Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/List of British Traditional Counties

I created the page. I object to its deletion.

The topic of these counties (known variously in the official and unofficial sources as "historic counties", "traditional counties", "ancient and geographical counties") has been hotly discussed in Wikipedia's discussion pages. This page is not part of that argument. (The argument we have seen appears to be whether a British place can be described with these counties in addition to a location by administrative geography. Those involved in those discussions on both sides have become very hot under the collar for some reason.  It has brought out ugly extremism in both sides and there have been disgraceful edit wars, largely, I suspect, through mistrust and misunderstanding.)

There is more to the world than internal Wikipedia community debates. These traditional counties are used by genealogists as the primary basis for their study. They are used by historians and others. They are useful in many disciplines. Some traditionalists prefer to use them generally, which is their choice. Even if we do not use these traditionalists' counties for classification in Wikipedia articles, others do use them and would want to know what they are.

Even in the limited Wikipedia context, the counties debate continues to be an active issue. Where such debate continues concerning traditional / historic counties (and not just among Wikipedia contributors), we need a resource telling us which these alleged counties actually are.

The nomination for deletion states that the webpage reflects a particular political view. No; that is preconception. It does not contain any political view at all. Indeed, it contains no statements whatsoever. The page is a list, placed there as a resource.

The nomination for deletion also states that the page breaches Wikipedia policies on the geographical identification of places. Again, it does no such thing; it is just a list of historic counties. With each one is a list of towns within it as a way to identify the extent of the alleged county in question.

Wikipedia does not and cannot take a position on the long debate about whether the ancient and geographical counties of the United Kingdom exist in law in some form or other. That the debate exists is without doubt, and outside the narrow confines of cyberspace there are many private lobbying organizations concerned with the issue. It is for us to ensure that there is something telling everyone what they are talking about.

It is not for us to lay down what other people may or may not believe nor to lay down what geographical references they prefer to use in their private lives. We do not censor the very idea of traditional counties. (If we did, I can think of plenty of points of view far more worthy of censorship than the socially dangerous idea that Caithness might be a real place.)

If the issue is just about the name of the Article, that is another matter. I believe that "traditional" is a neutral word. It is the description I have seen in more publications than any other. The UK Census Office used to use the term "ancient or geographical counties", though that is a bit of a mouthful. "Historic" is used by some organizations, including that cited. It have a triumphal ring to my ears; "traditional" is more natural usage, and one I have heard on the lips of others, which is why I adopted it. Still, I will not dig in over the exact name over the list.

Howard Alexander (talk) 00:23, 13 January 2008 (UTC)