Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/City of Dubbo


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result was Keep ~ trialsanderrors 05:24, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

City of Dubbo


It's a double page of Dubbo, New South Wales and the information in the "City of" page is identical to the NSW page (which has lots more information on the city). Really, there's no need for the City of Dubbo page as I see it.  Gromr e  aper  (Talk) / (Cont)  03:21, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as per Naming conventions (settlements) Keep per recent revisions.-- TBC Φ  talk?  03:27, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per TBC. TJ Spyke 03:47, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per TBC.-- Kf4bdy talk contribs 04:00, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: I have registed a complaint in relation to this discussion at Australian Wikipedians' notice board: "Why is Articles for deletion/City of Dubbo not listed at this notice board? This discussion seems to ignore the work being done at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian places" --Grahamec 04:09, 11 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions.   -- Longhair\talk 04:11, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. OK, since someone is complaining that the work being done at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian places is being overlooked, could they please explain what is the difference between the Dubbo page and the City of Dubbo page and what it is that they are trying to achieve. I will withhold commenting on the deletion itself until they do, but right now I see no reason to keep. --Bduke 04:43, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Hold it! Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian places has established naming conventions, and while currently the articles may reflect similar content, the intent is for LGA's and towns (which are vastly different) to have seperate articles. The town Dubbo, and the LGA Dubbo are different and with time they will reflect this. Please do not delete this page without considering debate at the afore mentioned WP. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SauliH (talk • contribs)
 * OK, I'll say Keep, but just do a quick fix on both articles so the difference is clear and cross reference the two is a way that is not confusing. The rest of the detail can be done later. --Bduke 06:00, 11 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Strong keep - TBC, Naming conventions (settlements) does not endorse deletion or even renaming of this article. In fact, it says "Local government areas are at their official name." The City of Dubbo is an LGA, and the article is correctly named. Likewise the City of Melbourne is the LGA for Melbourne, Victoria, and a different entity from Melbourne the city. --Canley 05:20, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. As of now, both articles describe the LGA and neither focus on the city. In fact, the first sentence of Dubbo, New South Wales states that "Dubbo is a Local Government Area".-- TBC Φ  talk?  05:25, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment (after edit conflict) I disagree. Dubbo, New South Wales does say it's a LGA, and this should probably be changed to city, but after that the content is different - City of Dubbo covers the council and the other villages that the city encompasses as it should, and the other has detailed information about the city itself. --Canley 05:36, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

I will grant this... the lead in for Dubbo, New South Wales should not read "Dubbo is a Local Government Area". In fact, articles for places in Australia. I am going to change the lead, to avoid this first item of confusion. Place names in Australia are a work in progress as the 'stub' designation specifies on the City of Dubbo page.SauliH 05:32, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * That's better, thanks SauliH. --Canley 05:37, 11 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep as per the discussions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian places there are a number Australian articles that are being split into the suburd/town area and the Local Government Authority this is just one of them. Gnangarra 05:57, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Dubbo is a town; City of Dubbo is a local government area. There shouldn't be two articles with virtually identical content; but there should be two articles. WikiProject Australian places is currently dealing with this precise issue. Trust us; we can handle it. Hesperian 06:33, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * see "Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian places for ongoing related discussion.SauliH 06:38, 11 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect to Dubbo, NSW. There isn't enough material there to be worth two pages.  If at some future date the Dubbo page gets too long, then split it.  Regards, Ben Aveling 06:39, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The City of Dubbo article was created only six days ago please give editors time to expand there is enough information for both articles to exist. Gnangarra 06:42, 11 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep per other keeps †he Bread  06:40, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, Dubbo and the City of Dubbo are two different entities. So they both need seperate articles, and all real places are notable. The discusssions at WikiProject Australian places says it all. --Ter e nce Ong (C 07:08, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per recent revisions. I live in Perth, and although I don't like the Eastern States much (or the people who live in them), this has to stay. It's the Australian equivalent of a metropolitan area, I think. Black-Velvet  07:19, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, Dubbo, New South Wales is the place, this is the LGA. Lankiveil 08:56, 11 November 2006 (UTC).
 * Keep, per just about everyone else - this is the local government area, the other article is a city in it that shares the same name. --bainer (talk) 10:23, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. This is in line with work at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian places. There is no duplicity between the articles (edit: I can see that there was some until today, but an AfD was not the way to handle this) - one is a history of a local government area and body, the other of a population centre. If there is indeed any duplicity it should be resolved so that the above principle holds true, but I don't see any at the present time. Orderinchaos78 (t 10:39, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. Upon my nomination of this article, I had no idea about the WP:Australia naming conventions and the article really was just a lot of the same from the Dubbo, NSW article with no distinction between the Local Government Area and the city itself.  I guess the radical changes to the nominated article just go to show how good Wikipedians as a community can be.   Gromr  e  aper  (Talk) / (Cont)  12:25, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, as above.--Grahamec 13:17, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Grahamec has done a lot of work on sorting out the LGA content separate from the town content in NSW over the last week. He started by creating all the new articles and I expect will continue to sort out the content. This was caused by earlier editors attempting to keep LGA and town content in one article. This has led to confusion in some cases (Dubbo may not have been one - not sure) as the names often correspond. Some other states have "always" had separate town and LGA articles. --Scott Davis Talk 13:24, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, articles do not refer to the same thing -- Renesis (talk) 18:58, 11 November 2006 (UTC).
 * Keep Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Australian places seems to know what they're doing. Let them do it. --Falcorian (talk) 19:13, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * thanks for the vote of confidence. :P :)SauliH 20:17, 11 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep City of Dubbo and Dubbo are distinct topics as per many people above. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 19:28, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Real place. --Oakshade 20:55, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. It is a local government area as distinct from the town/city of Dubbo which is its principle town. I was tempted to speedy keep this given the comments of the nominator following the improvements to the article but there are a couple of delete votes. Capitalistroadster 00:07, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. Perhaps the person who put this article up for deletion doesn't understand the local government laws in Australia. I'll start an article about it. Atlantis Hawk 00:15, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per standard.--cj | talk 08:00, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep as per Scott Davis and Atlantis Hawk. JROBBO 07:03, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. We don't delete articles on US counties. Rebecca 03:49, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Strone Keep as per policies mandated by WikiProject: Australian Places. The LGA and town are two separately governed entities. --Rambutaan 00:44, 15 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.