Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of most populous cities in South India


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 06:19, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

List of most populous cities in South India

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Unnecessary content fork of List of most populous cities in India. There is no need for a separate list for South India. Snotty Wong  yak 22:41, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:50, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:50, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete I have to agree on this one being an unneeded fork. Although there seems to be at least one  definition of what states would be considered "South India", we don't have articles about "List of most populous American cities in 'The South'", or in "Western Canada" or in "Eastern Australia". Mandsford 00:57, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - unnecessary and redundant. The India list is enough--Sodabottle (talk) 07:38, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - Unlike Western Canada or Eastern Australia, South India has unique features which distinguishes itself from rest of India. Infact, every Indian state is different from each other in culture, language, etc. Since India is a big populous country, the List of most populous cities in India cannot include many of the South Indian cities. So the list is not redundant, and it conveys a fair idea about the population of the South Indian cities. Cheers, -- Rajith Mohan (Talk to me..) 05:54, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * If the List of most populous cities in India cannot include many of the South Indian cities because of size restrictions, then why is it that every city in the South Indian list already appears in the full India list? The list is 100% redundant.    Snotty Wong   chatter 21:55, 7 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep - India has a large population and both in terms of total population and population density, India is one of the densest populated country's. There are so many populated areas which cannot be included in the List of most populous cities in India. Also India's languages, religions, dance, music, architecture and customs differ from place to place within the country. Because of this difference India is always referred as South India, North India, Northeast India etc. There is a section in the article Western Canada about the Major population centres in western Canada. There is only a few city's so it can be added as a sub section in the article itself. Same in the case of Eastern states of Australia. But in the case of South India there is so many important populated city's. It cannot be add as a section in the article. My suggestion is to keep this list.  BINOY  Talk 07:06, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * If the List of most populous cities in India cannot include many of the South Indian cities because of size restrictions, then why is it that every city in the South Indian list already appears in the full India list? The list is 100% redundant.    Snotty Wong   chatter 21:55, 7 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree with the nom here. There are currently 200 cities in the india list. Does not make it too big or unnavigable. All the cities in the South Indian list are present in the Indian list too. So it is indeed redundant. The cultural/population diversity argument here would mean even more lists. For differences between say Southern Tamil Nadu and North Karnataka would be as as large as those between Tamil Nadu and Jammu and Kashmir. I would support a separate list if the original list becomes unsortable and unmanageable. --Sodabottle (talk) 04:17, 8 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep - Why the list should be deleted as long as it is not redundant and carrying useful information? The arguments in favour of deletion is very weak. --Samaleks (talk) 20:57, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The list is redundant. Every city in the South India list appears in the regular India list.  The only reason that we would need to split the list into two lists is if one list was too large for a single article, per WP:SIZE and WP:SPINOUT.  There is no evidence that that is the case here (in fact, the only evidence is to the contrary).    Snotty Wong   spill the beans 21:51, 7 July 2010 (UTC)


 * I think we can keep this list by expanding the article. There is more important cities with significant populations.  BINOY  Talk 04:59, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * With all due respect, this list already includes cities with only 150,000 population. I wouldn't consider a city "populous" if it has a population much smaller than that.  In any case, if there are more notable populous cities, the List of most populous cities in India is not a long list at this point.  There is plenty of room for more cities to be added to it, and no need for a second article to serve as a content fork.  If the List of most populous cities in India article eventually gets unmanageably large, then that is the time to discuss splitting it into multiple lists.    Snotty Wong   verbalize 05:33, 8 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Hi, All the data cannot be added to the article List of most populous cities in India. Because there is 1000 of city's with significant populations. (see here). How would less than 150,000 population cannot be considered as populous? See the List of cities in Australia by population which has city's with population less than 35,000. In List of cities in Canada, there is city's below the population 2,500. (I don't know why it has been considered as city). Also in List of the 100 largest urban areas in Canada by population, there is populous places which has less than 25,000 inhabitants. Same in the case of List of cities and towns in Russia by population. In India a city of population 20,000 and more is considered as a municipality. Why there is no need for a separate list for South India? South India is considered as a region of India. See List of municipalities in British Columbia(it is also a featured article), which is a province of Canada. Most of the city's in the list is on the list of city's in Canada like here. But it helps to find information about a part of the country easly.  BINOY  Talk 07:56, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Speculating that this article might get longer in the future is not a reason to keep the article. The article right now is not long, and neither is the parent article.  Right now, 100% of the information in this article appears in another article.  That is called a content fork, and such articles are to be deleted.  Once the main India article gets to be demonstrably too long per WP:SIZE, then this article can be recreated if need be.  Currently, however, this article is useless.    Snotty Wong   talk 14:00, 8 July 2010 (UTC)


 * The article is now expanded and contains more information than the other article. Articles on distinct but related topics may well contain a significant amount of information in common with one another. This does not make either of the two articles a content fork. Here the List of most populous cities in India is the list of city's in the entire country and the List of most populous cities in South India is the list of cities in a region of the country, just like List of cities in Canada and List of municipalities in British Columbia. Most of the city's in List of municipalities in British Columbia is in List of cities in Canada.  BINOY  Talk 17:07, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * While I applaud your efforts to expand this article, I'm still not convinced. This article now has 100 cities, and the main India article has 192 (of which at least 53 are duplicated between articles).  If you combined those two articles together, you'd get a list of 239 cities, at the most.  A table with 239 entries does not constitute a spin-off article per WP:SIZE and WP:SPINOFF.  Furthermore, if someone is interested in finding the most populous cities in southern India, the table at List of most populous cities in India is sortable, which means they can sort the list by "State/UT" and find whatever information they're looking for.  This list is still an unnecessary content fork, and adds nothing to the project that doesn't already exist elsewhere.    Snotty Wong   comment 18:37, 8 July 2010 (UTC)
 * And, your example with Canadian municipalities/cities is not relevant either. Municipalities and cities are not the same thing, therefore those two lists are lists of different entities.  This list, however, is a list of the exact same entities that appear in another list.    Snotty Wong   converse 18:40, 8 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. Completely redundant. If it is so important to differentiate the cities by region, just add another column to the List of most populous cities in India. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 02:21, 9 July 2010 (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.