Talk:List of places with fewer than ten residents

china

acording to my 1997 world atlas made by harper collins there used to be a town in china thats located In inner mongolia and its on the border with Heilongjiang the towns name was Liuzhan its not there anymore when i looked at the spot on google maps all i can see now is empty land and even the buildings were removed . im sure that this cannot be the only place in all of china is abandoned. 69.221.169.111 (talk) 23:59, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Island in Greece

There's an island in the caldera of the Santorini volcano in Greece that has a population of one. Can't think of the name of it. He basically caters to the tourists showing up to bath in the hot springs, when he feels like it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shawn@garbett.org (talk • contribs) 22:21, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Are you referring to Nea Kameni? I've added it, but the article states that it is uninhabited. - Canglesea (talk) 04:06, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Encyclopedic

If this article is to ever become encyclopedic. It needs a background, such as why did the population shrink? The current intro offers no insights whatsover. --Menchi 07:44 14 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Won't that depend on the place? Martin

There's probably a general trend. For example, the lack of industry, tourism, natural resources. Or the deprivation of natural resources -> Ghost town. And one could elaborate on the causes, drawing from unique, interesting, and specific examples. --Menchi 20:05 14 Jun 2003 (UTC)

There may or may not be a general trend, but for Wikipedia purposes what matters is if there's a general trend described by a reliable source. sorsoup (talk) 01:28, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

An interesting idea - but perhaps better placed as an article on depopulation? Martin 22:56 14 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Deletion?

VfD notes: the page as a whole has been listed. I've also just listed the four places with a population of one (though on reflection I wonder if a redirect/merge would have been more appropriate). Martin 01:39 15 Jun 2003 (UTC)

---

DELETE THIS PAGE? these are two of numerous examples of these useless "list of..." pages. These pages are not useful for almost anything. A significant percentage of changes lately are to these pages. Where will it all end? List of list of pages? Iammaxus 21:33 13 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Actually there is a List of lists. The list of places with fewer than ten people is useful for people who are looking for just that: information on places with fewer than ten people. Same for the list of fictional bears. Wikipedia also has a list of fictional dogs, a list of fictional cats, and a list of fictional monkeys, and much more at the list of fictional animals article. These pages should not be deleted. -- goatasaur

Agree with Goatasaur, seems like the kind of thing to chop from a paper encyclopædia, which Wikipedia isn't. -- John Owens 21:45 13 Jun 2003 (UTC)

How do we decide what is useful? Should we make any list we can possibly think of? Sure you can think of some explanation for the usefulness of the fictional bears article... Who knows? maybe someday, some psychologist will want to write on the symbolism of bears in fiction? Im not asking to delete every "list of" page or even 'any' list of page, if there is any opposition. im just saying that these pages are becoming a big waste of time and energy. Iammaxus 21:58 13 Jun 2003 (UTC)

If a list involves some kind of trivia then it's usually acceptable. I remember the "list of books without an article in the title". I can think of at least twenty books without an article in the title off the top of my head, but thinking of fictional animals (much less ones that aren't on the list) or places in the US with a <10 population is somewhat more taxing. Also, lists are a good way for newbies to cut their teeth. -- goatasaur

...and in the credibility of the Wikipedia project. The article makes the ridiculous claim to list "every place on earth with less than 10 people". Seems to me as a parallell to e-mail spam and usenet cross-posting effectively sabotageing a possibly good idea. Ruhrjung 22:14 13 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Yes, this list should (as it does) only list those places officially recognized by any census as a place worth counting. I only haven't found a catchy phrase to add to the article. But that should better be discussed in the talk page there. andy 23:03 13 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Agree, leave it. Passes the tests of contains accurate info, might be usefull to someone, and mostly harmless. -- Infrogmation 22:06 13 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Lists are indexes, that's why people spend time on them, and why they're good to have. At 130K+ articles, indexing is becoming more and more important. We have lots of material, but many articles are effectively invisible because there aren't enough paths to them. Stan 22:36 13 Jun 2003 (UTC)

One thing is to index articles. Another is to create lists based on concepts which the contributor has none understanding of: How many "places" exist on Earth? Can a "place" be part of another "place"? How many dialects exist? How many ethnicities? Is X a nationality or an ethnicity? (Maybe list frency also invites to copy-right violations when lists are copied from sources like http://www.dmoz.org/ and http://www.ethnologue.com/ ?) Ruhrjung 23:08 13 Jun 2003 (UTC)

indexing yes, junk no. jimfbleak 15:19 14 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Jimfbleak and Ruhrjung understand what im saying. An index like list of rifles or list of battles in WWII could be highly useful. These other lists are another matter. List of people whose name starts with a certain letter? how could that possibly be useful? Iammaxus 21:22 14 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I've no strong objection to deletion, but if y'all do decide to delete, would you mind letting me move it to my user space? Thanks. :) Martin 01:32 15 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I think this is something that needs to be handled in some wikipedia policy page... These lists need to get under control and be a little more organized Iammaxus 02:14 15 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I actually thought this article was interesting -Antonio MTV Dancer Martin

I think so too. It needs more explanations than a list, that's all. --Menchi 12:54 16 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Why ten people?

The only thing that bugs me is, "Why 10 people?" why not 100? -fonzy

An arbitrarily mark, or it'd not stop. --Menchi 12:54 16 Jun 2003 (UTC)

What is a "place"?

How about Mars? Tuf-Kat

There are quite a few uninhabited places on the Earth, for instance the summit of Mount Everest, and just about every mountain summit for that matter. The places on this list are basically US Census boners, which should have been folded into other places and weren't, most likely due to bureaucracy and/or inertia. Many of them will be gone from the next Census. (In case people don't realize, the 30,000 articles added from Census data are still only a fraction of all the named settlements in the US - look at a state map of Tennessee for instance, see how many of the little dots are not in Wikipedia.) Hmmm - perhaps the list criterion should be something like "declared by some government to be a settled place", which excludes wilderness areas, archaeological ruins, Mars :-), etc. Stan 22:20 13 Jun 2003 (UTC)

The two I added were articles I created about places not on the census list. --Infrogmation

What is "place" here? It is the question Stan asked before. The top of a mountain, an isolated island, a small village, a ghost town, or even my house are places with population less than ten. Guidelines should be added. --Wshun

• I concur with comments here - this list should define what a "place" is for the purpose of this list; how do items merit inclusion on the list (other than of course pop< 10)?--A Y Arktos\^talk 00:16, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

in order for a place to be considered a settled place or a former settled place with 10 residents or fewer it would have to be a named villages on a map or used to have a form of local government such as a elected mayor. currenly many places fit this difinition. acording to this diffinition tops of mountains are not considered places. this covers the settled areas and as for land areas they can be any territory on earth if there land ares are known that is to say how large the uninhabitd region is. take for instance the province inside of greenland called greenland national park. its population is zero. yet for some reason this artical continues to list every former settlment and former weather research station when it should just list the park municipality as a whole . Northeast Greenland National Park in this land area as if thats the extent of its de-population where as in real life this park province is clearly marked and nearly measures one half of the land area of greenland. 69.221.169.111 (talk) 00:21, 10 February 2012 (UTC) 69.221.169.111 (talk) 00:08, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Rambot humour

Some of those articles created by Rambot look totally amusing when there are few people in it. Example: North Red River Township, Minnesota

Demographics

As of the census of 2000, there are 3 people, 2 households, and 1 families residing in the township. The population density is 0.0/km² (0.1/mi²). There are 4 housing units at an average density of 0.1/km² (0.2/mi²). The racial makeup of the township is 100.00% White.

There are 2 households out of 50.0% are non-families. 50.0% of all households are made up of individuals and 0.0% have someone living alone who is 65 years of age or older. The average household size is 1.50 and the average family size is 2.00.

In the township the population is spread out with 0.0% under the age of 18, 33.3% from 18 to 24, 0.0% from 25 to 44, 33.3% from 45 to 64, and 33.3% who are 65 years of age or older. The median age is 54 years. For every 100 females there are 200.0 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there are 200.0 males.

The median income for a household in the township is $13,750, and the median income for a family is $18,750. The per capita income for the township is $8,983. 33.3% of the population are below the poverty line, all between 18 ang 65 years of age.

In the third paragraph, you might as well just say: "One person is between 18-24, another is 54 years old, and the third is 65 years old or older. Two of them are male." In the fourth, you could say, "One of the three is poor (living below the poverty line). --seav 04:37, Aug 29, 2003 (UTC)

I recommend editing such sections... Martin

But that would probably mess up with the automated Rambot updating after the next U.S. Census. --seav 18:02, Sep 14, 2003 (UTC)

Disney town?

Here's an (alleged) example of a place with fewer than ten people. The Disney town. They have no residents, only workers. All property is owned by disney, a manager is the mayor, and all employees who live there live in trailers, and can be kicked out at the whim of the corporation. Allegedly this is so that the corporation can retain control over things which are otherwise controlled by municipalities, like water, etc.
~ender 2003-09-12 04:14:MST

I don't think it's a very good idea to have people's incomes for such small places. Everyone in the world can come here and find out the income of a family lving in og these towns! That's why in Canada information for small places are rounded. We can't even know the exact population until the next census! Earl Andrew 23:13, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Well, you can go right here http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/SAFFFacts?_event=Search&geo_id=01000US&_geoContext=01000US%7C04000US36%7C16000US3646349&_street=&_county=&_cityTown=ervings&_state=&_zip=&_lang=en&_sse=on to find out how much the one guy in Ervings, New Hampshire makes. Nelson Ricardo 06:50, Nov 18, 2004 (UTC)

---

Article Title

May I suggest that this page be moved to List of places with fewer than ten residents or List of localities with fewer than ten residents? The current title's wording of 'people isn't very precise. --Kwekubo 15:14, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I agree. List of places with fewer than ten residents is much better. Peter S. 15:29, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Separation?

I personally think that places with 0 population should be separated from places with a population from one to ten. I was directed here from such a place, and I think that those sorts of places are more interesting than destroyed cities and whatnot. Tell me your thoughts. clarkefreak 21:05, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

• Nevermind clarkefreak 21:09, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Sealand

I have hidden Sealand from the list of places with one person, because the Sealand entry says "The facility is now occupied by one or more caretakers representing Michael Bates, who himself lives in Leigh on Sea, England." At the very least, this means that Michael Bates (who was listed here as living there) does not, and there is some question as to the exact number living there. - Cafemusique 11:38, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Famagusta

I have added Famagusta to the list of places with no population (its own Wiki article and the article on ghost towns both cite its lack of population). --Si42 01:01, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Burhou

... is one of the Channel Islands, and as such is not part of the United Kingdom. --MacRusgail 16:18, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorted. Thanks for pointing this out!  Regards, David Kernow 17:44, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

What about Dellview

Dellview, North Carolina has a population of 10 in 1990. It is an incorporated town, but is on probation for not having enough people, so it doesn't really have a government. --Gooday.1 19:49, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

[County of Gaston ]

Reference for US data?

Does anyone know if there's a reference from the US Census for this data? I searched all over census.gov and wasn't able to find anything - without looking at each state for each CDP that qualifies...

My reason for asking is because there's a statement on Erving's Location, New Hampshire that says it's one of only four places in the US that has a population of 1. But this list has seven. -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 19:08, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

FYI - the town of Garryowen, Montana has one resident. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.100.189.183 (talk) 18:16, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

oil springs reservation, ny

this made it on the list twice - once for 3 people, once for 9. Must have had a population boom during editing??? Sabalon 15:01, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

• There are two CDPs, bcz the reservation overlaps a political boundary -- split between 2 counties, i think.
  --Jerzy•t 04:15, 22 November 2008 (UTC)
  

Delete page?

This page, at least under its current title, is nonsensical. There is no definition of "place", and of course the title represents something impossible to list -- short of mentionning all empty locations. How about "next to the 5th stone, just right off km 201 on this or that track through Sahara" ?

If this page is to be saved, one should for instance focus on administative units (towns, ...). Or make it specifically a census issue. In either case, it seems hard to escape imposing a rule such as requiring the "place" (redefined) to have or have had at least 1 resident.

In its current form, with its current title, the page looks like an attempted hacker joke.

How about a page on "list of places that do not exist"?

Chernobyl

Surprised that Pripyat near Chernobyl has not been listed. Although it has some unofficial residents, the area was evacuated after the nuclear disaster. --MacRusgail 16:58, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Uninhabited places

Have these been deleted or moved? I certainly think such a place is worthwhile for ghost towns, and abandoned settlements (rather than the top of Everest) as long as they are above ground, and above water! --MacRusgail 20:48, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Pill Hill, California

I posted this request on Talk:Pill Hill, California but I am also posting it here since the community was added to this page in January 2006 [1] before the article was eventually created just a few hours ago:[2]

Could someone please provide me with a link or source to the United States Census Bureau statistics verifying that Pill Hill, California does indeed have a population of two? When I try to enter "Pill Hill, California" into http://factfinder.census.gov I get a "American FactFinder could not find information for the location you specified" error message. Thanks. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 10:58, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like something similar to Moonshine, Illinois, which has never been incorporated and presumably has no boundaries besides the property line, but served as a post office for less than 10 years after the Civil War & thus got on maps. Not a CDP.
--Jerzy•t 04:20, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Hoot Owl, Oklahoma

The town of Hoot Owl, Oklahoma would qualify for this list. The only thing is that I don't know which section to place it in. The official Census Bureau tally is zero; however, they list six housing units, and give an estimated population of ten. So should it go under "zero" or under "ten"? Thanks, Trvsdrlng (talk) 03:47, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Title

Needs to be renamed '..with ten or fewer residents' or '..with fewer than eleven residents' or have the ten residents' place removed.217.44.180.84 (talk) 16:06, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

• I fixed this. One of those places seems to have only 7 people now so I moved ti to that section. The other only has an estimated "fewer than ten" so I moved it to the Nine section. Johntex\^talk 18:58, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Fewer than 10

What is the basis of of the 'fewer than 10'. Is '10' just an arbitrary number or is there some significance and support to its use in this case. If there is no significance/support, then this article can and should be challenged as arbitrary and unsuitable for WP. Hmains (talk) 03:31, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Three residents

Neither the Isle of Man nor South Georgia are part of the United Kingdom, as misleadingly stated by the formatting of this section. It should be adjusted to reflect this (using commas rather than hierarchical sections, as elsewhere in the list). I would do it myself but my wiki markup is not up to scratch and I'd only bugger it up! Badgerpatrol (talk) 11:19, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Table changed. Certes (talk) 00:30, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

United States

What is the point of even listing the places with fewer than 10 residents??? Don't get me wrong I live in a town with 6 people, but i'm not going to list it here. Because there are hundreds of towns, at least here in the US, with fewer than 10 people... --Atilla5 (talk) 20:35, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

Cook

Cook appears within "Two residents". Cook, South Australia (along with sundry blogs which may be copied from there) contains an unsourced claim that Cook is "said to have a resident population of four". Can we verify its population? Certes (talk) 00:00, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Verifiability suggests restriction to census-recognized units

As many contributions to this talk page suggest, the status of having N inhabitants has a clear meaning only when it is a place that a governmental unit

1. knows the boundaries of and
2. counts the residents of.

Otherwise we're trying to verify #s that are based on people's personal taste about whether their home is part of, or near the place, and whether they're feeling today that their dorm or parent's house is home for whether their stuff is still at their lover's place (or not) bcz they're going reconcile or break up for good or not, and change the place's population from week to week.
Population is only determinate and therefore only verifiable on the basis of a census taken at verifiable times. (And the population of Sealand will probably never be verifiable.)
The article should be changed to say that only census-designated places are covered; Moonshine, Illinois should be removed whether or not the article is deleted.
--Jerzy•t 05:53, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

What about Antarctica?

The population entry for Antarctica states it has 1 permanent resident; the esteemed Father Georgy.
Does he deserve inclusion into this list? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.151.170.9 (talk) 20:15, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

I think he does deserve inclusion; I've added Bellingshausen Station to the one resident list. - Canglesea (talk) 02:26, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Not acceptable. The Bellingshausen Station is not in Russia, as it reads on the article. Why couldn't it be as whole, The Antarctica, since it is not owned by any country, and no country is located there. 82.141.73.133 (talk) 07:40, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Paulengrund?

Im sorry for my English, but i am from the German Wikipedia and cant good speak English ;)

In the german Wikipedia there stand, that there is no town with the name "Paulengrund". The smallest town in Germany is Dierfeld and not Paulengrund. have you a reference for paulengrund?

LG -- 91.50.88.165 (talk) 19:49, 14 October 2011 (UTC)