Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of countryies by population (graphical)

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was KEEP. JamesTeterenko 16:34, 20 August 2005 (UTC)

List of countryies by population (graphical)
Not only is the word "countryies" misspelled, but all of the information it provides can also be found at List of countries by population. Frag 15:04, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Reasons as above. Zaw061 15:06, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Object - Dude, I just started working on this an hour ago. It's still a work in progress. Give it a little bit of time, eh? It's a lot more complete now than when you listed it, and I've changed the name. As for the info, yes, the info is also available in List of countries by population (as the page itself states), but I thought having a graphical veiw would be helpful for people to visualize the data. Do you think this sort of work should be discouraged? – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 15:09, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Also, note the article List of popes (graphical). It contains only information that is also in List of popes, but it shows the data graphically - and it's a Featured List! I don't understand why anyone would want to delete these sorts of articles. – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 15:21, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, if you've changed the name, the original "countryies" article will still be there, and there's no reason to keep it then, regardless. ;)--Frag 15:17, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Then it should be listed on WP:RFD, not here. – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 15:21, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, but I listed this here before knowing said information. ;) --Frag 16:19, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Is it just going to include those three charts? If so, I recommend a merge.  If you're planning to expand it further, I say Keep and move to a better name, such as Chart of countries by population since it's definitely not a list anymore, is it?  Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd  15:14, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Note List of popes and List of popes (graphical). I was simply trying to use the naming convention that was used for a featured list. – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 15:24, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Can timelines be made to float right? There's a whole lot of blank space on the right two thirds of List of countries by population. &mdash;Cryptic (talk) 15:23, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
 * They can, but these timelines are 600px wide, and shrinking them makes them hard to read. That's why I put them in a separate page. – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 15:26, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. I suppose I've been spoiled by my large display.  Keep, by the way. &mdash;Cryptic (talk) 16:33, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Fun for all the family. - Randwicked 15:36, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep graphical content is a weakness of Wikipedia so let's not discourage those who are willing to put in the spade work. However the current title is not acceptable as the article covers the EU, so I've slapped a neutrality-disputed notice on it. That can go if it survives as the article can then be moved to Graphical list of countries and other entities by population. Osomec 15:42, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
 * You'll want to add one to List of countries by population too, then. &mdash;Cryptic (talk) 16:33, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep for the obvious reasons stated above. Secretlondon 15:43, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. As countries' populations are non-static, is this information going to be regularly updated? Sliggy 16:38, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Like everything in Wikipedia, only if you (or someone else) updates it. – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 16:47, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Fair point, keep. Sliggy 17:00, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. I quite like this. It will need regular updating, but we should be able to rely on the wikiprinciple to do that. Why does it have a factual accuracy dispute tag on it? It's very tiresome. -Splash 19:24, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Because it is titled "countries" (modulo the typo) but has an entry for the European Union, which isn't a country (I assume that was Osomec putting a "factual" tag rather than a "neutrality" tag on). Keep, by the way. Tonywalton 23:13, 10 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep. A useful list and well-done to Quaddell for his work so far. Capitalistroadster 19:32, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, and keep up the good work Quadell! I can see how, with the original title, it may have seemed appropriate for VfD, however. The factual accuracy tag... well I see what you mean listing the EU under an article titled "countries", but it's interesting to include for comparisons, and changing the title would make it a lil long winded. This can be discussed further on the articles talk page, tho. UkPaolo 19:33, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Does the UN have certain benchmarks for population numbers?  Otherwise, sorting country populations in ranges like "Over 500 M" and "50M to 500M" is very arbritrary to say the least. At least create some bin widths that reflect the number of countries present. --Madchester 22:25, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Let me get this straight - you're voting to delete the article because grouping countries by size is "arbitrary"? That's a rather odd outlook. By the way, a put the articles in three groups, because if they were all in one group with a standard scale along the bottom, most bars would be so small that they would be nearly invisible. – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 23:26, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment.  You should be creating charts that are of equal interval sizes, say every hundred million or every five hundred million.  Right now, the presentation is skewed, b/c it's set at an arbritrary scale that you decided was convenient.  One grouping contains samples with pops less than 50 M, and another contains a much larger interval, between 50-500 M.  It just doesn't make sense.  I recommend that or creating charts for each continent.
 * Before asthetics, the presentation of the material needs to be statistically relevant. --Madchester 02:28, August 11, 2005 (UTC)


 * If you can think of a way the data can be better presented, you're welcome to make your own charts. That's the beauty of Wikipedia. I think if you tried it yourself, though, instead of just criticizing the efforts of others, you'd find that separating them into sections with equal numbers of countries would leave many countries with bars so small as to be uninformative. But be my guest. – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 21:27, August 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Looks good, needs some work but that's no reason to throw it out. Sabine's Sunbird 22:41, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep A misspelled title is not grounds for deletion, just moving. Template:Sofixit (Another opportunity to use my favourite template!) CanadianCaesar 22:51, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, and I agree with the point about the "List" of Popes (graphical). If this is a "Chart" (which I suppose it is) then so's that. The EU bit needs sorting out though - Voted above Tonywalton 23:13, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: It's really put me in a foul mood that three different users want to delete an article I spent over an hour creating, and that I've had to spend time defending it. If we want to encourage people to contribute to Wikipedia, this deletionist attitude isn't the way to do it. – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 23:26, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Oh, I know. Not even an article like Self-induced abortion is safe from VfD.  No votes to delete that one outside the nominator, but what a waste of the creator's time. CanadianCaesar 00:17, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Don't be disheartened, Quadell! It is clear that the article took considerable effort, and I'm sure will survive VfD. UkPaolo 17:39, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment Hurt feelings aside, Madchester makes a very good point that should be addressed. Dottore So 21:04, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and I agree with how Quadell has used a different scale for different charts so that the population differences are highlighted. DS1953 05:02, August 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep (and rename of course). Encyclopedic enough, and quite well done. — Hillel 11:13, August 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Well made and useful. 13:04, August 17, 2005
 * Comment - It's been over a week. The consensus is to keep. Can this vote be removed from the page? – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 17:37, August 18, 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. I think the graph is nice, but I don't understand why it has to be a standalone article. Why not merge it into List of countries by population? Niteowlneils 21:36, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. However, the article should be improved and worked on. --*drew 00:25, 20 August 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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.