Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of cities and towns in South Australia


 * 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. &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 17:17, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

List of cities and towns in South Australia

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is an incomplete mess of a thing - it's basically a relic from before Wikipedia had a category system that somehow survived this long, and is the sort of area much better covered by categories now. A discussion back in 2005 failed to come up with a consensus about what to do with it - I think it's about time we junked it. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 05:32, 7 March 2016 (UTC)


 * A difficulty with the categories page is that any town that does not yet have a Wikipedia page does not get any mention except possibly within articles. There are numerous redlinks on this page that over time will (hopefully) prompt contributors to write new pages. But duplication of information, and inconsistency between the pages is not good either. Are there any suggestions as to how to show the list of 'other' towns? For example, is it appropriate to add redlinks to the bottom of the Categories page as "Other towns without Wikipages", essentially merging the two pages? A similar issue exists for Rivers of South Australia Hiraffe (talk) 08:46, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The redlinks in this page are listed completely at random: there are hundreds of places without articles, but very few of them are listed here. Complete lists of gazetted places (including redlinks) are in the articles on South Australian local government areas, and do a much better job of serving that purpose than this article, showing complete lists broken down by region as opposed to a few random links from all over that've been thrown in here over the years. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 09:46, 7 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  Vipinhari  &#124;&#124;  talk  09:03, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  Vipinhari  &#124;&#124;  talk  09:03, 7 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep but some work is required. I think this article would serve a better purpose if it was tabulated and other useful information was included, along the lines of List of cities in Japan. It appears that there is a list of some sort for every state, e.g. List of towns in Western Australia and List of localities in Victoria (Australia). So the problem is not limited to the SA page. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 00:16, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
 * This is not equivalent to the List of cities in Japan one: that seems to be more equivalent to what we would call Local government areas of South Australia but in a totally different bureaucratic structure (this is a list of populated places: SA has no official concept of "cities" and "towns" as distinct things). I would be happy to add all the others to this nomination if people would rather deal with them together: the SA one is just particularly frustrating because it's ridiculously overlinked and so hard to miss - a couple of editors keep adding see also links from every populated place in the state. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 00:45, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Indeed I was comparing apples with oranges. I think it would be more appropriate if the list was broken up and towns were listed within the article of their respective LGA. After sampling a few of the non-metropolitan LGA articles (Wattle Range Council, Naracoorte Lucindale Council, District Council of Robe) they already have a list of localities, which makes this redundant. Once we ensure that each of the localities is included in the appropriate article, I think we can delete this page.
 * For the sake of thoroughness, perhaps a separate discussion for each state is required to ensure no information is lost. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 01:00, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
 * That makes sense - how would you feel about deleting this and shifting that resulting discussion to an appropriate WikiProject page? I'd be on board with helping ensure the LGA articles get completed lists of localities - I'm already doing it for South Australia and partially did it for Victoria too but would be happy to make doing the lot a short-term mini-project. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 01:08, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I would suggest sorting the LGAs by South Australian government region. This would allow the inclusion of localities and suburbs that are located in the 60% of the state’s area that are located outside of local government areas as well as the small number of suburbs/localities within the local government areas that have been excluded by the South Australian government for strategic reasons, i.e. parts of False Bay and  Mullaquana.  Regards Cowdy001 (talk) 06:04, 16 March 2016 (UTC)05:45, 16 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep; I don't believe that the LGA pages solves the problem. Firstly, depending on why a reader is looking for towns, listing by LGA may not provide a natural means to find localities. Having a dedicated list seems to have better utility than just towns being listed in an arbitrary location. A second issue is that many towns and localities are not in a LGA (for example, Innamincka, see http://www.lga.sa.gov.au/councilmaps) and not all LGAs have a Wikipage (e.g. Whyalla City Council). Listing localities under LGAs is only useful for those who know which LGAs to look under or who happen to be looking at the LGA for some reason. Also, for some LGAs, their page will become cluttered by numerous localities if the list is to be complete; and if not complete then where is the ‘complete’ list to be? Looking at List of localities in Victoria (Australia), it does seem that a simple populated list like this loses its value as there is no context. Suggest that it would be best to develop this page properly (as towns and localities) to be a decent summary table including perhaps name, LGA and/or region, population, settlement date, comments/notes. List of cities and towns in Arkansas is a reasonable example, and offers the ability to sort by the different headings. Perhaps the Category page is actually the redundant one as a separate list page gives better opportunity to customise (e.g. to introduce with sub-lists of largest towns, oldest towns etc) rather than being only an alphabetical list.  Hiraffe (talk) 00:04, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, I must respond to some of your comments. Firstly, I have found that the LGASA website is not a reliable source as its lists of places appear to be in some cases at least 15 years out of date.  In respect to places such as Innamincka, please refer my comments above regarding the use of South Australian Government regions as a means of sorting LGAs.  Secondly, if you wish to retain the option for searching a locality or suburb by name, I would suggest the renaming the article as List of suburbs and localities in South Australia and remove anything is not suburb and locality and add an introductory paragraph that includes where to go to find SA cities and towns (also please refer below).  Thirdly, what is wrong with a complete list of suburbs and localities for LGA - I have recently done this for the Kangaroo Island Council, City of Whyalla and others?  Should not the WP be comprehensive?  Fourthly, Whyalla City Council does have an article, i.e. City of Whyalla.  I know of its existence because I recently edited it.  Finally, I would like to emphasis and add to what has been stated above, “towns” in SA no longer officially exist and now are part of either suburbs or localities. Also as far as I am aware, the term ‘city’ in SA refers to a LGA whose population has reached a particular level at which its name is changed to include the word ‘city’.  I remember being told about this in primary school; however, I have not able to find a online source to cite.  Regards   Cowdy001 (talk) 06:41, 16 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep - simple fact it's of Encyclopedic value. Aeonx (talk) 07:07, 14 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. "Cities and towns" is/are a notable thing.  They can be categorized.  The categories can be split by country and by state/province.  They can be listed.  Oddly, List of cities and towns is currently a redlink, but see and help out at Draft:List of cities and towns.  That world-wide list should be fully started and link to the many "List of cities and towns in ..." list-articles that already exist.  There exist huge lists such as List of populated places in the United States and List of bridges and List of artists and List of Liberty ships, all of which can be subdivided by geographic area or alphabetically or otherwise.  Lists can provide references and redlinks and photographs;  see wp:CLN why having categories and lists (and navigation templates) are complementary.  Making a table which could contain images and more is a fine idea, but that's for Talk page discussion, has no AFD implication. -- do  ncr  am  02:01, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
 * They aren't a notable thing because there "cities" and "towns" do not formally exist in South Australia: this list is WP:OR. Cowdy001 provides one way that it could be brought into the realm of "things not made up by Wikipedians". The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 09:35, 16 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. Apart from other issues, it's just a substituted category. Perhaps allow recreation in a better, tablified form.  Sandstein   20:12, 16 March 2016 (UTC)☻
 * Keep Standard list. The terminology may not be exact, but it is what people are likely to look for,    DGG ( talk )


 * 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.