Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of cities by sunshine duration

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 arguments in favor of inclusion cite existing guidelines including WP:NLIST and WP:PILLAR, Wikipedia does operate as almanac. Valoem ^talk ^contrib 23:44, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

List of cities by sunshine duration

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

Another case of WP:NOTINDISCRIMINATE, and this list will never be completed anytime soon. Most of the data seems to have been copied from their respective Wikipedia articles. Some places, such as parts of southern Chile and the Aleutian Islands do not have sunshine data available, and the amount of sunshine hours received varies greatly from year to year. Also, where are some of the world's sunniest places in that list? Websites gathering sunshine information may be unreliable as well. One city's monthly sunshine information being available on a website may be different on another website. The article may have a problem similar to that of List of places with fewer than ten residents, which was deleted because it was also an indiscriminate and never to be completed list of places with no more than nine people. (edited) Eye snore 12:45, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:48, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:49, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This curious list of information appears to have no notability in secondary sources as an overall list topic. Nwlaw63 (talk) 16:52, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense – see the BBC, for example. Andrew D. (talk) 07:31, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I missed the BBC source - when I looked at the article, I saw what I thought were all primary sources. Still one source, or even two, three or four, don't actually constitute 'significant coverage' in reliable secondary sources. Nwlaw63 (talk) 01:12, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Sunshine is a standard weather measurement which is collected and collated by organisations such as the UN and WMO. Secondary sources report the sunniest cities in the US and the world using this data. The list therefore passes WP:LISTN easily. If there's no entry for isolated places like the Aleutian Islands then that's reasonable because there are no cities there. I am writing this in London which is certainly a city but, as usual, there's an overcast and so the sun is not shining :( Andrew D. (talk) 07:17, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Andrew Davidson: Not every large city in the list is present, many of them are missing and I will still mark the list as a dynamic list. Eye snore 15:22, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, as interesting and informative. Long-term averages, like average duration over the last n Januaries, are better and editors should be encouraged to improve the page in this way. Removing the page because it can be improved isn't much of an argument and seems counter to the spirit of Wikipedia. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 17:55, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I agree with the nominator, very WP:INDISCRIMINATE. If one wanted to see each cities average sunshine duration they could go to the respective article. JayJay^{What did I do?} 19:46, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete somewhat reluctantly. A lot of work has gone into it, even if semiautomated. Seems to be exact duplicate of data from individual city articles weather sections? So the data is by definition notable in itself. By the way, cannot be compared to 'less than 10 inhabitants'. Cities do always have sunshine of some amount so not arbitrary, although the definition of city could be. The next article will be List of cities by average high temperature and the next will be . . . Ideally all the tabulated weather data for each city should be moved over to wikidata and the tables for each city populated from there, and then this article cold be automatically generated and will always be as complete as there are in existence articles for places with weather data (and this I would strongly support) . . . but as it stands this would take a team of editors doing nothing but keeping it up to date and in synch with the city/town/village articles. The top 10 or top 20 sunshine cities cold be useful (section in another article about city livability perhaps), but a list of all cities/towns/villages manually maintained (and it will need to be kept current if it has any value) will soak up far more wikitime than its encyclopedic value is worth. Aoziwe (talk) 15:45, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete perhaps as I also think this is an interesting subject but am questionable about solidity therefore I suggest deleting for now. Asking DGG for analysis. SwisterTwister talk 05:13, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Such lists are appropriate for an encyclopedia like WP, because, according to our most basic principles, WP:PILLARS, one of our functions is to have much of the contents of an almanac. Such lists have been traditional almanac territory. They are lists for which people might very reasonably comes here; they are not indiscriminate: they cover the largest cities in each country, and there is no reason they cannot be complete for them, since authoritative data for the table is very easily available . As for other lists by climate indicators, I might well support them also: they're equally within our scope. DGG ( talk ) 08:27, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Music1201 ^talk 20:40, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Clearly the topic is notable, since there are multiple sources discussing the sunniest cities in the United States and the World. Also, as DGG noted, meteorological data is permitted as Wikipedia also functions as an almanac. If there is problem with list size, that can be remedied by setting a bar for including a city in the list. Possible criteria could be "only cities with population greater than 250,000", "only the ten largest cities per country", "only one city per quadrangle of width one degree longitude and height of one degree latitude", and so on. But that is for the editors to discuss on the list's talk page: AfD is not for cleanup. Altamel (talk) 21:48, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per DGG CerealKillerYum (talk) 06:24, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is a very important list as it give the idea of sunlight given in a particular place. I agree with Altamel that some modifications should be made in order to give this list a limit. A bar should be kept like "only the capital cities" or limit it to ten cities in one grid (15 degrees longitude x 15 degrees latitude). The former list would give a limit of no more than 196 cities and the latter would give a maximum of only 2880 cities. (Also since land is there on only 30% of the earth the list would get further restricted to 960) Furthermore, I think that the world "cities" should be replaced by "places" as there are many "places" on the earth's surface which have interesting sunshine data but are not qualified to be called "cities". Arpit.arun.mishra (talk) 10:25, 2 May 2016 (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.