599:
article, if really use that "methodology" in Lima, we have two different 2012 populations (considering this, ¿why used the expossed methodology?), the rest are only primary source. And yes, i'm expert but my afirmations are based on secondary sources, I have in my hands the new development plan of
Arequipa (the replace of the plan 2002-2015), in the page 123 says that Yura in the year 2011 has a metropolitan category but only have a 92% of metropolitan population, and 8% of non-metropolitan population, a district can have a "metropolitan category" but all the population of the district could not be inside the metropolis. In other case, Cerro Colorado have a 99,5% of metropolitan population and a 0,5% of non-metropolitan population, and this happen in Socabaya, in Tiabaya, in Sabandia, etc, etc. In the page 116 say, that the 98% of population of the province of Arequipa in 2011 lives in the metropolitan area (That is a secondary source, Knowledge is based in secondary source made by experts in the field and not an original research made for a user of Knowledge). Really, the methodology exposed in the article is evidently an original research, done by a novice in the field, who believed that the metropolitan population figure was a mere sum of districts and that is obviously incorrect.--
247:
there are unreliable, even one of them is a blog. With regard to the "population" of the same this is not verifiable, about the same article in other languages, all were created by the same IP, there seems to be making a claim that information like true or trustworthy. The same article has been deleted in the
Spanish Knowledge for be an original research, because the only reference reliable has populations by districts, and not by metropolitan areas.
421:
methodology when you have the information by neighborhoods? like you see, the populations of this original research differ from the only secondary source, that actually figure only in the case of Lima. Conclusion, if one use a methodology has a different population in the Lima case, in the case of
Trujillo and Arequipa no exists secondary source for contrast if the original research, differ from the applied methodology.
397:: Cmonzonc, it seems you're wrong; the user is not making an original research, it seems he's presenting the information of estimated population given officially by peruvian government and he uses official documents of plannings of cities for metropolitan areas. It seems he's using the same methodology as peruvian government for metropolitan areas as it can be seen here in the next table of the
315:. It´s clearly seen that most of the sources used are government planning documents of municipalities of the cities and official census estimates of peruvian government. The user seems to make use about official documentation for the article. This is useful information but It is recommended to make an improve.--
337:
The goverment statitics talk about districts, provinces, and do not talk about "metropolitan areas", that population was calculated for the editor of the article. In almost cases, the districts are not completely include in the metropolitan area and that population is a simple calculation done with a
598:
The references don't talk about the 2012 population, can be official source but are only pimary sources and are not fully verifiable because in these non exist any page with 2012 population. Your exposed that the methodology is applied in Lima, but only in that case we have an official source in the
516:
in 2012 is this, according that reference the
Metropolitan Area of Lima has a population of 9 450 585 inhabitants, the rest are only primary source, and this is not the same of the sum of all district of Lima o Callao. According the primary source used in Arequipa and Trujillo, in the Arequipa case,
246:
Sourced by unreliable material and he makes an original research with primary sources, in the source of population do not talk about metropolitan areas, and the user make a sum to his understanding, has several errors. This is an original research, It does not have enough references, and in fact
511:
Sorry. Ok, your propose is good idea, because only exists officialy three metropolitan areas unfortunatly no exist a official population in
Arequipa and Trujillo, and in the case of the population INEI don't provide a population, only provide population by districts, cities, and indirectly the
250:
From the population by districts are recreating the metropolitan population, which is not correct because the metropolitan areas are not defined by a conglomeration of districts, the metropolitan areas in Peru are actually a cluster of developments or neighborhood. In conclusion, it is using a
627:
we can't verify it you must post it here the new document to verify that you say it's true, certainly till now you haven't referenced anything of your argumentation. Do we must believe in your word when it's been shown that you lie?.. and in the case you were an expert thing that you haven't
420:
Is not the same methodology, in Lima INEI provide a different population in 2012 of the calculate with that "methodology" (original research),in the cases of
Arequipa, the original research or methodology, is based in erroneous criteria. ¿The user can not suppose a methodology or applying a
80:
614:
I'm sorry but at least me, I can't believe you're an expert unless you show a certification. Anybody can say that but to believe it's true must show a certification. And It can be seen you're not speaking the truth in every argumentation you do that is very bad you lie when you say
338:
wrong approach. For that reason
Knowledge is not a primary source.In this case are using a primary source, census results. He is doing research, a shoddy investigation, with erroneous criteria to generate metropolitan populations based on census data (a primary source).
632:... According to the information It can be seen there's no different populations for 2012 for Lima Metropolitana, in all cases is 9`450,585. Are you trying to lie again?, if there's two different populations, what are those?, can you put them here?. --
179:
75:
556:
in the table "EVOLUCIÓN DE LA POBLACIÓN POR GRANDES GRUPOS DE EDAD TRUJILLO METROPOLITANO". And according with official documents of
Arequipa the methology for mertopolitan population is the same as Lima and Trujillo see page 62 in
440:
in the table "EVOLUCIÓN DE LA POBLACIÓN POR GRANDES GRUPOS DE EDAD TRUJILLO METROPOLITANO". And according with official documents of
Arequipa the methology for mertopolitan population is the same as Lima and Trujillo see page 62 in
655:
are you willing to withdraw the nomination? There are no delete !votes and the first AfD (May 2012) received no comments after the first relist. Maybe the article could be moved if necessary, after discussing on the talk page.
478:
I didn't remember at first that I had commented on the first AFD for this, by the same nominator. He never responded there to my suggestion for fixing it according to his criticism, so I'll repeat it here: "So convert this to
107:
102:
401:
about Lima metropolitan population given by peruvian government that is considering all population of the districts that form Lima metropolitan area, on the contrary that you say. Do We believe to you or to the peruvian
111:
519:
I suggest create the list of districts, other list of provinces, delete this and create and article for each of the metropolitan areas. And only provide a total population of a metropolitan area if exist a secondary
94:
173:
630:
Your exposed that the methodology is applied in Lima, but only in that case we have an official source in the article, if really use that "methodology" in Lima, we have two different 2012 populations
139:
553:
437:
561:
the table "CRECIMIENTO DISTRITAL DE AREQUIPA METROPOLITANA". So
Cmonzonc it seems you haven't cheked the official documents of Peruvian cities. On the other hand, where is your source to say
98:
517:
exists districts that have a non-metropolitan population ¿How calculate the population, if one don't know what percent of people of one district are inside the metropolitan or not?.
668:
641:
608:
586:
531:
500:
465:
411:
385:
364:
324:
304:
282:
260:
240:
219:
59:
552:, the user only presents the information at year 2012. According to official documents of Trujillo the methodology for metropolitan population is the same see page 35 and 36 in
436:, the user only presents the information at year 2012. According to official documents of Trujillo the methodology for metropolitan population is the same see page 35 and 36 in
90:
65:
134:
194:
161:
290:
251:
primary source to recreate information incorrectly. This article can be replaced by an article that talks about the populations of districts or provinces.--
268:
573:
of the article are also official references. Do you intend to ignore or disown a document of the municipality of Chiclayo city? see page 6 in reference
155:
372:
Please don't format your subsequent comments as if they are new !votes by new contributors; I've struck through your duplicate "delete" accordingly.
445:
the table "CRECIMIENTO DISTRITAL DE AREQUIPA METROPOLITANA". So Cmonzonc it seems you haven't cheked the official documents of Peruvian cities.
151:
548:
Well, it causes me curiosity and I searched for information in articles of cities and It's clearly seen that is the same methodology that in
432:
Well, it causes me curiosity and I searched for information in articles of cities and It's clearly seen that is the same methodology that in
201:
574:
565:?, you never sourced that. The population you mention "9'450,585" coincides with the population in the article. That source you say
483:
to explain the classification and describe the three MAs; remove everything that's not officially a metropolitan area; and create a
461:
167:
558:
442:
17:
342:
623:
that source presents information from years 2012 to 2015, so it demonstrates you don't speak with truth. All you say about
628:
demonstrated, the documents of municipalities speak by themselves and your word has nothing to do there. And when you say
480:
687:
40:
620:
484:
351:
video or transcripts of surveillance, public hearings, investigative reports, trial/litigation in any country
683:
637:
582:
549:
457:
433:
407:
398:
320:
235:
56:
36:
570:
449:
229:
187:
604:
527:
360:
256:
215:
495:
380:
300:
278:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
682:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
633:
578:
453:
403:
316:
53:
81:
Articles for deletion/List of the Most Populous metropolitan areas in Peru (2nd nomination)
664:
566:
513:
600:
523:
356:
252:
211:
489:
374:
296:
274:
128:
659:
563:
in the Arequipa case, exists districts that have a non-metropolitan population
76:
Articles for deletion/List of the Most Populous metropolitan areas in Peru
232:. This nomination is too vague, and has no qualification for its basis.
347:
Further examples of primary sources include archeological artifacts,
512:
population of Lima Metropolitana (Lima+Callao), the only official
676:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
625:
Yura and other districts and new development plan of Arequipa
652:
124:
120:
116:
186:
487:
with a sortable population column. Would that work?"
91:
List of the Most Populous metropolitan areas in Peru
66:
List of the Most Populous metropolitan areas in Peru
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
690:). No further edits should be made to this page.
617:in these non exist any page with 2012 population
569:is not the only one official reference, these
200:
8:
289:Note: This debate has been included in the
267:Note: This debate has been included in the
291:list of Lists-related deletion discussions
288:
266:
269:list of Peru-related deletion discussions
577:. Are you an expert to ignore that?. --
73:
7:
575:Área metropolitana de Chiclayo 2010
72:
653:saying "your propose is good idea"
24:
621:Lima, estimated population 2012
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
343:Knowledge:No original research
1:
669:12:16, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
60:15:49, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
642:17:15, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
609:16:22, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
587:21:14, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
532:19:51, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
501:17:06, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
466:21:04, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
412:14:27, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
386:03:27, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
365:03:14, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
325:02:40, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
305:00:41, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
283:00:40, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
261:22:16, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
241:13:49, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
220:03:29, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
707:
481:Metropolitan areas of Peru
485:List of distritos of Peru
679:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
313:Speedy Keep and improve
226:Speedy Keep and improve
71:AfDs for this article:
210:Original research
469:
452:comment added by
307:
294:
285:
272:
239:
698:
681:
662:
468:
446:
295:
273:
238:
236:Northamerica1000
233:
205:
204:
190:
142:
132:
114:
48:The result was
34:
706:
705:
701:
700:
699:
697:
696:
695:
694:
688:deletion review
677:
657:
447:
349:census results,
234:
147:
138:
105:
89:
86:
69:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
704:
702:
693:
692:
672:
671:
645:
644:
596:
595:
594:
593:
592:
591:
590:
589:
539:
538:
537:
536:
535:
534:
504:
503:
475:
474:
473:
472:
471:
470:
425:
424:
423:
422:
415:
414:
391:
390:
389:
388:
340:
339:
328:
327:
309:
308:
286:
244:
243:
208:
207:
144:
85:
84:
83:
78:
70:
68:
63:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
703:
691:
689:
685:
680:
674:
673:
670:
666:
661:
654:
651:Cmonzonc, by
650:
647:
646:
643:
639:
635:
631:
626:
622:
618:
613:
612:
611:
610:
606:
602:
588:
584:
580:
576:
572:
568:
564:
560:
555:
551:
547:
546:
545:
544:
543:
542:
541:
540:
533:
529:
525:
521:
515:
510:
509:
508:
507:
506:
505:
502:
498:
497:
492:
491:
486:
482:
477:
476:
467:
463:
459:
455:
451:
444:
439:
435:
431:
430:
429:
428:
427:
426:
419:
418:
417:
416:
413:
409:
405:
402:government?--
400:
396:
393:
392:
387:
383:
382:
377:
376:
371:
370:
369:
368:
367:
366:
362:
358:
353:
352:
350:
344:
336:
334:
330:
329:
326:
322:
318:
314:
311:
310:
306:
302:
298:
292:
287:
284:
280:
276:
270:
265:
264:
263:
262:
258:
254:
248:
242:
237:
231:
230:WP:DEL-REASON
227:
224:
223:
222:
221:
217:
213:
203:
199:
196:
193:
189:
185:
181:
178:
175:
172:
169:
166:
163:
160:
157:
153:
150:
149:Find sources:
145:
141:
136:
130:
126:
122:
118:
113:
109:
104:
100:
96:
92:
88:
87:
82:
79:
77:
74:
67:
64:
62:
61:
58:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
678:
675:
648:
629:
624:
616:
597:
562:
518:
494:
488:
448:— Preceding
394:
379:
373:
354:
348:
346:
341:
332:
331:
312:
249:
245:
225:
209:
197:
191:
183:
176:
170:
164:
158:
148:
49:
47:
31:
28:
634:Antodeabout
579:Antodeabout
454:Antodeabout
404:Antodeabout
317:Antodeabout
174:free images
571:references
684:talk page
619:see this
567:reference
559:reference
554:reference
550:reference
514:reference
443:reference
438:reference
434:reference
399:reference
297:• Gene93k
275:• Gene93k
37:talk page
686:or in a
601:Cmonzonc
524:Cmonzonc
462:contribs
450:unsigned
357:Cmonzonc
253:Cmonzonc
212:Cmonzonc
135:View log
39:or in a
649:Comment
490:postdlf
395:Comment
375:postdlf
228:– per
180:WP refs
168:scholar
108:protect
103:history
520:source
333:Delete
152:Google
112:delete
57:yck C.
660:Trevj
195:JSTOR
156:books
140:Stats
129:views
121:watch
117:links
16:<
665:talk
638:talk
605:talk
583:talk
528:talk
496:talk
458:talk
408:talk
381:talk
361:talk
321:talk
301:talk
279:talk
257:talk
216:talk
188:FENS
162:news
125:logs
99:talk
95:edit
50:keep
658:--
202:TWL
137:•
133:– (
54:Der
667:)
640:)
607:)
585:)
530:)
522:--
499:)
464:)
460:•
410:)
384:)
363:)
355:--
345::
323:)
303:)
293:.
281:)
271:.
259:)
218:)
182:)
127:|
123:|
119:|
115:|
110:|
106:|
101:|
97:|
52:.
663:(
636:(
603:(
581:(
526:(
493:(
456:(
406:(
378:(
359:(
335:.
319:(
299:(
277:(
255:(
214:(
206:)
198:·
192:·
184:·
177:·
171:·
165:·
159:·
154:(
146:(
143:)
131:)
93:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.