Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of cities in Uttar Pradesh/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was not promoted by The Rambling Man 15:44, 28 October 2012 [1].

List of cities in Uttar Pradesh edit

Featured list candidates/List of cities in Uttar Pradesh/archive1

Nominator(s): ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 19:24, 27 October 2012 (UTC) and User:25 Cents FC 19:24, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured list because I believe it is a comprehensive list of cities in the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh, 67 cities with a population over 100,000 people. For anybody wanting to explore the cities in the state this is an excellent starting point, order by population size, and just by viewing the list alone will familiarize yourself with a lot of the names. The data is all sourced to latest census figures and I believe it is sound as a featured quality list with relevant background info, map and photos of the larger cities. ♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 19:24, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Map is wrong. Lucknow and Kanpur are not that apart. They are just 70 kms from each other.
Photograph of Kanpur (the biggest city)?
"The Himalayas lies in the north of the state and the Deccan Plateau is at the south". Deccan Plateau to the south? wrong. Deccan Plateau is far away not just south of Uttar Pradesh.
"Uttar Pradesh can be divided into two distinct regions, Southern hills and Gangetic plain" - Citation needed.
"The central and western regions are densely populated regions of Uttar Pradesh" - Source needed, and I believe that this is completely wrong.
The Legend at the bottom of the table says "CT=Census Town". There is no mention of neither "CT" nor "Census Town" in the article.
The Type column in the table is unsubstantiated. I believe it is wrong. Areas in India are classified into 4 types:Municipal Corporation/Municipalities/Nagar Panchayat/Gram Panchayat. Refer File:Setup of India.png. In this case, I guess the last two categories may not come into play.
The "Census of Uttar Pradesh" section does not look relevant.
Biggest Blunder - The population figures in the table doesn't match with the source.

--Anbu121 (talk me) 21:18, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Whats a "city" by the way? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 21:04, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

My biggest and primary concern with this list is that the title reads "List of cities in Uttar Pradesh" and lists populations of urban agglomerations. This overlaps with "List of urban agglomerations constituents in Uttar Pradesh". Also is there a specific criterion for defining a city
"borders with National Capital Territory of Delhi?" I don't think so, many area like Ghaziabad, Noida and Meerut belong to UP, although they come under the NCT
The first five lines in the lede are unsourced
"under 18 divisions" is not verified by the source
"The central and western regions are densely populated regions of Uttar Pradesh. As of 2011, 67 cities in the state had a population of over 100,000 people" unsourced
"The sex ratio as of 2011, at 908 women to 1000 men, is lower than the national figure of 933", ditto
Is there is a source that explicitly states, "Because of both a large population and a high population growth rate, Uttar Pradesh figure among the list of states with large number of people living below poverty line"
199,581,477 million?
"Kanpur is the largest city with 1,640 square kilometres (630 sq mi) area having an approximate population of over 3 million which comes under Kanpur Metropolitan Area". This needs clarity, as it's impossible to have such a huge area for an Indian city. The 1640 figure corresponds to the area of the Metropolitan area
The first two lines of the second para in "Census of Uttar Pradesh" are unsourced
There is a mix of data representation between million and lakhs. Be consistent
Ref #12 is leads to the 2001 district data
Ref #10 leads to district data and ref #11 corresponds to 2001 town data
Why is " Government of India" italicised in refs
PDF refs needs the format to be specified
Ref #9 needs formatting
Cats need to be sorted alphabetically
Above all these are just provisional population figures and the final results are yet to be released

The biggest problem is that there is factual inaccuracy and data mismatch. Given the number of concerns, I may have to oppose this list at the moment.

—Vensatry _{(Ping me)} 07:35, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments as well as the above:

"Uttar Pradesh can be " followed by "Uttar Pradesh is divided" is repetitive.
You repeat "Uttar Pradesh" five times in five sentences, this isn't elegant prose.
" with 1,640 square kilometres (630 sq mi) area " grammatically weak. Perhaps "with an area of..."
"over 3 million " -> three million.
"2001–2011" (see WP:YEAR) vs "r 2004-05" (see WP:DASH as well).
"The sex ratio" normally we'd refer to this as gender wouldn't we?
"high population of state have" do you mean "has..."?
"The Scheduled castes and Harijans are also exits in state" I don't know what this sentence actually means.
What is BPL?
What is "lakh people"?
What is the context for it being "the largest BPL population"?
Your gallery section is called "Cities and towns", this is about cities right?
You need to be clear up front about the inclusion criteria for this list, not embed it somewhere in the middle of the lead.
When sorting the table, the final row (which has a colspan of 30, not sure why) is included in the sort and therefore breaks it.
Tables need to comply with WP:ACCESS for row and col scopes for the benefit of screenreaders.
Literacy Rate -> Literary rate.

The Rambling Man (talk) 13:22, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This was a nom for 25 who asked for me to nom it. I added the map and the table and background made it seem a worthwhile candidate. Feel free to close this AFD, its clearly faulty. A shame none of you brought this up in the peer review..♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 14:19, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Two points from me. (1) It's an FLC, not and AFD. (2) I wasn't invited to participate in the peer review. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:23, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry RM, wasn't referring to you, I was referring to the others, I thought this was advertised at WP:India noticeboard.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 14:54, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't. --Anbu121 (talk me) 15:03, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mmm, I hope he doesn't do that again, sorry that you weren't alerted in such an obvious place to ask for input.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 15:17, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per above. TBr and ley 14:28, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to close this FLC, its clearly faulty...♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 15:01, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.