Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of largest cities by area (4th nomination)


 * 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 no consensus defaulting to keep and w/o prejudice to a future renomination. Opinions (and !votes) appear to be all over the place. If there is a desire to renominate I suggest waiting a while given this is the 4th shot at deletion. Ad Orientem (talk) 15:12, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

List of largest cities by area
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Underdeveloped article (list) dated from June 2017. Seems that nobody is interested in developing it. We can't keep such poor articles in our encyclopedia. WP:TNT XXN, 17:11, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello.

I will be very happy to contribute to it.

Thanks CrayonS (talk) 17:14, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 17:16, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 17:16, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello.

I've added two cities, including Shanghai and Melbourne.

I will not let this list go without trying my best to improve it.

Thanks CrayonS (talk) 18:02, 1 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Merge into List of largest cities which could have area added as extra columns in the table Andrew D. (talk) 21:28, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List of largest cities which essentially covers the same topic. It's quite disappointing that this is the 4th AfD on this article and very little had been improved. Ajf773 (talk) 19:06, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello.

@Andrew Davidson I strongly discourage merging since the columns of List of largest cities are based on population, not area in square kilometers (or km2). Instead of discussing about deleting and merging, why don't you help contribute instead? The subject on it is easy.

Also, I am very much interested in contributing to the article.

Thanks CrayonS (talk) 21:11, 1 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I take the point which CrayonS makes and have updated my !vote accordingly. I still reckon it will be best to develop one page, rather than maintaining two separate ones. Andrew D. (talk) 21:28, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello.

Thank you.

I think it might be appropriate to merge it in. Since it is a WP:TNT situation, we could do that to get more attention from contributors. I agree about merging it though, but I don't know too much about these list pages.

Also, it isn't that hard to contribute to because you can just copy the area from a city's Wikipedia article (an act of pure laziness).

It is definitely not a delete.

Thanks CrayonS (talk) 21:33, 1 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete a well-created article on this topic would inevitably run into problems with city-county consolidation. This list is necessarily arbitrary. (exactly what I said on nomination #2) power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 03:54, 2 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. List of largest cities is just a summary article of three lists: List of cities proper by population, List of urban areas by population and List of metropolitan areas by population. Many of the same cities pop up in slightly different order in all of those lists, which is why summarizing them in one table is useful. The biggest cities by area would be a completely separate set – for example, the biggest city in the US by area is Sitka, Alaska with a population of less than 10,000. You wouldn't expect it in a list of biggest cities that can be sorted by population as well as area. I think a list of biggest cities by area would be quite welcome as a separate article. After all, we've had a separate list for US cities by area since 2004 and it looks fine. This one just needs (a lot of) developing. Jafeluv (talk) 05:43, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello.

Keep is my opinion.

@Jakeluv I agree with you very much.

Someone once told me about the WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS but you can't apply that to an argument on a 2004 page :)

The page does need a lot of development, if we will stop WP:TNT.

Also, instead of nominating this article for an AfD and do textbook work, we could have been contributors to it instead to avoid this from happening.

All these people in this discussion could have being adding to it more right now.

Thanks CrayonS (talk) 08:44, 2 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep A notable list. Totally different than a list by population, so separate list.  And these cities do get coverage for their size surely.  I did some minor work on the article back in August, restoring an entry someone deleted and adding a reference to it.  Someone might come along eventually and add to it.    D r e a m Focus  18:14, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

Hello. Keep for me. I think we just need to contribute to it. Like @ D r e a m Focus  says (that HTML!), it is a notable list and it does have coverage. Thanks CrayonS (talk) 09:48, 3 March 2018 (UTC) Removed double vote by CrayonS

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Redirect  to List of cities proper by population. This page already has a table with an area column and it's sort-able. So one click gives you cites sorted by area. Details there for 100+ cities, why duplicate all this here? Teraplane (talk) 22:57, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
 * None of these cities are listed there. Wouldn't be room for all the tabs of information.   D r e a m Focus  23:56, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 05:53, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment, this article/list is silly, how is the "cutoff" decided? 10,000sqkm? 1,000sqkm? 100sqkm? ie. if i add Boston that has an area of 232.14sqkm, if/when it is removed what legitimate argument to remove it ie. backed up by sources, can be made? Coolabahapple (talk) 06:39, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List of largest cities. MT Train Talk 06:43, 9 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep List in sad state, but the claim that it is redundant with List of largest cities has been convincingly debunked above.-- cyclopia speak! 00:03, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

Keep Here are some sources about the subject I posted at Articles for deletion/List of largest cities by area (2nd nomination):  The book notes: * On October 1, 1968, Jacksonville, Fla., city proper became coextensive with Duval County (827 sq. mi.).   The book notes: "Edmonton is the capital and largest city in the province of Alberta with a metropolitan population of 1,159,869 over 684.37km2, making it one of the largest cities, by area, in North America."   The book notes: "In 1968, the population jumped to more than 500,000 when it was consolidated with Duval County, and Jacksonville became one of the largest cities by area in the U.S."</li> <li> The book notes: "For instance, it is estimated that over 700 square kilometres of land—roughly equivalent to the size of Calgary, one of North America's largest cities by area— has been directly disrupted by tar sands mining since the start of the industry in the late 1960s."</li> <li> The article notes: "Edmonton sprawls over a 259-square-mile area, one of the largest cities by area in North America."</li> <li> The book notes: "He recognized the difficulties in using maps of questionable accuracy and acknowledged the problem of defining the limit of a city. Nonetheless, he was able to reduce his results to several classes of cities, by area: very large cities in excess of 2,000 arpents, such as Peking or Rome, or between 1,000 and 2,000 arpents (5–15 km2), such as Lyon or Florence; large cities, 300–1,000 arpents (1.5–5 km2), such as Brussels, Strasbourg, and The Hague; medium cities, 70–300 arpents (0.35 km 2–1.35 km2), such as Liège, Cadix, and Amiens."</li> </ol>Cunard (talk) 06:52, 13 March 2018 (UTC)</li></ul>


 * Redirect to List of largest cities. It already has a much larger and better maintained table of cities and can be sorted by area.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Teraplane (talk • contribs) 00:48, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. Such a list is inherently subjective because the definition of "city" varies so widely between countries and even within a country.  It might make sense to list cities in this way in a jurisdiction where the definition is consistent, but a worldwide list is just a horrible pit of WP:OR.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 09:15, 17 March 2018 (UTC).
 * Delete, Merge, or Redirect to List of largest cities: Delete is the first choice as there is No notability for a standalone article. This AFD needs an admin closure for sure. The outcome depends on close attention to policies and guidelines as well as other criterion, and not just a head count. Any !vote except "keep" actually means editors deem a stand-alone article not appropriate. "Merge" and redirects" sometimes causes confusion and they should not. This is the 4th nomination with one deletion and an "article champion" has not emerged. The possibility of POTENTIAL is negated by the lack of notability. In this case, the target article for both merge and redirect is either List of largest cities or List of cities proper by population. There are three !votes for a redirect to List of largest cities and one for List of cities proper by population. There is one merge !vote for List of largest cities. There are four !votes for delete (including my first choice). A summary would be of fourteen !votes nine consider the article not worthy of stand-alone status and five think it deserves to remain. I have serious concerns with the comments "...summary article of three lists...", so it is appropriate to have a fourth summary list? Now we need a new "Category"? What about "Also, it isn't that hard to contribute to because you can just copy the area from a city's Wikipedia article (an act of pure laziness).". If we have to "copy" Wikipedia content to another article that should be a red flag of original research, that has continuously been mentioned. There are four references and a general source and all can support content but none of the five sources advance notability and that is a criterion for inclusion on Wikipedia. Otr500 (talk) 12:45, 17 March 2018 (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.