, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Rural area. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110212033139/http://ncseonline.org/nle/crsreports/05jun/97-905.pdf to http://ncseonline.org/nle/crsreports/05jun/97-905.pdf

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 11:10, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Rural area. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131014182213/http://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html to https://www.census.gov/geo/www/ua/ua_2k.html

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 23:22, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Rural area. 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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071017182257/http://nal.usda.gov/ric/ricpubs/what_is_rural.htm to http://www.nal.usda.gov/ric/ricpubs/what_is_rural.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080401062838/http://www.defra.gov.uk/rural/ruralstats/rural-definition.htm to http://www.defra.gov.uk/rural/ruralstats/rural-definition.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140225014239/http://www.dispensingdoctor.org/about.php?pid=43 to http://www.dispensingdoctor.org/about.php?pid=43
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120609065635/http://www.bmelv.de/SharedDocs/Standardartikel/EN/Agriculture/FarminginGermany.html to http://www.bmelv.de/SharedDocs/Standardartikel/EN/Agriculture/FarminginGermany.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080516021007/http://www.gos.gov.uk/gonw/nwraf/ to http://www.gos.gov.uk/gonw/nwraf/

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 20:23, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be a good idea to enter the places in an alphabetical order, so for example, Asia comes before Europe, North America before South America, and so on? I think this arrangement of doing things would be a bit clearer, and should be rolled out over ALL of Wikipedia. Kate Butch (talk) 02:51, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Which alphabetical order do you propose? If we use the alphabet then Africa comes before the Americas (Central, North and South) possibly Antarcticand Arctic then Asia (East, South and South-East), Europe (Central, Eastern, Northern, Southern, Western) and lastly Oceania and the Pacific (Australasia, Central, Eastern, Northern, South, Western), might work, though I am uncertain where Sub-antarctic might fit, under A or S? No doubt the order could change if this was done in Chinese, Russian or Arabic, too. In many respects the order and grouping depends on your point of view. Actually the current order makes sense too because it runs West to East and North to South. It is a bit like choosing where the global meridian is placed on a sphere of the Earth and that North is on the top of the map. Please remember circles are infinitely round and so do not have a start or end. Mostly it is convention, 'cos that is the way it has been done in the past. And Wikipedia contributors have chosen to follow the convention. If you want to standardise the presentation order across ALL of Wikipedia, or even just the English Wikipedia, this is not the place to hold that conversation. The advantage of the current order is that it is not alphabetical and the same order can be used in different languages. In many respects not having an alphabetical order is a more neutral point of view. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 04:02, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I added the Globalize tag to the Human fertility section as the content in that section deals primarily with India. Perhaps this section is best made a subsection under India, but I wonder if the trends it discusses are applicable to other countries, or even worth a separate article, so have tagged it for now so the available options can be discussed. - Cameron Dewe (talk) 02:06, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

When this edit was made in February 2018, inserting the section about Pakistan the section about Human fertility was separated from the section about India - Cameron Dewe (talk) 02:35, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Talk 2406:B400:D1:C781:F8B5:85B2:E665:AFAE (talk) 17:37, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

🌍 is a gift for us 152.59.194.58 (talk) 15:06, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]