Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thrissur Metropolitan Area

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. Discussion of possible renaming or merging can continue on the article talk page. Beeblebrox (talk) 01:23, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thrissur Metropolitan Area

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

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). —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 03:55, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 12:02, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Subject does not seem to exist. -- BenTels (talk) 18:52, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and rename: Per Unscintillating. The title should reflect what the subject is, not what it is not. -- BenTels (talk) 19:55, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thrissur Urban Development Authority

Thrissur earlier had a developmental authority known as Thrissur Urban Development Authority. It had designed lot of projects for Thrissur. But the Government of Kerala has dissolved it so that it can give more importance to Trivandrum and Kochi cities. Later when Census came in 2011, it has described Thrissur Metropolitan Area very clearly including the Municipalities and Panchayats. So there was a concept of Thrissur Metropolitan Area earlier also.

Yes, it is a new topic. So what’s wrong in that? A new film releases in English or Hindi. Is the Wikipedians wait for 5 or 10 years to make an article about that particular film? No. They make the article before the film goes to the studios. Here I am talking about Indian Census of 2011 not some Utopian Census. And I think that is enough to make an article about Thrissur Metropolitan Area.

In Kerala only two cities get priority, Kochi and Trivandrum. All the money and manpower goes to these cities. Governments are less interested in other cities. For that purpose I can’t do anything. My priority is to create an article about Thrissur Metropolitan Area.

Keep: The subject is relevant till the Govt of India say that Census of 2011 is fabricated or manipualted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.143.76.2 (talk) 10:37, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The primary source calls this an "urban agglomeration", so I don't understand the reasoning to keep the topic as Thrissur Metropolitan Area; nonetheless, this is a govt-defined populated area. Unscintillating (talk) 23:21, 31 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There are 53 such urban agglomerations in India. Given the case, we may go for creating urban agglomerations for every possible city. Also I don't think it has much notability outside the "population" scope. There are no specific boundaries for urban agglomerations defined by the same census authorities whatsoever. They are mainly used for calculating the urban population. There is not much possibility for the article to grow beyond a stub. Given the concerns, I don't think a separate article is needed. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 10:05, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Thrissur. Thrissur is by no means, metropolitan or even close to it. This statement In Kerala only two cities get priority, Kochi and Trivandrum. All the money and manpower goes to these cities. Governments are less interested in other cities. For that purpose I can’t do anything. My priority is to create an article about Thrissur Metropolitan Area. is absolutely invalid in this case. IF you want to promote your city, do it in a neutral and encyclopedic manner. If you want to advertise your city as a metro city, please consider creating a blog, not a Wikipedia article. This isn't the place for WP:Original Research --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 11:22, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Census of 2011

I am not promoting any city here. I just wrote an article on Thrissur Metropolitan Area in a neutral and encyclopedic manner. Is that a wrong thing? Census of 2011 is not done alone in Thrissur. If you can base other articles on Census data, and make big big claims, then what is that problem of this article? So if you are going to delete this article, first tell all Wikipedians that Census of 2011 is not an encyclopedic data. From tomorrow onwards, no body will give citations to Census 2011 because some narrow minded people sitting in some metro cities don’t like that.

124.124.211.93 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:09, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You cannot create articles simply like that. Each and every article must follow certain principles. —Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 18:12, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm not a narrow minded person sitting in a Metro city, I also live in a Tire II city called Coimbatore. Census 2011 is not in the PUBLIC domain, so I refuse to comment on that. As Vensatry said, you need to follow a few policies and principles like WP:N, WP:EXIST --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 11:50, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 10:09, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.