Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of largest cities in England by population


 * 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, default to Keep. WaltonOne 18:47, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

List of largest cities in England by population

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Article has been labelled with the totally disputed template for several days, due to the completely misleading and inaccurate title and contents. See talk, there has been general consensus for deletion or merging. DWaterson 23:24, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I support deletion. Redirect to "Largest urban areas". --Concrete Cowboy 23:32, 28 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete as proposer, obviously, and redirect to whatever page List of largest urban sub-divisions in England by population (which is subject to a requested move also proposed by me) ends up at. DWaterson 00:00, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment -- What's the reason for deletion here? I have no opinion on the list, but it seems to be based on the assertion that it's "disputed", which isn't a reason for afd. Saikokira 01:20, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - Well, disputed contents can be a reason for AFD, for example in the case of hoax articles. In this case, I proposed AFD to allow formal discussion over the existence of the contents of this article; as per my vote above, I support redirecting the article title afterwards to a more suitable page if consensus emerges for ditching the contents of this article. DWaterson 12:14, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * keep keep for now or we might end up with no page about all this big populated areas stuff by the sounds of it Delighted eyes 03:05, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * keep and delete List of largest urban sub-divisions in England by population, the article is perfectly within guildelines, is sourced and understandable. DWaterson, don't forget to remove your vote since you opened the case, you cannot vote twice and it is implied you wish it deleted since you initiated the RfD. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 14:34, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. No reason has been given for deletion in terms of deletion policy, and I can't see one to raise. I think we can assume good faith about the nomination, and even commend the general conduct of the discussion. But it wouldn't hurt to review WP:POINT anyway, in view of the procedural mistakes of which this nomination is the most recent. The claim that there is consensus to delete appears to be false; If there is consensus, it's to merge and redirect, which shouldn't involve an AfD nomination anyway. Andrewa 14:39, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - um... merge and redirect can be an entirely appropriate outcome of an AFD. I'm glad you accept that this was in good faith though; I don't seek a POINT as I hope my editing history shows. DWaterson 00:50, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * True, it can be an entirely appropriate outcome of an AfD, but seeking this outcome is not generally appropriate grounds for raising an AfD, rather it should be dealt with as a proposed merge. I note your previous response to similar advice, but I hope others might find these comments helpful. Andrewa 02:06, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, or Rename appropriately. See Talk page for my comments. These figures are created specifically for a single report, are not related to cities but to Primary Urban Areas, and indeed even the FAQ article states: As such the 56 PUAs were always intended purely as an analytical device for the State of the Cities Report (SOCR).  Therefore this article should be deleted, or renamed to Primary Urban Areas in England. I don't really mind which. Fingerpuppet 14:56, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Your comments are misleading, city does not solely exist under the British definition. A city is not necessairly a settlement that has been granted city status by royal apporvement, by all means Walsall is a city per say. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 16:46, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * They do in the United Kingdom! Nevertheless, your point is reasonable - hence why a move to Primary Urban Areas in England is in my opinion a sensible choice. It should be noted that PUAs are NOT the same thing as Urban Areas, but are agglomerations of local authorities.  Therefore a use of the unqualified term "Urban Area" should be avoided - as they are defined entirely differently by built-up areas, and are not related to local authority boundaries in any way. Fingerpuppet 17:36, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * UA, PUA, same terms designated an arbitrary and non unitary area... I could come up with an 'area' type notion now, it doesn't make it any more manageable. Both terms and ideas are lose and it is precisely because those terms are used solely for analytical purposes see ONS quote above that they aren't appropriate for yet another meaningless list article. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons 22:50, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * What is "loose" about Urban Area definitions? An Urban Area is a "built-up area that has gaps in development of less than 50m".  Seems pretty exact to me. Fingerpuppet 13:50, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - "A city is not necessarily a settlement that has been granted city status by royal [charter]" - well, actually consensus on Wikipedia has been, for a long time, that yes, that is exactly the only accurate usage. See City status in the United Kingdom (a Featured Article). DWaterson 19:21, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't remember saying that american cities were only designated as such thanks to a royal charter... I'd hat eto ink New York being called a town, maybe I've missed something but Wikipedia EN is not British but English in language. Anyway, this is all non consequential considering the lobbying that has been made and the member to who the petitioning was made to. Captain Scarlet and the Mysterons</i> 22:50, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * But this isn't a US topic, but a UK one. Therefore the UK definition is the correct one, just as UK English grammar and spelling is used in articles relating to and within the United Kingdom, rather than the US English versions. Fingerpuppet 13:50, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Maintaining the lsit as such is elitism and is not a correct representation of the largest places with lots of people in cities in the UK, oh sorry the article is narrow enough to be about England only... <b style="color:#000000;">Captain Scarlet</b> <i style="color:#FF0000;">and the Mysterons</i> 06:29, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Er, sorry? DWaterson 12:06, 31 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Move to List of largest urban areas in England because that is what it is. Hawkestone 16:31, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: See also Talk:List of largest urban sub-divisions in England by population. No change of vote. Andrewa 21:19, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, perfectly valid list using criteria used by various government departments. But move to list of Primary Urban Areas in England by population, because that is what it lists. Warofdreams talk 00:49, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, we've got tons of lists like this for places in the USA that are quite within bounds; surely there would be some official definition for cities or metros or something that could be used to source this. Nyttend 04:31, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete because it duplicates List of largest United Kingdom settlements by population. Bearian 12:52, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: This and several other delete votes above (including that of the proposer) seem to me to actually support either redirect or merge and redirect, either explicitly or in their reasoning. No change of vote. Andrewa 18:28, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and rename as Largest urban areas in England by population. Britain has the Primary Urban Area (PUA) which is what the United States calls a Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA).  The problem appears to be that the criteria weren't readily discernible and that the name was misleading. Mandsford 13:59, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment "Urban Areas" in the United Kingdom have a different meaning to this list, and are named differently. Urban Areas deal with built-up areas.  Primary Urban Areas (which is what this list is) are agglomerations of local authorities.  As an example, the Greater Manchester Urban Area is very different from the "Manchester" Primary Urban Area.  There are also Primary Urban Areas called "Bolton" and "Rochdale" (based upon those local authorities), whereas the towns of Bolton and Rochdale are part of the GMUA - along with other towns such as Wilmslow which are not in any of the PUAs. Fingerpuppet 17:09, 1 August 2007 (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.