Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of villages in Hinthada District


 * 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   keep. consensus was clear even before the relisting (former admin close) Secret account 05:14, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

List of villages in Hinthada District

 * – ( View AfD View log )

While this article does include a *lot* of data, presenting a list of unlinked village names isn't really useful to anybody, and lots of these villages probably aren't notable. --Rossheth | Talk to me 17:29, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep I see no policy that a list of settlements violates. How is this any different from any of the hundreds of articles in Category:Lists of populated places? "Not useful" is not a reason to delete, and anyways this seems highly useful. In the past, any individual verifiable populated places get kept at AFD. So any one of these might be notable individually. But certainly a list of all 900 settlements in an area of Burma is collectively notable and exactly the sort of thing that should be in an encyclopedia. FYI I'm in the process of splitting this into townships (see e.g. List of villages in Hinthada Township) at which point this article will become a disambiguation page, so the component articles will be of a slightly more manageable size. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:59, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Asia-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 22:53, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 22:53, 27 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Divide information into separate articles and change this page to a redirect to Hinthada District. Although this seems to be legitimate content to include in Wikipedia, per Calliope, this article calls on coord so many times that it hits the template limit. Thus, many of the villages' coordinates don't actually display here. Furthermore, this is currently the longest page in the English Wikipedia. The page will be more useful to those interested in this topic if it is divided into separate articles (presumably one for each township in the district). --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:54, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The "dividing the information into separate articles" has already been done. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 14:16, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note I just implemented the split, so now this article is divided up over six pages (with the exact same content). I also replace the coord templates with a custom template that doesn't generate the globe icon and little map (so I don't hit the template limit and it loads faster). Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:20, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Strong keep The ignorance of the nominator... The idea is that they are gradually linked and te more notable villages have articles. This greatly helps the comprehensiveness of wikipedia.♦ Dr. Blofeld  16:32, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment So let me get this right. This is an unlinked list of lists of villages that are mostly not notable enough to have articles, but the lists are overloaded with coordinates. "Hinthada District", without saying what country it is in, has one line of information that says it is a district of the "Ayeyarwady Division" which redirects to "Ayeyarwady Region". Talk about ignorance. I am just confused! Secondarywaltz (talk) 18:28, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * And your problem with lists like List of United Kingdom locations with names and coordinates is??♦ Dr. Blofeld  18:48, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * We are not discussing other lists here. The article "Hinthada District" has yet to grow beyond less than basic information, and yet this extensive list of villages was developed - unlinked to or from that article. The District article gives links to the Township articles, which have individual lists which are linked. That would be the normal progression in looking for this information. Now that it has been split, Delete the redundant Distict list of lists and Keep the Township lists. Secondarywaltz (talk) 21:47, 28 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep a logical way to handle this, as is done in nearly every other county; where a bunch of smaller geographic units roll up into larger ones, it is often preferable to break them down; of course, anyone could overcome the objections by simple copying and pasting all the material in all the sublists to make an unmanageable but apparently unobjectionable mondo-table. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 23:54, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per the keep arguments above. CSB. - The Bushranger One ping only 05:13, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep, clearly, although what remains is a list-of-lists, not a disambiguation page. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 21:34, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 00:53, 6 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I thought there already was a consensus. Anyway, the page has been significantly altered since this AfD began, with substantially all of the content being divided among six other pages. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:28, 6 October 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.