Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Postcodes: New South Wales

Postcodes: New South Wales was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was KEEP. (6 delete, 9 keep, 1 ambiguous) Rossami 05:13, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

co-listed: Postcodes: New South Wales A-M, Postcodes: New South Wales N-Z A list of 2610 (!) postcodes. Unencyclopedic-Nabla 21:17, 2004 Aug 29 (UTC)
 * Other Australian postcode lists :


 * 1) Postcodes: Australian Capital Territory
 * 2) Postcodes: New South Wales A-M
 * 3) Postcodes: New South Wales N-Z
 * 4) Postcodes: Northern Territory
 * 5) Postcodes: Queensland
 * 6) Postcodes: South Australia
 * 7) Postcodes: Tasmania
 * 8) Postcodes: Victoria
 * 9) Postcodes: Western Australia
 * User:Krik 21:28, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * I propose colisting List of ZIP Codes in the United States and sections thereof, as a very similar page. That being said, I vote keep on everything. Postal codes are certainly notable. {User:Yelyos seems to have forgotten to sign. Niteowlneils 22:06, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)}
 * I vote delete on all. Tabular data like this is not encyclopedic.  It's something for an almanac or gazette.  It's a flat record, with no commentary or contextualizing of the information.  It is, therefore, not fitting into declarative sentences, not encyclopedic.  Geogre 21:54, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete all. I doubt that these lists will be maintained for changes. Mikkalai 22:02, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. De ja vu all over again (see Wikipedia talk:Do lists of postal codes belong on Wikipedia? from VfD less than 5 months ago). As I said then, "According to What is an article, "A Wikipedia article is defined as a page that has encyclopedic or almanac-like information on it ("almanac-like" being; lists, timelines, tables or charts)." Almanacs do have ZIP Code lists in them, although in a slightly different presentation (numerical only within state). ...Finally, I don't believe there is anyway to find out what city a certain ZIP Code belongs to on usps.com, so there is value to the lists." I hardly think mapsonus.com is common knowledge, but since this point seems to be a distraction, I'll remove it to focus on my main two points: 1) I don't think ANY article should be subjected to VfD anything less than six months apart, and 2) Wikipedia, by definition includes "almanac" lists, and ZIP/Postal codes are included in almanacs. Niteowlneils 22:06, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Sure you can find a city with a zip code. Go to http://www.mapsonus.com/db/USPS/, put in the zip code, and click on Find MyPostOfficeTM.  Delete all Zip code articles.  RickK 23:11, Aug 29, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. If you want to find beginning of the postal code for a city, just search on the city in Google and look at any address in that city. If it's a reasonably sized business you are looking for, you can usually find the exact code that way. Bad use of technology. Jallan 01:57, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep all. -Sean Curtin 02:45, Aug 30, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. As much as I'm not a huge fan of this kind of stuff in an encyclopedia, it has been long-standing policy (at least on VfD) that we do not delete information of this type (besides, postal codes don't need updating, at least in the short - ie, decades - term) Denni &#9775;  21:48, 2004 Aug 30 (UTC)
 * Comment: Postal codes in Canada are updated to some extent every month and a new postal code data file issued for address correction purposes and postal sort purposes. I believe it is every three months for zip codes in the United States. I have no idea about Australia. Jallan 03:00, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Delete. Perhaps a short explaination of the postcode format and an off-site link to http://www.auspost.com.au/postcodes/ on the Communications in Australia article would do.  Also see Talk:List of Australian post codes -- Chuq 05:17, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep - Alamanc type information. Similar to a large majority of Wikipedia. Wodan 00:09, Sep 1, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Valid data. Changes to codes are rare, so maintenance is not an issue.--Gene_poole 02:16, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. I'm not a big fan of almanac-type data in an encyclopedia, but since a virtually identical article (topic) survived VfD less than six months ago, I have to vote to keep this one.  SWAdair | Talk  04:05, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete Postcode: New South Wales since it only contains links to two other pages, but Keep the actual postcodes. No less encyclopedic than "Lists of". ··gracefool |&#9786; 10:01, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, unless someone wants to make a wikibook of world postal codes, in which case move thither. Valid and possibly even useful information.  Dukeofomnium 02:41, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete all postal codes. Other sources cover this more thoroughly and more accurately than WP. Wile E. Heresiarch 08:47, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.