Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Redding-Chico 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 delete. Singularity 06:18, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Redding-Chico Metropolitan Area (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
census.gov data does not support existence of Redding-Chico CSA - they are separate MSAs - this page is duplication of the others' content Ikluft (talk) 06:00, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete This CSA indeed doesn't exist, and any verifiable info on the page is duplicated in Redding's and Chico's pages. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 06:09, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, I can find no external confirmation that Redding-Chico is any kind of US or California statistical area. Is somebody just trying to get higher on a list, or what? There are several lists that will be affected. --Dhartung | Talk 07:04, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm fairly sure someone was just confused learning their way around Wikipedia. A redirect page for "NorthState" (a local term for the far-northern counties of California) points at "Redding-Chico Metropolitan Area", which makes me think they probably saw terms like CSA used elsewhere and thought they could use them there too. That kind of info could be better represented by starting from scratch (not using the currently duplicated content) with a more recent local name for the area, "Upstate California". Ikluft (talk) 10:23, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Nobody actually calls it "Upstate." That is an invention of some southern California Chamber of Commerce publicity campaign. It is called "The Northstate" and has been called that by its residents widely for many years. --GB
- Actually, that's relatively new. The northern counties started marketing the "Upstate" name in 2001. After years of a slow start, apparently they stuck to it because I've been hearing it around lately. So I'm starting to consider the name more credible now. Unlike "northstate", people outside the area seem to intuitively understand what it means (1/3 of the state north of the Bay Area and Sacramento), which was their apparent intent. Ikluft (talk) 18:54, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't see any reason to support some propaganda campaign by some businesses on the Wikipedia. Pontiff Greg Bard (talk) 21:19, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, the current page has to go because there's no CSA. If there's enough verifiable material online to support it, that would be the basis for a decision to start a new page for Upstate California. I'm in no hurry on that one so it will be a while anyway. (I lived in the northstate area for over a decade and still have family there.) Google gets over 7000 hits on the term even when quoted. It isn't about opinions - it's whether there's usable and verifiable info. Ikluft (talk) 22:02, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't see any reason to support some propaganda campaign by some businesses on the Wikipedia. Pontiff Greg Bard (talk) 21:19, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, that's relatively new. The northern counties started marketing the "Upstate" name in 2001. After years of a slow start, apparently they stuck to it because I've been hearing it around lately. So I'm starting to consider the name more credible now. Unlike "northstate", people outside the area seem to intuitively understand what it means (1/3 of the state north of the Bay Area and Sacramento), which was their apparent intent. Ikluft (talk) 18:54, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Nobody actually calls it "Upstate." That is an invention of some southern California Chamber of Commerce publicity campaign. It is called "The Northstate" and has been called that by its residents widely for many years. --GB
- Delete -- not a csa, much duplicated content Pontiff Greg Bard (talk) 22:22, 23 March 2008 (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.