Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Malappuram Urban Center


 * 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   merge to Malappuram. Consensus established following relisting. The Bushranger One ping only 02:15, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Malappuram Urban Center

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

No such area defined for this city nor a separate governing authority exists. The article was created based on the urban agglomeration population (provisional figures). &mdash; Vensatry (Ping me)  09:25, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 10:14, 30 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment: Just 1 source: Census report. In India UA is not an administrative unit, but just a virtual concept used in many population reports. Similar articles do exist in WP; for example Kochi metropolitan area Vs Kochi. I'm not sure whether it should be deleted or not.  AshLey  Msg 11:53, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
 * We have a separate authority for metros like Mumbai, Chennai, Bangalore and Kolkata. Does Kochi have an urban development authority for itself? &mdash; Vensatry (Ping me)  09:35, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge into Malappuram. I don't know how small cities suddenly become metros overnight . --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 11:28, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

The problem is not with article but with the attitude of the people who stays in Metro cities and think that Kerala is small village and there are only two cities Kochi and Trivandrum. See the comment of an Wikipedian, “I don’t know how small cities suddenly become metros overnight. --Rsrikanth05 (talk)”. Most of the Wikipedians have a attitude problem. They can’t digest new things when it comes up. For the record, Kerala is big Metro and Kochi and Trivandrum are new cities which just have 300 years of history. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.143.76.2 (talk) 14:24, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Attitude problem
 * Even Trivandrum and Kochi will not come under that category. As Rsrikanth05 already said, this is not the place to promote your city. You may go for a blog. &mdash; Vensatry (Ping me)  18:10, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
 * If you think the census results published by the government are more important, you may also have to go through this link to see what they say about the cities of Kerala. &mdash; Vensatry (Ping me)  18:30, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

So what is the problem? Is the word “Metropolitan” used in the copy is the problem or something else? 124.124.211.93 (talk) 09:29, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Metropolitan


 * Comment I do not have an attitude problem. As stated earlier,. I myslf live in a Tier II city. KERALA is NOT a Metro, it is a state. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 11:52, 3 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment I cant find anywhere in the article the word 'Metropolitan'. I would say the present title 'Malappuram Urban Center' suits it better.--Truebrother (talk) 13:15, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Misunderstanding

There is a serious misunderstanding about Kerala urban population 2011. Am forced to say that the information found in pib website is completely baseless. Kerala Census Directorate has clearly stated that there is no adjustment in UA definition in Kerala. Same definition is followed through out India. Also there is no such inflation in population as stated in that report. ( for those who still doubt can file an RTI ) There can be rise in population between two census. That's why we have 10 years gap between each census. for better understanding of Kerala Population; There are three points, 1, Usual population increase due to migration from nearby areas. 2,The population rise due to urbanization of area which "were not considered urban" in previous census more than the increase in population within the previously defined UA area. 3,The % of people engaged in agriculture getting dropped below 25%, causing more regions in Kerala to be considered "Urban".

These three are the primary reason which made more places that are dependent on the principal city getting added to the UA. So you cant deny the fact that Kerala has bigger urban profile. Coming to the article 'Malappuram Urban Center', no one is adamant that the article should be retained, we could merge it with respective city article. But the question is whether all the articles on city UA in the name of Metropolitan city, Metro, Urban Agglomeration etc that are present in Wikipedia need to be deleted or not? If Yes, delete all. If No, retain All. But never try to keep your 'legs in both boats' by retaining what you like and deleting what you don't like.--Truebrother (talk) 10:51, 3 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Appreciate your original research. Do you mean to say that the Kerala Census Directorate is more credible than Press Information Bureau. The reason for increase in urban population in Kerala is mainly due to the relaxation in criteria for defining a urban areas. Migration can be a major factor but do you think, a small town like Malappuram which had a population of 1.7 lakh in 2001 has suddenly grown into a 17 lakh metropolitan city with in a span of ten years mainly because of migration. I recommend you to go through these articles: 1 and 2 If you look at the first article, it says the rural population has declined by 25.96% and urban population has gone up by 92.72%. All of a sudden the urban population cannot grow at this rate in a period of ten years that too a state which has 38000 sq.km. Even a fast growing city like Bangalore wouldn't have experienced this much growth in urban population. &mdash; Vensatry (Ping me)  15:51, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Now that's interesting. Answering your question whether PIB or KCD is more credible, i would say on this matter its KCD. Did i anywhere mention that Malappuram has grown to a 'Metropolitan city' within last ten years? If you fear Malappuram becoming one in future, this is not the place to show it. You might also want to consider talking to NIUA ( National institute of Urban affairs) regarding this as they have Identified Malappuram along with several other cities which has potential of becoming a Metro city in future. I can understand your frustration, no one is trying to exaggerate anything here. Malappuram UA along with few other UAs in kerala are million plus UAs. Its a fact, take it. Now if you could read what i said before, you would notice that there was 'three' points described as the reason to increase in Kerala UA Population not just migration ( may be migration contributed lesser, but dont say there wasn't migration at all ). Those three situations together made this drastic change. But that either doesn't mean Malappuram is bigger city than Coimbatore or Banglore. But with proper planning and central fund allocation, it could reach much heights in future (Kerala Town Planning department has already started planning for cities in kerala with a future perspective). And for your information, Kerala is a major state in India where rural-urban disparity is very narrow or low. It didn't happen with one day. There were several factors that helped Kerala to provide high standard of living (refer HDI) through out the state, contrary to other states where one metropolitan city stands over completely backward rural areas.--Truebrother (talk) 18:57, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

And if the links you gave as recommendation was referring to the population decline in the state, I recommend you to go and google 'Malappuram' with population tag. The same website given by you says "Malappuram District recorded increase of 17.09 percent to its population compared to 1991." Man +17 is a pretty big rate.--Truebrother (talk) 19:14, 3 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm least bothered, If a small town like Malappuram nor any other village becomes a metropolis in the near future. The discussion is whether we should keep this as a separate article or merge into the main article. We are not concerned about whether the town will become a great city in the future. Nobody has denied the fact that Kerala is one of the most densely populated states in India. But if you look at the growth rate it is appears at the bottom of the table. Considering the 17 percent growth rate in district population is highly relevant here. Do you have any source to claim that the increase in population in the entire district can be attributed to the growth rate of the city alone. Even districts like Karur and Perambalur in Tamil Nadu have experienced a growth rate of 15 percent. With this I cannot say that those towns have become major cities. &mdash; Vensatry (Ping me)  04:59, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
 * First of all what do you mean by a "urban center". Is that a definition given by JNNURM or Govt. of India? Apart from the population growth do you have anything more to describe about the growth of the city in the last ten years. Statements like "But the question is whether all the articles on city UA in the name of Metropolitan city, Metro, Urban Agglomeration etc that are present in Wikipedia need to be deleted or not? If Yes, delete all. If No, retain All" is highly relevant here. We have 53 such areas and cannot go and orphans like this for all areas. Leaving the population growth aside, do you have any official sources that establish the notability of the so called "Malappuram Urban Centre". &mdash; Vensatry  (Ping me)  05:08, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Fist of all, No village can become Metropolis, if that's what you have learned. And if some place is capable of it, it cant be either a small town.

I don't know whether the district population can be attributed to the city completely. Anyway current population of the district is 4 million plus, out of which only 1.6 million is the Malappuram UA population. Do you find anything wrong in that?. At present GoK as well as Central Ministry of Urban affairs is considering Malappuram as potential city. Infact Malappuam includes in the list of cities where FDI is proposed ( which is not going to happen though, as Gok is against FDI policy). And also according to the State Urbanisation Report(SUR) 2011 published last month, Malappuram district is the most urbanised district within last ten years in kerala. Right now unfortunately, I don't have any official sources apart from what known through Newspapers on the notability. May be once 12th FYP comes, we would see better remark from officials on Malappuram Urban Area as well as others like Thrissur UA.

The term 'Urban center' simply means 'A large and densely populated urban area; may include several independent administrative districts'.--Truebrother (talk) 07:44, 4 August 2012 (UTC)


 * This is what we call original research. Does the census authority define the term "urban center". &mdash; Vensatry (Ping me)  18:05, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

If the only problem here is the article being 'orphan'?, am collecting information that can be included in the article so that it gets out of the orphan tag, but would take some time. About other 53 cities, i truly believe they would have lots of information to be added to the respective UA articles.( UAs are not any imaginative urban area or some place in moon right?, people do live there and all sort of economic and social activities happens there too )--Truebrother (talk) 08:23, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge, per Vensatry. The key criterion is that "urban center" must have an official usage via a governmental body affiliated to the state government. POV pushing has little value here. Secret of success (talk) 16:45, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Isn't census of India a relevant source? Yet, the Title need to be changed to "urban agglomeration".--106.67.171.109 (talk) 17:44, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Appreciate your participation. But why don't you register an account before commenting. Otherwise, we might presume that you're a IP sock of User:Truebrother. &mdash; Vensatry (Ping me)  18:47, 5 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment Oh come on, stop acting like a genius User:Vensatry. I had cleared my view on this earlier itself. I don't have any problem with it getting merged to its parent article. But my request is that keep a standard criteria for every such articles and show this same enthusiasm with other 'Metropolitan' articles as well. Hereby Am off the topic.--Truebrother (talk) 10:37, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I made a direct comment to the anon IP. If that user isn't you, no need to intrude. &mdash; Vensatry (Ping me)  10:49, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Other metropolitan areas? Which one are you talking about. Other than big cities like Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata, Chennai and a few more, we don't have separate articles for Metropolitan areas. The Thrissur and Malappuram Urban agglomeration articles are the first of its kind in WP. We did not have that even for a city like Kanpur. &mdash; Vensatry (Ping me)  17:57, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Trivandrum and Kochi articles were present in WP long before Malappuram and Thrissur articles came in to exist. And both of them mentions 'Urban Agglomeration' as well as 'Metropolitan Area' in their Infobox and details. I think i have done my part here, so it will be good if you could detain yourself from asking more questions to me. You guys can continue the discussion here and come up with a worthy and viable solution to the problems created by the article Malappuram Urban Center based on Wikipedia Norms. Peace! --Truebrother (talk) 19:24, 6 August 2012 (UTC)


 * There exists an authority (1 and 2) to look after for both the Metropolitan areas. Perhaps that could be the reason why we have articles on Thiruvananthapuram Development Authority and Greater Cochin Development Authority. Do we have that one for Thissur or Malappuram either? &mdash; Vensatry (Ping me)  19:49, 6 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dori ☾Talk ☯ Contribs☽ 22:16, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

<hr style="width:55%;" /> <hr style="width:55%;" />
 * Move to Malappuram Urban Agglomeration and delete the redirect that is left for "Malappuram Urban Center". Why is this called "Urban Center" when the source calls it "Urban Agglomeration"?  I think we want a separate article for each of the urban agglomerations since they are government recognized populated areas–this is useful as part of the gazetteer.  But maybe this needs to be moved to "Malappuram Urban Agglomeration" if the current name is unsourced.  Unscintillating (talk) 12:50, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge As per rsrikanth  TheStrike  Σagle   03:54, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade Talk to me 13:19, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

<hr style="width:55%;" />
 * Comment Further commenters following the relist are strongly encouraged to focus on the question that determines whether we should keep or delete the article, that being "Do sufficient independent, secondary, and reliable sources exist for a full article on this subject?" Especially, please comment on this rather than commenting on other editors. Seraphimblade Talk to me 13:22, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge with Malappuram. A simple google search on Malappuram Metropolitan Area returns zero hits. Leaving the population, I don't see any notability of "Malappuram urban agglomeration". &mdash; Vensatry <sub style="color:indigo;">(Ping me)  06:54, 15 August 2012 (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.