In the absence of context there is no best answer. You need context to know why London, UK is much more likely to be the right London "without additional context".
sigh why do people always feel the need to redefine words?
By any definition of the word, "best" is correct term to use here.
Here's a few definitions of the word "best", please and in all honesty, tell me why the use is wrong given the following:
• best: "In the most excellent or most suitable manner; with most advantage or success: as, he who runs best gets the prize; the best-behaved boy in the school; the best-cultivated fields."
• best: "In or to the highest degree; to the fullest extent; most fully: as, those who know him best speak highly of him; those best informed say so; the best-abused man in town."
• best: "Of the highest quality, excellence, or standing: said of both persons and things in regard to mental, moral, or physical qualities, whether inherent or acquired: as, the best writers and speakers; the best families; the best judgment; the best years of one's life; a house built of the best materials."
So if there is a finite set of possible answers and a set of criteria that establish a metric to turn this set into an ordered set, there is by definition a non-empty set of best answers. The context-free metric for ranking cities is global relevance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_city
And now please look at the number 1 spot of this list.
Thanks for reading.
> The context-free metric for ranking cities is global relevance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_city
There is no context whatsoever in global relevance.
If you ask someone what time it is, you don't get asked "where?" in return - the current location is implied. Same with cities - if you mention London, it is implied that you mean the most globally relevant London, not the one that was named after it.
I do not find the word context-free in that page. That's even ignoring that there are different rankings on that page, each with different outcomes, once again showing that without context there is no "best".
> If you ask someone what time it is, you don't get asked "where?" in return - the current location is implied.
Just because it's implied doesn't mean it's not context.
So you're that guy who people should never ask for directions then, because instead of explaining how to get to a place from where you stand, you'd ask for the exact date and time of travel, and the starting location (including continent, country, city, and street address)?
> I do not find the word context-free in that page.
Of course you don't, why would you even? "Context-free" is specific to the issue at hand, e.g. given no additional information (e.g. where are you right know and in what context do you ask the question) and a list of possible answers, what would be the most likely?
Have you ever watched "Family Feud"? It's an entire show based around that concept. It sounds like you are one of those guys who, when given "We asked 100 people what you would find in a kitchen" would expect the top answer to be "DEA agents", because "kitchen" could refer to a drug lab...
> That's even ignoring that there are different rankings on that page, each with different outcomes, once again showing that without context there is no "best".
Are you shitting me? The point is, that in none of those lists - regardless of relative ordering - other cities besides London, UK, and the rest of the well-known global cities are listed.
It doesn't matter whether London, UK takes the #1 spot based on some set of metrics, or the 3rd based on another - the point is that it's ALWAYS London, UK and NEVER London, Ontario.