Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Largest urban areas of the European Union


 * 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 of the debate was keep. - Mailer Diablo 01:01, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Largest urban areas of the European Union
This list is absolute nonsense and should be deleted.. The list is absolutely not credible or reliable... the definition that the writer tries to explain is vague and totally subjective. There is already an article ranking EU cities by official "city" populations that has credible sources unlike this. Instead of this being one list from one definitive official government source listing the largest cities in Europe according to a uniform standard, this is just some one person's únofficial collection of information from various "sources". This is simply not an official list from a credible source. The author of the article also labels the article an "attempt" to rank EU cities by size - his attempt. I don't think the Wiki is the place for such attempts let official government offices do that. The defintion used here to define an urban area is an invention of who ever wrote this article and is not applied uniformly throughout the article. The ranking is mostly confusing misinformation - there are some things here that simply make no sense- why does the Paris urban area encompass basically all of the Ile de France region, a huge region including urban, surburban, and even rural areas, while London here only includes the areas inside the so-called Green Belt when the city's surbuban sprawl is far larger. And those are just two examples of the many anamolies here. I don't get it - the method used for this list is nonsense and is not in line with any EU statistics or in many cases the official sources from the individual cities. It is articles like this that makes so many people distrust the information on wikipedia. 84.153.37.123 12:19, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
 * It is not necessary to delete the article in order to rewrite it in the way that you describe. One doesn't even need an account in order to do so.  This is Articles for deletion.  Don't come here unless you want an administrator to delete an article.  Requests for comment is across the quad. Uncle G 13:25, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

I said the article should be deleted and not rewritten, I only suggested rewriting as one possible alternative in case nobody saw a reason for deletion. The article is flawed - the title says list largest urban areas in the EU, there is already an article listing the largest cities in the EU according to official population. The ranking is not credible or official as i said and that makes the article unneccesary in my opinion. Maybe I was not totally clear but i do think the article should be deleted. --Jimini 14:09, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete unless someone can point out who would want to know this stuff (and could not find it easily elsewhere) Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] :: AfD? 16:15, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
 * comment- the people at Global city would cetainly be interested. Davidrowe 08:47, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Neutral The article talk points out serious methodology and citation problems. I'm not sure this should go straight to deletion.  Has mediation been tried? Durova 16:24, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
 * I can not see how this article can be fundamentally improved- the whole problem is the author's notion of an urban area- it is pretty much a one-man invetion and the ranking is not trustworthy at all... I don't see what mediation will change for this and after all there is already a Wiki article that lists the EU cities ranked by official city population.. --Jimini 21:11, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and improve. Trollderella 17:23, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
 * How would you improve it unless you delete the ranking, which is the reasoning behing the article - I do not see any way to improve it..without a real list (ranking) by some official source, which I guess the EU has not made so as not to offend anyone probably.--Jimini 21:17, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep ok list.  Grue   18:00, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep The angry user who proposed the list for deletion doesn't seem to know much about statistics. It's not even worth arguing. Everybody just check the World Urbanization Prospects report pulished by the United Nations in 2003, look at Table A.12, and you'll see that the UN figures are strikingly similar to those in the table proposed for deletion. So if the list is "absolute nonsense" and "absolutely not credible", then call the United Nations statisticians to let them know that their data are absolute nonsense and that you know better. Hardouin 03:54, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Well it is your list so of course you are going to say keep it..and actually you make a good point if the UN stats are so similar, why not just use those official stats instead of your little collection. And I am not angry I just think your list is not credible.
 * Keep. The list's methodology makes a lot more sense than Largest European metropolitan areas. Martg76 23:11, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Davidrowe 09:21, 14 November 2005 (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.