Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Proposed provinces of Indonesia


 * 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 Province of Indonesia .  MBisanz  talk 01:08, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Proposed provinces of Indonesia

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is a very short article, fails WP:V WP:N, and will be empty if the provinces are created or turned down. United States Man (talk) 05:28, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Technical note 2013-01-09: I have merged all content. As of now, the page could be redirected. AsianGeographer (talk) 08:28, 9 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep - Sources are provided how can it fail WP:V? It can be deleted if one day it is empty, along with Proposals for new Australian states, Proposed provinces and territories of Canada, Aspirant states of India, ... List of proposed states of the United States. AsianGeographer (talk) 05:38, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Very sorry, I meant to put WP:N. United States Man (talk) 05:40, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Update WRT my vote - A merge is fine with me. I still think an extra article would attract more people to improve the data, but the most important seems to me the content is kept at least somewhere in Wikipedia. AsianGeographer (talk) 07:44, 8 January 2013 (UTC)


 *  Delete Merge to Province of Indonesia - fails notability. speculative and most likely transient in nature. WP:NOTNEWS. --Merbabu (talk) 05:44, 6 January 2013 (UTC) Update: could sit nicely within Provinces of Indonesia as suggested. --Merbabu (talk) 02:26, 9 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Why don't you tag the corresponding articles for Australia, Canada, USA, India? AsianGeographer (talk) 05:59, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Because it's not my responsibility to fix every "problem" on wikipedia. --Merbabu (talk) 06:21, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * OK. Then how is it speculative? The proposals exist as is documented and are thus not transient. AsianGeographer (talk) 22:58, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Merge to Provinces of Indonesia Delete - the sources are a problem for me. Four are from the same paper (two are the same article), three others are all the same link without editorial/publication clarity and the other is a reprint from an activist newspaper (though one I have cited myself in the past, this article is obviously not neutral so one must question its editorial value in that context - we are effectively citing activist opinion as fact). Remove the duplicates and it starts running into problems. It needs far more prose to support this simple list with no other details and I can't see that being possible with the sources available. That there are other articles of the same type is not a good argument for keeping this one. Stalwart 111  06:37, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment If the sources are the problem, wouldn't one ask for better sources first? AsianGeographer (talk) 07:17, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Sure, if you have some, I'd be happy to consider them. But the other problem (which I didn't go into) is that there is no single source that talks about this concept, the differences between the proposals, regional socio-economic similarities/differences, etc. So essentially we're bringing together different ideas based on different sources and synthing them together. That can be okay if the sources are rock-solid and similar enough to make comparisons without WP:OR. But who decides which proposals are actually formal proposals, which are pie-in-the-sky, which are actually independence movements, etc. Like I said, this is too complicated a subject to be covered by a short, simple list. But I'm concerned there's not enough to support prose enough to fix that problem. But again, if you have more, please do share. Stalwart 111  08:14, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I now found a source stating that the government limited the creation of provinces so that they would "only" reach 44 in 2025, from currently 34.. So to list these 10 would be an option, wouldn't it? That also means there are actual proposals considered by the government, not only some obscure ones. The whole topic in itself is warrants an article, apart from the simple listing. This creationism on new entities seems to be very recent. And it seems much less obscure than many things in Category:Proposed counties of the United States. AsianGeographer (talk) 08:20, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * That's a good start, but it would still seem to me that guessing which ones might be successful (or more successful) and including them here would either be WP:OR or at least a bit pointless. But I'm conscious that the article is new and might be improved. You could always request userfication so you can keep working on it until it is ready for the main article space. Right now, 2/3 of the references are from the one source. Maybe take some time to work on some verified prose before submitting it again. Again, be careful of WP:OTHERSTUFF arguments - besides which, that's a category of individual articles, not an article with a simple list of unexpanded proposals. Stalwart 111  08:37, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Indonesia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:50, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:50, 6 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment - Personally I think this idea has merits, like the articles linked by AsianGeographer. However, its scope needs to be extended to historical proposals as well (so the list does not "empty", among other reasons) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:14, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, I am happy to expand. There is not even a list that shows when the current provinces have been created. I will try to compile one. But why delete this list here? AsianGeographer (talk) 22:58, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment What about integrating the list into the article provinces of Indonesia, and redirecting Proposed provinces of Indonesia to the corresponding section? AsianGeographer (talk) 01:29, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Seems like a better idea. What do others think? --Merbabu (talk) 01:40, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry - I just came here to mention that I forgot that there is id:Wacana pembentukan provinsi baru di Indonesia - how will linking work, if there is no article in the English Wikipedia? Does it work with redirects? ... I don't know. I think with http://www.wikidata.org it may be problematic, there seems to be always one "Q"-entry and only one Wikipedia-link for each language edition. AsianGeographer (talk) 01:58, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry, you've lost me there. But I think your merge proposal has merit. I wouldn't strongly object to that. Stalwart 111  02:08, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * An example for a wikidata entry: http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3757 ... but I don't know how valuable the Indonesian Wikipedia content is, that it needs to be considered much. AsianGeographer (talk) 02:30, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * A merge sounds good to me as well. Should've thought of that first.United States Man (talk) 02:35, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * 'NOTE this AFD was about a stub created by User:AsianGeographer which was a sock of User:Tobias Conradi who has in many cases of earlier socks left a hell of a mess where he travels (sic), it might be reconsidered in the light of this factSatuSuro 00:20, 11 January 2013 (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.