Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of countries by population in 2050


 * 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   delete without prejudice against recreation in...er...2050 :) Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:46, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

List of countries by population in 2050

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Clearly, the title is wrong (this article is not a "list" at all), but I'm not sure it can survive even with a different title. The references are not properly cited. It is impossible to tell what is original research / synthesis, and what is actually from the sources. The author also added the same content to 2050, where it might be better there. Singularity42 (talk) 17:11, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - this is about 40 years early. Harley Hudson (talk) 17:57, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete We don't know because its not 2050 yet--Superlightoftruth (talk) 18:00, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete, because Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, and because this isn't actually a list of countries by population in 2050 anyway. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 18:18, 5 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - WP:CRYSTAL. Island Monkey talk the talk 19:34, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - It is WP:CRYSTAL to even list which countries will exist in 2050, much less how big they will be. --Nat Gertler (talk) 20:02, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:CRYSTAL. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 20:51, 5 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep An unsourced article needs sourcing, not deletion. --Reference Desker (talk) 23:49, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * There can be no accurate source on this topic for almost 40 years; we need not hold onto the article until then. If we don't salt it, the article can be created when sources exist. --Nat Gertler (talk) 00:28, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * And to be clearer on that argument:
 * The title does not state that it is a list of countries by projected population.
 * The article does not contain a list of countries in any order.
 * One could say that it could be a viable article if it just had different title and different content - why yes, it could be Presidential campaigns of Pat Paulsen. Any article could be viable if we just changed the title and the content.
 * Even if it were to be given the title reflecting the concept you seem to be leaning toward (on projected population), we are then stuck with the question of whose projection, as there are various ones, and we cannot call any of them to be accurate. And we cannot just list the various projections for the countries, since we are called to list the countries in the order of said population, and the various sources would require conflicting orders. --Nat Gertler (talk) 01:10, 7 June 2011 (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.