Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Canadian provinces and territories by area


 * 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 redirect to Provinces and territories of Canada.  —&#8288;Scotty Wong &#8288;— 22:13, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

List of Canadian provinces and territories by area

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Fails WP:NOTSTATS (since the sole purpose of this page is listing a few statistics, which can be and already are covered elsewhere) and is particularly redundant to Provinces and territories of Canada, where the most significant aspects of this are already covered. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 00:07, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists and Canada. Shellwood (talk) 07:07, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:12, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Provinces_and_territories_of_Canada, which contains all the relevant information. –LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄ ) 11:20, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment: I'm not going to remark on its notability, but as a Canadian I found looking at the lists useful. Nunavut in particular was a surprise. Curiocurio (talk) 03:10, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep WP:NOTSTATS is the suggested reason to delete. I quote it here in full Excessive listings of unexplained statistics. Statistics that lack context or explanation can reduce readability and may be confusing; accordingly, statistics should be placed in tables to enhance readability, and articles with statistics should include explanatory text providing context. Where statistics are so lengthy as to impede the readability of the article, the statistics can be split into a separate article and summarized in the main article. (e.g., statistics from the main article 2012 United States presidential election have been moved to a related article Nationwide opinion polling for the 2012 United States presidential election). Wikipedia:Notability#Stand-alone lists offers more guidance on what kind of lists are acceptable, and Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists#Selection criteria offers guidance on what entries should be included. I don't think this article is an excessive list of unexplained statistics. On the contrary, I think it is well explained. I find it not confusing at all, in fact I find it clear. As per the guidance, the data is in tables and has explanatory text. The guidance suggests splitting things into separate articles, which is the opposite of what the nominator is proposing. My reading of this guidance is that if we are to follow the spirit and the technicalities of WP:NOTSTATS, then keep is the only logical conclusion. CT55555 (talk) 03:54, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Easily meets WP:GNG, is closed-ended as a class, and is supportable by WP:RS.  Potentially useful to readers.  WP:Not paper and WP:Preserve.  7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 11:32, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * GNG reads: "A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." How does this meet GNG? -Indy beetle (talk) 14:13, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Some examples of where the area of Canada's provinces and territories are included in literature (and there are many, including already in the article):
 * Johnson, G., Fisher, S. A. (1904). Canada: Its History, Productions and Natural Resources. Canada: Department of Agriculture of Canada.
 * Federalism and Economic Reform: International Perspectives. (2006). United States: Cambridge University Press p197
 * Political Competition and Economic Regulation. (2007), Taylor & Francis. p59 CT55555 (talk) 16:48, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment It should probably be noted for the record that this was posted to WP:Article Rescue Squadron – Rescue list with the comment These noms make no sense, its basic statistical information. I don't see questioning of the accuracy of the statistics, additional sources aren't necessary. What is needed are experts to tell the echo chamber of ghouls voting delete about the validity of these lists of information. (the comment was later removed). TompaDompa (talk) 16:22, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * A dedicated editor was emotional and posted something, then two hours later removed it before anyone responded.  D r e a m Focus  16:25, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Not an accusation. It is considered best practices to note in the AfD discussion when it has been posted to WP:Article Rescue Squadron – Rescue list, and I figured that leaving out either that the comment was made or that it was removed would be an instance of "not telling the full story". TompaDompa (talk) 16:48, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Provinces and territories of Canada. This list is redundant. -Indy beetle (talk) 00:33, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment I did not post it at WP:ARS. But I came here from there.
 * I assumed that the customary notice had been posted here. I still don't know it was or wasn't at the time.  If I had noticed the omission, I would have corrected it when I posted my reply.  I will try to be more diligent in the future.  7&amp;6=thirteen (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 00:40, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
 * , please see here. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 11:21, 15 June 2022 (UTC)


 * <small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. <b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 11:27, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
 * If that template is used, it is neutral, and simply states the fact that is of interest to a project. Without the need for User:TompaDompa's explanation. He too could put it in,  <b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 11:27, 15 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep or lightly merge to the main article; not all information is covered there and the statistics aren’t indiscriminate, trivial or “unexplained”. Dronebogus (talk) 14:19, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect: quite redundant. I see nothing significant on this page not covered already on the page for Canada's provinces and territories, both land and water areas are given. regards, TryKid&thinsp;<sup style="white-space:nowrap;">[dubious – discuss] 17:33, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect per LaundryPizza03. desmay (talk) 19:03, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Provinces and territories of Canada, which also covers this topic. MrsSnoozyTurtle 23:12, 17 June 2022 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.