Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5/Society/Archive 17

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10←Archive 15Archive 16Archive 17Archive 18Archive 19

Add Linnean Society of London

PASSED
Added with a 4-0 voting consensus. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:57, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:57, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Per discussion above and comment @Makkool, add Linnean Society of London.

Support
  1. Historically important, and the oldest extant biological society in the world Makkool (talk) 20:03, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
  2. Iostn (talk) 18:49, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
  3. λ NegativeMP1 05:20, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:54, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
  1. Adding this because there were two people who supported it, but I'm personally pretty neutral.GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 19:42, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Swap Cyrillic alphabets with Armenian alphabet  5

PASSED
Added with a 5-0 consensus. PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:01, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:01, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Cyrillic alphabets is a List-type article about different variants of the Cyrillic script  3, which is a separate article we also list. Cyrillic alphabets is rated only Low-importance in Wikiproject Writing systems, while Armenian alphabet is rated High-importance. We already list Georgian scripts  5, so it would be fair to include the other major writing system of the Caucasus.

Support
  1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 19:37, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
  2. Support. Erinius (talk) 14:36, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
  3. Interstellarity (talk) 01:54, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Idiosincrático (talk) 17:21, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
  5. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:29, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Geographia Generalis

PASSED
Added with a 4-0 consensus. PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:04, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:04, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This book from the 1650s is still relevant today. Subsequent editions were edited by Isaac Newton, and to quote the lede, "This influential text laid the foundations for modern geographical science and was pivotal in the development of geography as a scientific discipline. Geographer Fred Lukermann described Geographia Generalis as the division between medieval geography from modern geography." Full disclosure, I am the one who originated this article, but I think it is quite important.

Support
  1. As Nom. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 20:33, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. Makkool (talk) 15:57, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
  3. Interstellarity (talk) 01:54, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Idiosincrático (talk) 17:21, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discus

GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 20:33, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Kitchen utensil  5

PASSED
Added with a 4-0 consensus. PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:07, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:07, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

An important term and category of household items. We already list Cutlery  4, but this is a separate thing. Add under Wikipedia:Vital_articles/Level/5/Everyday_life#Cooking_and_eating.

Support
  1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 20:41, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
  2. Interstellarity (talk) 01:54, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. λ NegativeMP1 08:52, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:30, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Right to education  5

PASSED
Added with a 4-0 consensus. PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:10, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:10, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This "has been recognized as a human right in a number of international conventions," as well as most countries' constitutions.

Support
  1. As nom. To law. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 21:01, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
  2. Interstellarity (talk) 01:54, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. λ NegativeMP1 08:52, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:30, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Well-being and Social skills

PASSED
Added both with 4-0 consensuses. PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:17, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:17, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Place both in psychology. They are both important topics.

Support
  1. Interstellarity (talk) 13:05, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
  2. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 02:20, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
  3. Iostn (talk) 18:49, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:31, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Compound interest  5

PASSED
Added with a 4-0 consensus. PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:22, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:22, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

One of the two main types of Interest  4. Place under Banking and financing.

Support
  1. As nominator. feminist🩸 (talk) 03:17, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
  2. Interstellarity (talk) 01:54, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:27, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:31, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Physical restraint

Added with a 4-0 consensus. PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:19, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:19, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Handcuffs are a type of restraint.

Support
  1. Interstellarity (talk) 01:44, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 06:34, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
  3. Definitely. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:07, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
  4. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:34, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discussion

Where should we put it? Criminal procedure? Lophotrochozoa (talk) 15:21, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Capital market  5

PASSED
Added with a 4-0 consensus. PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:24, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:24, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A capital market is a financial market in which long-term debt (over a year) or equity-backed securities are bought and sold, as opposed to a Money market  5. It is also an umbrella term which covers both the Stock market  5 and the Bond market  5. Place this under Financial market  5.

Support
  1. As nominator. feminist🩸 (talk) 03:55, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
  2. -TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:41, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
  3. Interstellarity (talk) 01:54, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:32, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Alternative civilian service  5

PASSED
Added 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:27, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:27, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Also known as just civilian service. An alternative to Conscription  4 in many countries with a national service. Add under War and military.

Support
  1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 17:33, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
  2. Important topic. Kevinishere15 (talk) 06:35, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
  3. Interstellarity (talk) 01:54, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:32, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Language variants

Portuguese language  3, French language  3, Spanish language  3 and Greek language  3 are all level 3.

Add French of France  5

PASSED
Added 4–0. Makkool (talk) 00:01, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

To swap Standard French with.

Support
  1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 19:53, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
  2. Makes sense. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:06, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
  3. Interstellarity (talk) 01:54, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Iostn (talk) 23:57, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add European Portuguese

FAILED
Not added 2-2. Makkool (talk) 15:15, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Support
  1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 19:53, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
  2. Weak support. Portugal isn't a very large country in terms of population, but this was the original version, so it can be included. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:08, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. -1ctinus📝🗨 02:40, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
    @1ctinus: Out of curiosity, why are you opposing this nomination? QuicoleJR (talk) 14:53, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
    I know people will disagree, but Portugal is too small of a country to include. There are probably hundreds of variants of other languages with more speakers than European Portuguese… -1ctinus📝🗨 15:27, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
  2. There's too few speakers, and Portuguese as a language is already included at a higher level. In my opinion, Brazilian is the only Portuguese variant that should be included. Needlesballoon (talk) 04:41, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
Neutral
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Spanish language in the Americas  5

PASSED
Added 4–0. Makkool (talk) 00:01, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Support
  1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 19:53, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
  2. Definitely. Mexican Spanish  5 should also be listed. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:08, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
  3. Per nom. Brunoblocks274 (talk) 01:48, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
  4. Interstellarity (talk) 01:54, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discuss
  1. Interwikis are low; I was thinking Peninsular, Mexican, and Rioplatense should be subtopics for the Spanish language  3.
    Colombian Spanish would be important too for the high number of speakers and prestige status in South America. I would support all those as subtopics, but if they would take too many slots, Spanish language in the Americas. Latin American Spanish links there too. Makkool (talk) 20:37, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Modern Greek

NO CONSENSUS
No consensus has been developed for over a month since its opening in November. This can be reopened later if anyone wants to do so. PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:28, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:28, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

We list Ancient Greek  4, but not this.

Support
  1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 19:53, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
  2. Interstellarity (talk) 01:54, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. In today's context "Greek language" primarily means Modern Greek, and Modern Greek itself only has a little over 10 million speakers and isn't a particularly influential lnaguage today internationally. Iostn (talk) 23:57, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
Neutral
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Masterpiece

Passed 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:30, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:30, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Place in architecture. Surprised this is not listed.

Support
  1. Interstellarity (talk) 13:59, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
  2. Support listing, though I'm not sure architecture is the best place to list it. Kevinishere15 (talk) 18:12, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
  3. Art not architecture-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:42, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:28, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discussion
  1. Is architecture really the best place for this? None of the examples in the article are architecture. Kevinishere15 (talk) 23:07, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Wand  5 to Philosophy and Religion

PASSED
Added 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:38, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:38, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I'm a bit surprised this wasn't included. I believe this is a significant religious object to numerous groups throughout history and literature. The term has been used as the name for numerous tools and inventions (as can be seen on Wand (disambiguation)), including as a name for a missile defense system known now as David's Sling, and various software tools. I believe it warrants inclusion.

Support
  1. As nomGeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 20:53, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
  2. Also important in pop culture. Kevinishere15 (talk) 01:55, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
  3. Interstellarity (talk) 01:54, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:27, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discuss

GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 20:53, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Customer

PASSED
Added 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:34, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:34, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

We already have Customer service listed. We might as well list this one as well.

Support
  1. Interstellarity (talk) 01:22, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. λ NegativeMP1 08:52, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. So many years in, and we still have obvious gaps in key concepts. Sure. V4 candidate. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:06, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:26, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Purchasing

PASSED
Added 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:44, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:44, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

We do this every day.

Support
  1. Interstellarity (talk) 01:28, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. λ NegativeMP1 08:52, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. V4 candidate. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:07, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:25, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Payment

PASSED
Added 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:45, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:45, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

We use forms of payments every day.

Support
  1. Interstellarity (talk) 01:29, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. λ NegativeMP1 08:52, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. V4 candidate. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:07, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:24, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Cathay Pacific, Aeroflot, and AirAsia

PASSED
Removed all 3, 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:49, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:49, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Airlines are very visible because of their pricing system and customer services, but they are only one element of air travel, and it's probably excessive for them to make up almost 10 % of all vital companies. These are some of the lesser ones in terms of passenger volumes, innovation, and historical significance.

Support
  1. As nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:55, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. Makkool (talk) 18:07, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
  3. Interstellarity (talk) 01:54, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:23, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Vendor

PASSED
Added 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:47, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:47, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

We see these in stores all the time.

Support
  1. Interstellarity (talk) 22:42, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. Seems vital. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:25, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
  3. V4 candidate. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:08, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:24, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Gigolo

REMOVED
Removed with a 4-1 consensus. Other than the latest support vote, this suggestion went stagnant for a long while. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:20, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:20, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Repetitive to Male prostitution  5.

Support
  1. As nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 23:35, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 02:33, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
  3. Makkool (talk) 18:07, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:19, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Similar to Call girl  5 it is a refined form of prostitution. The fact that we have Meat  3 does not mean we need to remove Steak  5.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:47, 26 December 2024 (UTC)


Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Swap Entomophagy with Insects as food  5

PASSED
Swapped with a 4-0 consensus. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:23, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:23, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

We list Entomophagy in the Cooking, food and drink section, but Insects as food would make more sense there. We could also keep the current article and move it somewhere else.

Support swap
  1. Makkool (talk) 14:24, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. Interstellarity (talk) 01:54, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Lophotrochozoa (talk) 16:33, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:21, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support move
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Standard Chinese

PASSED
Passed with a 4-0 voting consensus. 01:17, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:17, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The written form of the language.

Support
  1. Interstellarity (talk) 21:39, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. We list many variants of Chinese already; and Standard French is up for removal above, but I would still support as Standard Chinese has an influential position in global politics and business. Also, we list Modern Standard Arabic  5, which is a similar world language. Makkool (talk) 15:56, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
  3. λ NegativeMP1 08:52, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:16, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Consumerism

PASSED
Unanimous decision at 5-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:13, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:13, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This is a topic that should have been L4 already.

Support
  1. Interstellarity (talk) 11:30, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. -1ctinus📝🗨 18:34, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
  3. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 16:45, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
  4. λ NegativeMP1 08:52, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. Support at least at level 5. Might support a swap at level 4. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 17:12, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Rogue (video game)  5

NO CONSENSUS
Discussion has remained stagnant since December, not moving towards removal. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:35, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:35, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

People have talked about removing this in the past, but nobody has proposed it yet. Of all of the currently-listed games, this would be the easiest to remove. It has pretty much zero importance outside of popularizing the Roguelike  5 genre, which we already list separately. The genre is certainly vital, but we don't need to list this game as well.

Support
  1. As nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:10, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. Makkool (talk) 18:07, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Oppose simple removal; the genre is big enough at this point (There's even a roguelite Prince of Persia now!) that I think we need an example of it.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 10:33, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
Neutral
Discuss

As a possible replacement, NetHack is another ancient roguelike pillar, estimated as the second-most-influential in this page (section "Which games have influenced other games, exactly?"). It doesn't have as much pure name recognition but is more widely actually played; I can't be bothered to find sources right now for all of these but IIRC it's been cited as a direct influence for Dwarf Fortress, Spelunky and Minecraft  5 [1]. Plus its exceptional complexity has gotten attention as a challenge for machine learning agents[2][3].10:33, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

I would say Rogue is more notable as the forefather of the genre, and I don't feel strongly to swap it with another roguelike. I think like QuicoleJR that the genre is best covered by just the roguelike article. Makkool (talk) 16:20, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Swap Planet of the Apes (1968 film)  5 with Planet of the Apes

NO CONSENSUS
Discussion has remained stagnant since February and had been there for three months, not moving towards swapping. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:34, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:34, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Plain removal didn't look like it could get anywhere, so I'll propose a swap with the media franchise instead.

Planet of the Apes -frachise has had enduring popularity for 56 years. It covers 10 theatrical films, two 1970's TV shows and the original Pierre Boulle novel of course. The first instalment on its own doesn't seem to fit the vital movie status. Unlike many other sci-fi movies in the list, it's not considered one of the greatest films of all time.

Support
  1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 19:08, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. Support addition of the franchise, but oppose removal of the movie. One of them could go to V4, perhaps. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:12, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Weak oppose. Not considered the greatest of all time but I think the fact it did spawn such a successful franchise indicates how iconic the film was (in a similar manner to how we list Alien (film)  5 and not Alien (franchise)). The twist ending is also considered to be both one of the greatest twists and also one of the greatest endings of all time. It has been imitated into oblivion by other films at this point but when it first came out, it was groundbreaking. The movie is also very popular in the cultural zeitgeist with many quotes that people will instantly recognize (one of them, "Get your paws off me, you damned dirty ape," is on the AFI 100 years... 100 quotes list). Aurangzebra (talk) 03:38, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
Discuss
  1. If we really must get rid of a science fiction movie, my vote would be for Pan's Labyrinth  5. More beloved by critics, yes. But is it still particularly relevant even just ~20 years later? Not really. Aurangzebra (talk) 03:41, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
  1. Pan's Labyrinth is important certainly to reduce Hollywood and English-language bias. I didn't choose this as a sci-fi movie specifically. I carefully looked at the whole list to find articles with some justification for cutting. Not many came up, the list is pretty strong as it is. Makkool (talk) 16:06, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Graduation and Diploma

PASSED
Both added 4–0. Makkool (talk) 16:21, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

These are as important as Academic degree  5.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:45, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

Support
  1. Support as nom. -TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:45, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. Support, they are vital education topics still missing Makkool (talk) 20:02, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
  3. λ NegativeMP1 04:33, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Of course. V4 candidates. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:13, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add important offices

Add Police station

PASSED
Added police station, 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:10, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:10, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Support
  1. Support as nom. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:27, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. λ NegativeMP1 02:51, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
  3. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:18, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
  4. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 16:45, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Fire station

PASSED
Added fire station, 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:11, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:11, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Support
  1. Support as nom. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:27, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. λ NegativeMP1 02:51, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
  3. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:18, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
  4. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 16:45, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Post office

Nominated somewhere else already. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:17, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Support
  1. Support as nom. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:27, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
  1. @TonyTheTiger: this has already been nominated above. Kevinishere15 (talk) 00:17, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Surveillance  5

PASSED
Added 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:52, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:52, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

What Closed-circuit television  5 cameras do.

Support
  1. As nom. B3251(talk) 18:20, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. Definitely. QuicoleJR (talk) 21:32, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. DEfinitely. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 02:39, 29 January 2025 (UTC)
  4. Support  Carlwev  18:46, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Bukkake

PASSED
Removed 4-0. While group sex only has 3 votes, it can be assumed to have a general consensus towards addition. PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:56, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:56, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

It may seem unfair to nominate this, but this appears to be more of an obscure porn genre than a sexual activity people engage in (it's listed under sex positions).

Support
  1. As nominator. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 00:15, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. Swap for group sex, since it doesn't make sense to list this and not that, which is a much more basic and broader concept. Admittedly, bukkake does have a lot of interwikis and pageviews so it could possibly be readded if everyday life is below quota. Iostn (talk) 18:10, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
  3. Support swap for group sex. Interstellarity (talk) 01:54, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Support swap for group sex, which is vital, but bukkake may not warrant a full article in an encyclopedia with only 50,000 articles. EchoVanguardZ (talk) 22:19, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Amtrak  5

FAILED
Not removed 1-4. Makkool (talk) 16:21, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I love transit as much as anyone, but this one doesn't come to my mind when I think of vital American companies. Despite some renovation attempts, its 22.9 million passengers in 2022 are way below the 400-500 million figures the other rail companies we list, and that's in the low end.

Support
  1. As nominator. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 00:15, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
Oppose.
  1. Oppose. This is essential to the history of American rail as an industry. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 05:12, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. We need an American railroad on this list. Either keep or swap with the UPRR or the BNSF. pbp 16:32, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
  3. Per pbp, but I prefer keeping it while adding more American railroad companies. Interstellarity (talk) 01:54, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Certainly not while Acela  5, Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority  5, Chicago "L"  5, New York City Subway  4 are all listed, in the transportation section. EchoVanguardZ (talk) 19:23, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Wellington boot  5

NO CONSENSUS
No consensus on this nomination has been developed in months. PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:56, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:56, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

We currently list Boot  4 and this is the singular type of boot listed at level 5. I don't consider this to be the most vital type of boot. I would consider combat boot, snow boot or cowboy boot more vital.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:53, 24 December 2024 (UTC)

  1. Maybe even Ski boot. There are too many modern types of waterproof shoe technology to focus on the rubber boot.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 10:49, 25 December 2024 (UTC)


Support
  1. As nom.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:53, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Important piece of footwear. Rubber boot redirects to Wellington boot. Makkool (talk) 23:21, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
Discuss
  1. The generic duck boot, of which Bean boots are a brand name version and galoshes were way more popular when I was growing up. Not sure why we don't have a generic duck boot article.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:26, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add EssilorLuxottica

PASSED
Added 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:00, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:00, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

It was claimed that Luxottica owned 80% of the eyewear industry according to this and that was before its merger with Essilor in 2018. The merged company has been described as having a near monopoly in the eyewear industry. In 2024, they also bought Supreme (brand) for some reason.

Support
  1. As nom. Sahaib (talk) 19:32, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:33, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
  3. Interstellarity (talk) 01:54, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:37, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Abbey

PASSED
Added 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:02, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:02, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Given the list at Wikipedia:Vital_articles/Level/5/Philosophy_and_religion#Institutions includes Monastery  4. This is a type of monastery.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 01:44, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Support
  1. as nom-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 01:44, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. Support  Carlwev  17:42, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. Important type of historical building. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:22, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:38, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Town hall

PASSED
Added 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 05:05, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 05:05, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Support
  1. as nom-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 01:52, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. Support  Carlwev  17:42, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. Ubiquitous and an important place of governance. EchoVanguardZ (talk) 22:21, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:39, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Football and Gridiron football

PASSED
Both added (football 5–1, gridiron 4-1). Makkool (talk) 07:17, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

With Table football  5, Football (ball), Ball (association football)  5, American football  4, College football  5, Arena football  5, Association football  3, Women's association football  5, Australian rules football  4, Canadian football  5, Gaelic football  5, and Rugby football  4, we should have some more general listings.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:33, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Support
  1. as nom-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:33, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. Interstellarity (talk) 00:44, 15 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. Support just Football  5. While Football in general refers to all of the above sports, Gridiron football is redundant to American football  4, College football  5, and Canadian football  5, among others. λ NegativeMP1 22:31, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 17:00, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. Support. V4 level concepts, parent to stuff listed above. Sports is popular. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:35, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. I'd much rather see those other variations of football removed then add more. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:41, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
Neutral
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Homeschooling

PASSED
Added 5-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:13, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:13, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Seems as important to me as Remote work  5.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:47, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Support
  1. as nom-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:47, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. Very important, could even potentially make VA4 in my opinion. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:44, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. Sure. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 20:24, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
  4. Clearly. J947 ‡ edits 23:24, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. EchoVanguardZ (talk) 22:26, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Life expectancy

PASSED
Added 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:16, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:16, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

How is this not added to level 4 yet?

Support
  1. Interstellarity (talk) 01:01, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. Iostn (talk) 23:57, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. This is one of the demographic metrics that is important enough to be considered separately at this level. EchoVanguardZ (talk) 22:27, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Support, wow how was this overlooked, easily level 5 - possibly level 4.  Carlwev  22:29, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
Discussion

It should be added to Medicine Lophotrochozoa (talk) 00:15, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Swap Sanctity of life for Immortality

PASSED
Sanctity of life not removed due to lack of consensus towards it. Immortality added 5-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:39, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:39, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Immortality has a lot more language links and gets over 8x as many pageviews. It is also covered in more religions.

Support
  1. As nom. Sahaib (talk) 12:18, 5 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. I'd support adding Immortality, I don't think we need to swap though. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 02:45, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. Support adding Immortality. I'm surprised it's not here; the idea may be a cultural universal. EchoVanguardZ (talk) 22:29, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Support addition, not sure about removal (neutral on that). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:35, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. Support adding immortality. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:34, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Oppose removal of Sanctity of life, as it seems equally relevant to other religion and philosophy topics here. EchoVanguardZ (talk) 22:29, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
Neutral
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Everything

PASSED
Passed 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:41, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:41, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Opposite of Nothing  5, it is an important concept which should theoretically be level 1, but probably won't be.

Support
  1. Interstellarity (talk) 01:41, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. Life  1, the Universe  2, and Everything  5 are the big three. I agree it belongs on a level beyond level 5. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 05:38, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. Support, but if this goes to Level 4 or higher then so should Nothing. I think those two topics are roughly equal in importance. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:16, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
  4. Don't see anything wrong with this. --ZergTwo (talk) 16:48, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Parent–teacher conference

PASSED
Removed 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:42, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:42, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This is listed under the Wikipedia:Vital articles/Level/5/Society and social sciences/Culture section for "Communication" and "Meetings." It seems more specific then the others listed, such as Academic conference  5 and Symposium  5, and I think it can be trimmed out. I just don't think it is a particularly vital article.

Support
  1. As nom. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 05:27, 6 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. Makkool (talk) 10:25, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 16:44, 9 January 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:41, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discuss

GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 05:27, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Swap University of Alabama with Alabama Crimson Tide football  5

PASSED
Passed both, 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:46, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:46, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

In a previous, now closed, discussion above that was part of "Trim Academic Institutions" an editor proposed swapping the University of Alabama with Alabama Crimson Tide Football. I'm not really a football fan as many probably have learned in the past few days, but if the football program is what makes the school more vital then other state universities, then we should be more specific. My main issue is I don't think University of Alabama is more vital then a school like University of Tennessee, but don't think that school should be included either. @QuicoleJR, I believe you had stronger opinions and more knowledge about this then me based on our discussion above so I hope you can weigh in here.

Support
  1. soft support as nom. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 02:36, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. The school is very well known in the US specifically for the football team, I also believe we list an Alabama coach. Kevinishere15 (talk) 08:13, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. This is the main thing that the school is known for. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:11, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
  4. Sure, why not. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:43, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discuss
  1. We list 2 coaches Bear Bryant  5 and Nick Saban  5 of our 15 and probably a few of our 42 players,-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 08:11, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 02:36, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Choker

PASSED
Removed 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:47, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:47, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A piece of jewelry, and necklace. types of jewelry like Necklace, itself, bracelet and Ring (jewellery) are only introduced at level 5, I cannot see why this one type of necklace is of singular vitality seperate from necklace itself. looking at Template:Jewellery, or Category:Types_of_jewellery, there are quite a few types of jewelry and similar articles that seam of equal or higher importance compared with choker, that are not listed. I cannot see choker as more vital than...wedding ring, engagement ring, nose-jewel, or even toe ring, bindi, hair pin, gold teeth or tie pin, none of which are listed. The article is rated a stub, has 8 refs and is present in around 19 languages if I count correct.

Support
  1. As nom.  Carlwev  16:24, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 00:23, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. Support, but since we list jewelry in Everyday Life, this proposal should probably be moved to Society talk. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 02:32, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:47, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Autarky  5

PASSED
Added 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:32, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:32, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Seems like an important topic economically and politically. 47 interwikis.

Support
  1. As nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 21:37, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. Seems vital enough. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 05:09, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. Important concept. Kevinishere15 (talk) 10:00, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:32, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Law clerk and Court reporter

PASSED
Removed both 4-0. Both civil law notary and paralegal can be nominated separately. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:50, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:50, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

We list too many legal professions (16) relative to general Trades and professions (35). I think these two can go.

Support
  1. As nominator. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 20:17, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. I don't know what the 16 are, but I would throw in Civil law notary  5 and maybe Paralegal  5-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:18, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. support  Carlwev  09:33, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:48, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss

Court reporter seams less vital than war reporter which is not listed. The other seams like a type of secretary or assistant. Assistant doesn't even have an article.  Carlwev  09:33, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Types of restaurant

PASSED
Removed 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:28, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:28, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

List article.

Support
  1. As nominator. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 20:17, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. per nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:03, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. per nom.  Carlwev  09:27, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:27, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
  1. Asking since I'm fairly uneducated on this: are there any specific reasons why list articles can't be vital? Just curious before I cast a proper vote. λ NegativeMP1 03:09, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
    List articles serve a very unique role on Wikipedia, they are in a space between directory and article. The Vital articles are themselves a list/directory. If something on a list is vital, we should include that topic rather then the list of the topics. Lists of painters is a list article that lists the lists of painters. Imagine trying to sort out which of those lists is vital, if the list of the lists is vital, and if stuff contained within the lists are vital. It would be really redundant really quickly. At least that's my understanding/opinion. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 04:42, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
    As I see it, list-class articles AFAIK don't have quality assessments beyond WP:Featured lists, making measuring their improvement (the point of VA) difficult.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 09:15, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
    There is no official rule, but many users (myself included) believe that they are not vital. I can't speak for the others, but my reason is that they are directories, not proper topics. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:02, 13 January 2025 (UTC)
I'm sure there are other list articles hiding in lev 5 VA somewhere, that will be weeded out eventually. Listing lists would greatly change the project. Which levels would be OK? which not? List of chemical elements and list of sovereign states would perhaps be among the most vital, they are not listed here, there could be hundreds or in fact thousands of important lists. If we are not listing lists, this needs to go. If we are listing the most important lists, that would be a long winded effort to get right, and this article/list would still probably not be in.  Carlwev  09:27, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
I think SOME lists might be okay, but it depends. There are some articles that are more stand alone then directory. For example, articles on book series, author bibliographies, or other similar topics might be lists of things that don't have Wikipedia articles. For example, List of scientific publications by Albert Einstein contains details on publications that have no dedicated article. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 16:29, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Bilbo Baggins

PASSED
Removed 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:26, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:26, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Bilbo Baggins is important in The Hobbit  5, but is a side character in The Lord of the Rings  4. We don't list Frodo Baggins, who serves a similar and arguably more prominent role in the series. We include Gandalf  5, who is definitely important throughout. I believe that in a similar way that Captain Ahab  5 is vital but Ishmael (Moby-Dick) isn't, even though Ishmael is the narrator of Moby Dick, we can remove Bilbo.

Support
  1. As nom. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 03:36, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. Support; despite having somewhat in-depth analysis, The_Hobbit#Themes probably sufficiently covers the most important discussion about him, and Gandalf is much more famous anyway (and may be fair to include as one of the most well-known wizards in fiction, especially as long as we don't list Magician (fantasy)).--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 08:55, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. Support. Gandalf is basically a modern version of Merlin who is at level 5, so I don't think he is that vital but I wouldn't vote to remove him. Sahaib (talk) 17:00, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:25, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discuss

GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 03:36, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

  1. Importnat fictional character. I wonder what would User:Chiswick Chap say. How about a swap for Hobbit? It's not a VA entry but perhaps the race of a hobbit is more vital than any single character. Ping folks who commented: @GeogSage, LaukkuTheGreit, and Sahaib:. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:44, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
PASSED
Removed both 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:52, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:52, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Minor/niche concepts in law.

Support
  1. As nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 23:46, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. Support both Makkool (talk) 16:31, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. Citation  5 is level 5. I don't think we need to have legal citation as well. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 01:09, 25 January 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:51, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

NGO removals

We list a lot of organisations in a wide range. We are over-quota in Politics and economics, and this section could be trimmed. Makkool (talk) 17:09, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Remove Bilderberg Meeting

PASSED
Removed 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:55, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:55, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

An elite political forum. Most notable for being the subject of conspiracy theories. It seems to me that it lacks wider actual significance.

Support
  1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 17:09, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. Support. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 17:13, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 18:57, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:53, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove AIESEC

PASSED
Removed 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:56, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:56, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

An international youth organisation. Has a good cause, but I'm not so sure how notable it would be in Vital articles scale.

Support
  1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 17:09, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. Support. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 17:13, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 18:57, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:53, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Association des États Généraux des Étudiants de l'Europe

PASSED
Removed 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:57, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:57, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Like AIESEC, a student organisation that doesn't seem notable.

Support
  1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 17:09, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. Support. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 17:13, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 18:57, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:53, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove American National Standards Institute

PASSED
Removed 5-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:57, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:57, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Not sure if any national standards organisation should be vital, when International Organization for Standardization  5 is only V5.

Support
  1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 17:09, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. Support. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 17:13, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 18:57, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
  4. EchoVanguardZ (talk) 20:18, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:53, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Toastmasters International

PASSED
Removed 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:58, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:58, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

An organisation of clubs educating their members on public speaking and leadership skills. Lacks the level of notability to be considered a Vital article.

Support
  1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 17:09, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. Support. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 17:13, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 18:57, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:53, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Organisation internationale de la Francophonie

PASSED
Removed 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:58, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:58, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This is actually my past addition made by mistake. I wanted to add Francophonie  5, but when I didn't find the correct article, I added the this other one instead to the list. An article of the organisation of French-speaking countries isn't needed in Vital articles.

Support
  1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 17:09, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. Support. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 17:13, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 18:57, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:53, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Shigir Idol  5

PASSED
Added 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:24, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:24, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

From the articles lede, "The Shigir Sculpture, or Shigir Idol (Russian: Шигирский идол), is the oldest known wooden sculpture. It is estimated to have been carved c. 11,500 years ago, or during the early Holocene period, and is twice as old as Egypt's Great Pyramid. The wood it was carved from is approximately 12,000 years old."

Support
  1. As nom. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 04:17, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 22:13, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. Per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:37, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:23, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discuss

GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 04:17, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove several United States Government Agencies

We list 44 articles under "Government agencies." 22 of them are U.S. agencies, 9 are U.K. agencies, 2 are Chinese, 5 are multinational, and the rest are "other." I think this is a major western and American bias, so think we should trim some from the U.S. and perhaps add some from other countries. I tried to select a few that mostly focus on domestic affairs. I'm listing them in order of least page views to most over the last 10 years, you can see the graph here.

Remove Works Progress Administration  5

FAILED
Not removed 3-3. Makkool (talk) 06:26, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This is the least viewed of the articles I'm nominating. This was a New Deal agency that employed millions of jobseekers to carry out public works projects. Noteworthy, those positions included building and staffing the Japanese internment camps during WWII. I don't think this is particularly vital and believe we could replace it fairly easily.

Support
  1. As nom. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 03:22, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. I admire the legacy of the New Deal, but this organization existed for less than ten years. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 15:25, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. If this lasted longer maybe it could be kept but as it stands New Deal  4 mostly covers it Iostn (talk) 17:27, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Weak oppose, New Deal  4 is V4. Kevinishere15 (talk) 19:15, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. Historically significant pbp 16:01, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Changing to oppose, per above Makkool (talk) 00:10, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
Neutral
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove United States Department of the Treasury  5

FAILED
Not removed 2–3. Makkool (talk) 16:01, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Important to the operations of the U.S., but it doesn't stand out to me as particularly vital compared to all similar agencies in all of history.

Support
  1. As nom. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 03:22, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. Makkool (talk) 09:29, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Seems important enough. For balance, I would prefer listings of more national orgs from other countries. Some that come to my mind are the Bundestag, the National Diet, and the European Central Bank. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 15:25, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. Since the US is the world's pre-eminent economic power, listing this makes sense Iostn (talk) 17:27, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. Per above. Kevinishere15 (talk) 19:20, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
Neutral
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Federal Communications Commission

PASSED
Removed 5–0. Makkool (talk) 00:10, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Regulates US communication by radio, TV, etc. I don't think this is particularly vital from an international perspective looking at all of human history.

Support
  1. As nom. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 03:22, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. Makkool (talk) 09:29, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 15:25, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
  4. Per nom Iostn (talk) 17:27, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
  5. Its influence has also thankfully declined due to the rise of cable television and later the internet. Kevinishere15 (talk) 19:42, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Food and Drug Administration

PASSED
Removed 4–1. Makkool (talk) 06:26, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Might have some importance in terms of influencing other countries to regulate stuff, but other countries also have regulatory bodies like this and I'm not sure this one is that much more vital then those other organizations.

Support
  1. As nom. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 03:22, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. Makkool (talk) 09:29, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. Per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 19:21, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. per nom-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:19, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
  1. Would a swap for Drug Enforcement Administration make sense? I was going to oppose this due to the War on drugs  5 but in that case DEA might make more sense Iostn (talk) 17:27, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
  1. I would also support a swap with DEA. I'm surprised it's not listed already. Makkool (talk) 00:10, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove United States Department of Justice  5

FAILED
Not removed 2-2. Makkool (talk) 00:10, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

From the lede, " a federal executive department of the U.S. government that oversees the domestic enforcement of federal laws and the administration of justice. It is equivalent to the justice or interior ministries of other countries." I don't think this is particularly vital from an international perspective looking at all of human history.

Support
  1. As nom. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 03:22, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. Makkool (talk) 09:29, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Per my oppose comment above. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 15:25, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. The US's superpower status elevates this on an international level Iostn (talk) 17:27, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
Neutral
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove United States Postal Service

PASSED
Removed 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:18, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:18, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I'm not sure the U.S. Postal service stands out as particularly vital compared to all the other government agencies in the world and throughout history.

Support
  1. As nom. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 03:22, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. The proposal to add Royal Mail failed, and the USPS isn't anymore vital than it Makkool (talk) 09:29, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 15:25, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
  4. Idiosincrático (talk) 17:16, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove United States Secret Service

PASSED
Removed 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:19, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:19, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This is the most viewed of the articles I'm nominating for removal. Protects the president (and others), also combats counterfeit money. I don't think this is particularly vital from an international perspective looking at all of human history.

Support
  1. As nom. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 03:22, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. Makkool (talk) 09:29, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
  3. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 15:25, 28 January 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:17, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discuss

GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 03:22, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Generosity  5 and/or Charity (practice)  5

PASSED
Added both 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:06, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:06, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Generosity is an important philosophical subject under morals describing the behavior of giving more than what is necessary/expected. Being generous often (but not always) occurs under the act of giving, which is what Charity (practice) covers, which is why I'm proposing adding either

Support
  1. As nom. B3251(talk) 03:28, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. With Altruism  4, these seem worthy of VA5.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 11:53, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Agreed. I'd support both. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:46, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 03:59, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Selfishness  5

PASSED
Added 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:08, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:08, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

If we are going to consider Generosity, I think we should consider this too.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 11:58, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

Support
  1. as nom-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 11:58, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom B3251(talk) 14:49, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. For sure. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:58, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:00, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Additional university removals proposed by Purplebackpack89, February 2025

Above, most of the public "University of..." were rather ham-handily nominated for deletion, but some of the small private schools were untouched. If we trim American universities to 40 or 50, there shouldn't be very many private colleges outside of the Ivy League. After all, the vast majority of students go to public colleges and universities. pbp 20:45, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Pinging @OlifanofmrTennant:, @Makkool:, @TonyTheTiger:, @Kevinishere15:, @Needlesballoon: because they voted on universities above pbp 18:25, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

Remove Boston University

PASSED
Removed 4–0. Makkool (talk) 18:02, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Not among the 10 or even 15 most significant private colleges in the country. No more significant than some of the major public universities removed above. pbp 20:45, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Support
  1. pbp 20:45, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Support. I'm not super sure we need as many universities as we list. Listing more then one or two will lead to calls to list several dozen more. I've worked at three, none included on the list, I wouldn't include them on the list, but we have inclusions that I could use to argue for their inclusion.02:20, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:38, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Makkool (talk) 17:02, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Brandeis University

PASSED
Removed 4–0. Makkool (talk) 18:02, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Not among the 10 or even 15 most significant private colleges in the country. No more significant than some of the major public universities removed above. With only 5,800 students, is among the smallest American universities listed. pbp 20:45, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Support
  1. pbp 20:45, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Support. I'm not super sure we need as many universities as we list. Listing more then one or two will lead to calls to list several dozen more. I've worked at three, none included on the list, I wouldn't include them on the list, but we have inclusions that I could use to argue for their inclusion.02:20, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:38, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Makkool (talk) 17:02, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Brigham Young University

FAILED
Not removed 2–2. Makkool (talk) 18:02, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

We nominated Notre Dame and Georgetown for removal; we should discuss BYU too. pbp 20:45, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Support
  1. pbp 20:45, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Support. I'm not super sure we need as many universities as we list. Listing more then one or two will lead to calls to list several dozen more. I've worked at three, none included on the list, I wouldn't include them on the list, but we have inclusions that I could use to argue for their inclusion.02:20, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Part of the legacy of Brigham Young  5, whom I think should be VA4. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:38, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. BYU is reasonable famous Makkool (talk) 17:02, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Carnegie Mellon University

PASSED
Removed 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:09, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:09, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Not among the 10 or even 15 most significant private colleges in the country. No more significant than some of the major public universities removed above. pbp 20:45, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Support
  1. pbp 20:45, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Support. I'm not super sure we need as many universities as we list. Listing more then one or two will lead to calls to list several dozen more. I've worked at three, none included on the list, I wouldn't include them on the list, but we have inclusions that I could use to argue for their inclusion.02:20, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Makkool (talk) 17:02, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Idiosincrático (talk) 17:15, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Case Western Reserve University

PASSED
Removed 4–0. Makkool (talk) 18:02, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Not among the 10 or even 15 most significant private colleges in the country. No more significant than some of the major public universities removed above. pbp 20:45, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Support
  1. pbp 20:45, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Support. I'm not super sure we need as many universities as we list. Listing more then one or two will lead to calls to list several dozen more. I've worked at three, none included on the list, I wouldn't include them on the list, but we have inclusions that I could use to argue for their inclusion.02:20, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:38, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Makkool (talk) 17:02, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Emory University

PASSED
Removed 4–0. Makkool (talk) 18:02, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Not among the 10 or even 15 most significant private colleges in the country. No more significant than some of the major public universities removed above. pbp 20:45, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Support
  1. pbp 20:45, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Support. I'm not super sure we need as many universities as we list. Listing more then one or two will lead to calls to list several dozen more. I've worked at three, none included on the list, I wouldn't include them on the list, but we have inclusions that I could use to argue for their inclusion.02:20, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:38, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Makkool (talk) 17:02, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Rice University

PASSED
Removed 4–0. Makkool (talk) 18:02, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Not among the 10 or even 15 most significant private colleges in the country. No more significant than some of the major public universities removed above. With only 8,672 students, is among the smallest American universities listed. pbp 20:45, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Support
  1. pbp 20:45, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Support. I'm not super sure we need as many universities as we list. Listing more then one or two will lead to calls to list several dozen more. I've worked at three, none included on the list, I wouldn't include them on the list, but we have inclusions that I could use to argue for their inclusion.02:20, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:38, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Makkool (talk) 17:02, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Washington University in St. Louis

PASSED
Removed 4–0. Makkool (talk) 18:02, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Not among the 10 or even 15 most significant private colleges in the country. No more significant than some of the major public universities removed above. pbp 20:45, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Support
  1. pbp 20:45, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Support. I'm not super sure we need as many universities as we list. Listing more then one or two will lead to calls to list several dozen more. I've worked at three, none included on the list, I wouldn't include them on the list, but we have inclusions that I could use to argue for their inclusion.02:20, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:38, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Makkool (talk) 17:02, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion

pbp 20:45, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Defense Intelligence Agency

PASSED
Removed 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:10, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:10, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

We already list Central Intelligence Agency  5 and National Security Agency  5 so I'm not convinced we need to include a more obscure counterpart

Support
  1. Nom Iostn (talk) 17:10, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Weak support. I proposed removing several U.S. agencies above and didn't include this one because of how huge a roll the US DOD has on world events. However, I lean towards remove based on nom's argument, even if it isn't where I'd start the removals. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 05:07, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. It can be covered by United States Department of Defense  5. QuicoleJR (talk) 00:02, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 04:54, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss

Iostn (talk) 17:10, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Oud

PASSED
Added 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:12, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:12, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

If Lute  4 is VA4, then its Middle Eastern counterpart should at the very least be VA5. Extremely important instrument in the Arab world and is a UNESCO Intangible Cultural Heritage entry. 60 interwikis. Would address cultural bias in the instruments section since all the other major regions of the world seem to have at least one instrument representative.

Support
  1. as nom Aurangzebra (talk) 06:29, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Sure. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 06:53, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Per nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:53, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
  4.  Carlwev  10:58, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Legoland

PASSED
Added 4–0. Makkool (talk) 13:39, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Sports, games and recreation is under quota following the Olympic removals, which leaves these as maybe the biggest omission among "Specific amusement parks", of which we only list 12.

Support
  1. Nom Iostn (talk) 19:25, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Weak support, but seems good for level 5 per nom. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 19:06, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. For an under quota section and to list more amusement parks, sure. λ NegativeMP1 22:25, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Weak support, we now have plenty room.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 09:21, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
  1. I suspect that the quota in sports, games, and recreation will fill naturally over time (probably fairly rapidly) and don't think we need to scramble to fill the void. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:48, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. How about adding Lego fandom instead? Disclaimer: my article. But I think as a social concept (hobby) it is more vital than a single amusement park chain. @Iostn, GeogSage, NegativeMP1, LaukkuTheGreit, and GeogSage:--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:53, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
    Maybe weak support. I'm not sure, what is the status of other "fandom" articles (Star Wars fandom not being listed makes me a bit hesitant.) GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 03:02, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
    I think the only "fandom"-like article we list is Beatlemania  5. But that was more of a worldwide cultural phenomenon than something like Star Wars fandom. Not sure if we should even list Beatlemania, to be honest. λ NegativeMP1 03:07, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
    I'm not against it. I know that there are a lot of people that make building with Legos one of their main hobbies, and that demographic is probably way larger than any sole "fandom" for something like a show since, while media is subjective, I'm sure that everyone at least understands, can get behind, or has built with Lego. λ NegativeMP1 03:06, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
    I'm skeptical of adding a fandom based on a specific toy range/product, especially since Social studies is already slightly over quota and the subcultures listed there could probably use cleanup. I'm not necessarily opposed to adding articles on fandoms on broader subjects though, such as "toys" (to relate it to Lego) or just specific genres or broad forms of entertainment Iostn (talk) 12:09, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add 808s & Heartbreak

FAILED
Not added 2-6. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:13, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:13, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

One of the most influential albums of the 2000s. Quotes from the article:

Although West conceived 808s & Heartbreak as a melancholic pop album, it proved to have a significant effect on hip-hop music.

While not considered among West's best, 808s & Heartbreak is arguably his most influential album, according to Complex.

808s & Heartbreak is credited with giving rise to the emo rap subgenre.

Rolling Stone later included the album in its list of "The 40 Most Groundbreaking Albums of All Time"

I wanted to add a hip hop album, and I chose this over Graduation because of its impact. 28 interwikis. If you read the Legacy section, its impact shows vitality.

Support
  1. As nom. -1ctinus📝🗨 13:58, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Weak support swap with My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy  5. I feel like Kanye is important enough to warrant having an album at this level even if he himself is only V5. So I'm supporting a swap with MBDTF because I don't feel like MBDTF should be vital at all and is quite possibly among one of Kanye's weakest works. Meanwhile this one has at least left somewhat of an impact. λ NegativeMP1 22:40, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
    I usually don't respond to other people's votes but this is such an interesting take to me. I feel like it's impossible to deny that MBDTF is Kanye's consensus pick magnum opus. It's crazy to say that MBDTF left no impact when it is widely considered one of the best albums of the 21st century, one of the best rap albums of all time, and one of the best albums of all time across any genre (#8 by EW, #17 by Rolling Stone, and #21 by NME). And I say this as someone who didn't particularly like the album that much, I'm just going based on objective perception. Aurangzebra (talk) 23:52, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
    I'm not necessarily going off of critical acclaim here, but rather industry impact at first glance. MBDTF doesn't have a legacy section at all. 808s and Heartbreak does. And from everything I've heard, Kanye's magnum opus is allegedly Graduation (album), is it not? I'm not trying to turn this into a debate of which album is or isn't better, especially since I'm relatively unfamiliar with Kanye's work or impact beyond a general idea, but I feel more obligated to lean more towards the slightly older albums of his that have more proven industry impact. λ NegativeMP1 17:24, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Oppose, Kanye himself is only level 5. There are artists that are level 4 now or where in the past that have no song or album. I just don't think this is significant enough. Would rather add another artist.  Carlwev  16:02, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. We have quite many hip-hop albums already. Makkool (talk) 21:06, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. This is way to recent an album to be considered here without having been recognized by the Grammys at the time. I think it would need to be twice as old with firmly established significance of sampling, remakes, claimed inspiration.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:33, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Well-received but not on the same plane of accolades as the other albums we list here. Aurangzebra (talk) 23:46, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. pbp 01:49, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  6. Idiosincrático (talk) 17:09, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Trimming some of the TV shows

We have more TV shows than films which is a big difference between the level 4 list, long term history (shows only really came into existence in the 50s, unlike 1910s for major full length films), crticial standing and canonisation into academia (film studies, tv studies isn't as prominent) and how much more global the film industry is in relation to the world. (tv shows are more country specific generally, we don't list as much country diversity in tv shows as much as any other artforms artworks). We need heavy cuts here.

Remove Let's Make a Deal

PASSED
Removed 8–0. Makkool (talk) 17:13, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This is your average game show. The only American game shows that should be listed are arguably the big 3, Jeopardy!, The Price Is Right and Wheel of Fortune (American game show). Non American game shows are covered by Who Wants to Be a Millionaire?. Game shows are not a genre that's canonised through criticism and they are largely inaccessible to rewatch, they are very in the moment pop culture based. They do not have standing in criticism or long standing in culture once they go off the air, these 4 are enough to cover this genre. American shows should be at around 100 or less, game shows should take up less of that. Let's Make a Deal is a dime and dozen game show, there's been many on its level throughout broadcast tv history.

Support
  1. As nom. 118.210.24.72 (talk) 16:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. λ NegativeMP1 17:40, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Support. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:48, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. pbp 01:49, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. Per nom.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  6. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  7. 3 interwikis. Aurangzebra (talk) 00:01, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
  8. Low interwiki count indicates it's too America-specific (despite versions produced "in many countries throughout the world"). --LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 08:38, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
  1. This influenced the Monty Hall problem  5. Kevinishere15 (talk) 05:38, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Family Feud

FAILED
With a support-oppose ratio of 5-4, a removal would seem to be too controversial. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:15, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:15, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Per above, it is popular today and would be the next one to add but 4 is enough to cover this genre.

Support
  1. As nom. 118.210.24.72 (talk) 16:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. λ NegativeMP1 17:40, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Support. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:48, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. Per nom. Makkool (talk) 17:06, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Timeless.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. I think the three you mentioned and this one should be the four American game shows on the list. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:36, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. per above Aurangzebra (talk) 00:01, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Oppose Idiosincrático (talk) 17:06, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Match Game

PASSED
Removed 8–0. Makkool (talk) 17:13, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Per above. Too many game shows.

Support
  1. As nom. 118.210.24.72 (talk) 16:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. λ NegativeMP1 17:40, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Support. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:48, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Per nom.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. Doesn't seem popular or influential at all. Kevinishere15 (talk) 05:39, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  6. Does not need to be listed. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:37, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  7. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  8. Aurangzebra (talk) 00:01, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove America's Funniest Home Videos

PASSED
Removed 5-1. Makkool (talk) 17:13, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This is kind of just popular fluff, there's no reason to cover this show. It isn't global by it's name. This isn't something that will be remembered 50 years after it goes off the air. A show that's largely inaccessible to watch fully and with no ability to study or analyse it is not a vital show.

Support
  1. As nom. 118.210.24.72 (talk) 16:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. How the hell is this in any way "vital"? λ NegativeMP1 17:40, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Per nom.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 00:01, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Oppose. This kind of clip show had a major impact on short form internet videos, for better or worse. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:48, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
Discuss
  1. This is considered by many as a predecessor to YouTube  4. Kevinishere15 (talk) 23:33, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Good Morning America

PASSED
Removed 6-1. Makkool (talk) 17:13, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

We list Today (American TV program) and 60 Minutes - two specifically American news shows with a much longer history. We don't need 3 news shows from every network. It is fundamental fluff, news programs would cover generally the same stuff too. Listing Fox News and CNN is also covering more of the American broadcast news industry. Atleast even The O'Reilly Factor would be a cable news example, but it's just too much.

Support
  1. As nom. 118.210.24.72 (talk) 16:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. λ NegativeMP1 17:40, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Support. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:48, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Per nom.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. Kevinishere15 (talk) 05:41, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  6. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Weak oppose. Since 2012, it is the most watched morning show in the country that watches the most TV. Aurangzebra (talk) 00:01, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Late Show with David Letterman

PASSED
Removed 5-1. Makkool (talk) 17:13, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

It's an important show in late night, but we list Letterman himself. Talk shows are a genre that is largely inacessible once aired, they are not permanent cultural pieces that are often revisited when off air. We list 6 specifically American talk shows, Meet the Press, The Oprah Winfrey Show, The Jerry Springer Show, The Tonight Show and The Daily Show. 4 is enough, Meet the Press for it's historical value, Oprah to represent daytime, Jerry Springer to represent syndicated/tabloid and the Tonight Show for late night. Anything more than 4 is US fluff, many countries have long running talk shows, we can't list them all just for being long running and popular.

Support
  1. As nom. 118.210.24.72 (talk) 16:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. λ NegativeMP1 17:40, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Per nom.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 00:01, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Iconic. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:48, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove The Daily Show

PASSED
Removed 5-2. Makkool (talk) 17:13, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Per above.

Support
  1. As nom. 118.210.24.72 (talk) 16:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. λ NegativeMP1 17:40, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Support. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:48, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Per nom.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. So many other shows (Colbert Report, Colbert Late Show, Last Week Tonight, the Samantha Bee Show, arguably even the Office) are derivatives of this show. I do not exaggerate by much when I say everybody in the last 20 years with a show was either on the Daily Show or SNL pbp 01:47, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. per above. Aurangzebra (talk) 00:01, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Passions

PASSED
Removed 8–0. Makkool (talk) 17:13, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This isn't a major soap opera and there just isn't much to say here other than that. Dark Shadows is a similar paranormal soap opera that retains some level of prominence today via the Tim Burton film remake and it's accessible to watch but it isn't listed either. 12 American soap operas is too much.

Support
  1. As nom. 118.210.24.72 (talk) 16:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. λ NegativeMP1 17:40, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Support. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:48, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. pbp 01:48, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. Per nom.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  6. Kevinishere15 (talk) 05:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  7. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  8. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 00:01, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove One Life to Live

PASSED
Removed 8–0. Makkool (talk) 17:13, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This one was popular, but we also list General Hospital and All My Children for ABC soap operas. I think just General Hospital is appropiate here. Soap operas are largely inacessible cultural pieces once off the air, there isn't alot of permanence generally here.

Support
  1. As nom. 118.210.24.72 (talk) 16:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. λ NegativeMP1 17:40, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Support. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:48, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Per nom.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. Kevinishere15 (talk) 05:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  6. I will vote support because GH and AMC are likely to be retained pbp 18:48, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  7. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  8. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 00:01, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove All My Children

FAILED
With a support-oppose ratio of 3-4, a removal would be controversial. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:16, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:16, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Per above. General Hospital is the longest lasting and predominant ABC soap opera, we don't need any more.

Support
  1. As nom. 118.210.24.72 (talk) 16:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. λ NegativeMP1 17:40, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Per nom. Makkool (talk) 17:06, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. I'm not into Soaps at all, but this is one I've heard referenced quite a bit. I believe it was fairly influential and has impacted multiple other franchises. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:48, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. per above Aurangzebra (talk) 00:01, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Oppose Idiosincrático (talk) 17:05, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Santa Barbara (TV series)

PASSED
Removed 8–0. Makkool (talk) 17:13, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This is just another popular soap opera, but it does have credence for being very popular in Russia, but there should only be around 4 US soap operas, similar to game shows and talk shows. I don't think being popular in one other country can make a long culturally dead show in it's home country relevant. It wouldn't make any other artforms artwork vital (they'd have to be globally popular).

Support
  1. As nom. 118.210.24.72 (talk) 16:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. λ NegativeMP1 17:40, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Support. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:48, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. pbp 01:48, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. Per nom.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  6. Support removal, but I don't agree that things have to be globally popular to be vital, there's no shortage of stuff here that isn't. Kevinishere15 (talk) 05:43, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  7. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  8. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 00:01, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove The Bold and the Beautiful

PASSED
Removed 8–0. Makkool (talk) 17:13, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Recognisable name but it's a sister show to much longer The Young and the Restless. Every other artform wouldn't have a sister artwork just listed and US soap operas don't have the global recognisability or critical standing to have two of a similar thing listed and 2 shouldn't fit in an ideal of 100 US shows. Y&R has in it's lede "It is also currently the highest-rated daytime drama on American television, a rank it has held for 34 years as of the end of the 2021–22 season" so it's the one that should stay.

Support
  1. As nom. 118.210.24.72 (talk) 16:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. λ NegativeMP1 17:40, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Support. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:48, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Per nom.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. Kevinishere15 (talk) 05:44, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  6. pbp 18:49, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  7. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  8. per nomm Aurangzebra (talk) 00:01, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Dynasty (1981 TV series)

PASSED
Removed 6-2. Makkool (talk) 17:13, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Was very popular in it's time but it's very similar to much more prominent Dallas (1978 TV series) and was created to compete with it. I don't think there's any reason to list both of them when American tv needs heavy cutting.

Support
  1. As nom. 118.210.24.72 (talk) 16:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. λ NegativeMP1 17:40, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Support. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:48, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. pbp 01:57, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  6. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 00:01, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Pretty important.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. One of the more famous soaps, I think. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:54, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove As the World Turns

PASSED
Removed 7–0. Makkool (talk) 17:13, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Sister show to Guiding Light but not as prominent to list both. Not globally relevant, not remembered today and not in high critical standing.

Support
  1. As nom. 118.210.24.72 (talk) 16:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. λ NegativeMP1 17:40, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Support. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:48, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Per nom.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. Kevinishere15 (talk) 05:45, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  6. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  7. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 00:01, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Saved by the Bell

PASSED
Removed 4–1. Makkool (talk) 17:13, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Very similar to Boy Meets World which was removed. Not as globally popular as Beverly Hills, 90210 and Dawson's Creek which are the two major 90s teen shows. We don't need a third.

Support
  1. As nom. 118.210.24.72 (talk) 16:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. λ NegativeMP1 17:40, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Per nom.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Feel this might be a bit more influential then other franchises. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:48, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Charmed

PASSED
Removed 7-1. Makkool (talk) 17:13, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Popular show but surpassed in popularity and critical standing by Buffy the Vampire Slayer (Buffy studies). We don't need both of these and also Xena: Warrior Princess. Only credit it had was longest running women led show but was overtaken by Desperate Housewives, which is also listed.

Support
  1. As nom. 118.210.24.72 (talk) 16:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. λ NegativeMP1 17:40, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Support. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:48, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. pbp 02:03, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. Per nom.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  6. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  7. Per nom.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 08:38, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. 55 interwikis. I think it is influential internationally and should stay. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:56, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Judge Judy

PASSED
Removed 4-2. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:17, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:17, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A show that's on the level of Cops (TV program) which was removed. Court show and The People's Court also would have a claim to be in the spot that Judge Judy is in. Just not apart of the 100 most important American tv shows.

Support
  1. As nom. 118.210.24.72 (talk) 16:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. λ NegativeMP1 17:40, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Per nom.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. This is extremely iconic and influential. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:48, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Enormously influential show, would put it far ahead of Cops. Idiosincrático (talk) 17:03, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove House of Cards (American TV series)

FAILED
Not removed 3-4. Makkool (talk) 17:13, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

May be controversial but 3 recent netflix shows is too much. Stranger Things is a global phenomenon that's surpassed these two in cultural impact and standing.

Support
  1. As nom. 118.210.24.72 (talk) 16:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. It does seem to have some significance to the history of content released exclusively onto streaming services "It is the first original online-only streaming television series to receive major Emmy nominations", but it's probably not enough. (switched to oppose) λ NegativeMP1 17:40, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Support. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:48, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Not as vital as other Prestige TV shows, like Breaking Bad, Sopranos or The Wire. Makkool (talk) 17:06, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. For the historical reason mentioned above.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per above. Kevinishere15 (talk) 03:13, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. After further consideration based on the historical reasoning I provided above in my initial support, this show is probably fine. For now at least. λ NegativeMP1 03:26, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. It's been memory holed at this point because of all the Kevin Spacey  5 stuff but it's important to remember that this was THE show that made Netflix a cultural juggernaut. Aurangzebra (talk) 23:45, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Orange Is the New Black

PASSED
Removed 6–0. Makkool (talk) 17:13, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Per above.

Support
  1. As nom. 118.210.24.72 (talk) 16:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. λ NegativeMP1 17:40, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Support. A bit to recent ot be sure, but wouldn't be surprised if this is re-added. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:48, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Per nom.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. House of Cards may get removed and this seems less important because it doesn't have the novelty of being the first big streaming show, plus less interwikis. Kevinishere15 (talk) 03:16, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  6. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic

FAILED
With a support-oppose ratio of 6-5, a removal would be too controversial. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:20, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:20, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

I get it's had some online cultural impact but My Little Pony itself being listed is enough at level 5. Adventure Time, Steven Universe and Rick and Morty are enough to cover recent Animation shows (and they're too much, Steven Universe and Adventure Time should be arguably cut too).

Support
  1. As nom. 118.210.24.72 (talk) 16:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. λ NegativeMP1 17:40, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Per nom.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. Western online nerd-culture bias Makkool (talk) 17:06, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
  6. per nom. Aurangzebra (talk) 04:10, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Weak oppose, as there is a whole page about the My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic fandom. Sahaib (talk) 21:00, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. The fandom of this show is... more visible then others. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:48, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Per above. Kevinishere15 (talk) 23:30, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Big enough cultural impact even non-fans are well aware of it.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 08:38, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. Lasting influence on popculture. More vital IMHO than a bunch of other stuff proposed right now. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:52, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Dragnet (franchise)

FAILED
Not removed 4–3. Makkool (talk) 17:13, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This may be relatively important in early TV history, but it's cultural relevance is dead in the water today, it's just not vital in today's global culture.

Support
  1. As nom. 118.210.24.72 (talk) 16:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. λ NegativeMP1 17:40, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Support. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:48, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Too US-centric, not an internationally known francise unlike Law & Order or Columbo Makkool (talk) 17:06, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. The theme and the catchphrases are recognizable to this day. Spawned all the other police procedurals pbp 02:00, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per PBP.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Seems to have been pretty influential, it also went on for a long time. Kevinishere15 (talk) 03:03, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Shortland Street

PASSED
Removed 8–0. Makkool (talk) 17:13, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

With two Australian soap operas listed, we don't need a New Zealand one. It's also weird to list a NZ show over other major countries not even having any shows listed. We don't list a globally popular telenovela like María la del Barrio so i don't know why a lesser known regional domestic NZ soap opera is listed.

Support
  1. As nom. 118.210.24.72 (talk) 16:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Support swap with María la del Barrio. λ NegativeMP1 17:40, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Support. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:48, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. pbp 02:01, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. Per nom.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  6. 11 interwikis is also relatively low for an supposedly vital show. Kevinishere15 (talk) 03:06, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  7. Nothing to add. J947 ‡ edits 06:02, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  8. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Beavis and Butt-Head

PASSED
Removed 5–0. Makkool (talk) 17:13, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Might be another controversial one but we cover animation shows way too much. South Park is the much more globally popular animated show of this style, we don't need two. King of the Hill is Mike Judge's more important animated work and it's not listed (and shouldn't be either).

Support
  1. As nom. 118.210.24.72 (talk) 16:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. λ NegativeMP1 21:11, 18 February 2025 (UTC) λ NegativeMP1 17:40, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Support. I believe I recently nominated this for removal and it failed (like the past few months recently). That said, those rules are more suggestions then policy and I thought this should be removed then. It might be to soon for some people to vote on this one though. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:48, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Per nom.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
  1. Not that I mind IP editors, but they are a bit unconventional in the vital article space, and this is an advanced proposal which makes me think the person is familiar with this project. Did someone forget to login and want to claim this? GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:51, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove some Arts articles

Remove Magical girl

PASSED
Removed 4–1. Makkool (talk) 13:42, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Very niche subgenre of Japanese literature. There are a lot of things we don't include, so I think this can go.

Support
  1. As nom. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 05:50, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. I would argue it's niche on a global scale, mostly only a part of Japanese pop culture. Makkool (talk) 12:03, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Per above. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:21, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 04:33, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Per my argument back then. It is a major trope in anime/manga and a major concept of modern popculture. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:55, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
Neutral
Discuss
  1. I don't think it's "very niche", we even list an example of it: Sailor Moon  5. Kevinishere15 (talk) 06:00, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. FYI, it was added over a year ago, so I think's fair game to proposal a removal. Makkool (talk) 12:03, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
@Kevinishere15, we don't include Shōnen manga, Shōjo manga, Seinen manga, Shōjo shōsetsu, or Slice of life despite listing several examples of the. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 15:57, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Anne of Green Gables  5

FAILED
Not removed 1-4. Makkool (talk) 13:42, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Support
  1. As nom. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 05:50, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Strong oppose. This is a staple and a classic in children's literature and is known worldwide. Regularly in the top 10 greatest children's books of all time (#5 on Goodreads for example). We list 25 children's and young adult's books. There are better choices here. Aurangzebra (talk) 06:51, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per above, a children's literature classic. Makkool (talk) 12:03, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. pbp 13:11, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Ranked fairly high (currently #247) on thegreatestbooks.com, #19 in List of best-selling books, high stats (~2000 daily views, 41 interwikis and 238 watchers) for its age (over 100 years old).--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 15:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
Neutral
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Art rock  5

FAILED
Not removed 1-3. Makkool (talk) 13:42, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

  1. We list a lot of genres of rock and metal, I think this one can go.
Support
  1. As nom. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 05:50, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Significant subgenre of rock that covers many of our VA4 and VA5 rock musicians (Queen, Pink Floyd  4, David Bowie  4 etc.). Some overlap with Progressive rock  5 but it is enough of its own thing to deserve a spot (e.g. people would consider most of The Velvet Underground  5 and Talking Heads  5's discography art rock but not prog rock). If we must get rid of a rock genre (which I really don't think we have to), I would target one of the heavy metal subgenres. They have a lot of interwikis but cover a smaller number of VA5 musicians as well as smaller audiences (do we really need both Black metal  5 and Death metal  5?). Aurangzebra (talk) 06:44, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per Aurangzebra. Also, this genre is significant to the development of Punk rock  4. I would like to see more genres listed, not less. λ NegativeMP1 06:45, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Per above Makkool (talk) 12:03, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
Neutral
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Love Will Tear Us Apart

PASSED
Removed, 4-2. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:22, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:22, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

We include the band Joy Division  5, I don't think this album is needed as well.

Support
  1. As nom. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 05:50, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. At first, I was leaning oppose because we lack representation on our rock song lists in punk/proto-punk/new wave which is a significant subgenre of rock. But I realized we already list London Calling which is a much more vital example of punk. By the way, this is a song, not an album. It is considered one of the greatest songs of all time but we list so few songs that we need to prioritize tracks with critical acclaim, cultural longevity, and global recognizability. This is not on the same level as the other songs we list. Aurangzebra (talk) 06:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
    Post-punk (incl. its own offshots like gothic rock) is very distinct from punk rock) and exerted its own separate distinctive influence which is still felt today, something like hardcore punk (which is more intrisically tied to "punk" in the original sense) would be more close to classic punk rock in terms of influence Iostn (talk) 13:54, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
  3. I tried to remove this about six months ago, but it was opposed. I wasn't really convinced then because the only arguments there seemed to be for keeping it were the alleged importance to Post-punk, a genre we don't even list as vital (yet, admittedly it was one of many genres I contemplated proposing if we can increase the quota of Arts) and being a popular song in the United Kingdom. Neither of those arguments are really strong enough for me to want to keep it, and nothing in the article suggests that this song is significant at all, as I said in my initial proposal. I'm also pretty sure it has the fewest interwikis out of all rock song we list. Surely we can find a more important song or album to list over this, such as maybe Unknown Pleasures (which I would support a swap with) if we really wanted something from post-punk and/or Joy Division. λ NegativeMP1 06:41, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. pbp 17:56, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. For the same reasons as last time: it's an iconic song for UK pop music, and for alternative music in general. Classic rock would be over-represented, if we cut alternative rock works. I would still support a swap with the Unknown Pleasures album. Makkool (talk) 12:03, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Again with last time, I would only support on condition of a swap with Unknown Pleasures. Iostn (talk) 13:49, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
Neutral
Discuss

GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 05:50, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Western film  5

PASSED
Added 5–0. Makkool (talk) 19:40, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The proposal above made me realize we do not list Westerns on our genres. We have 5 VA5 Western films and 1 VA4 Western film (Stagecoach (1939 film)  4). It is the only genre that we list specific movies in that is itself not included. Not to mention all the entertainment personalities whose careers were built off of Westerns such as John Wayne  4, John Ford  4, Clint Eastwood  4 etc. It is not just an American phenomenon either. Viewers in countries all across the globe avidly consumed and even created their own Western movies and TV shows. In fact, some of the most famous Westerns of all time were actually Italian productions made in Spain (Spaghetti western).

Support
  1. as nom Aurangzebra (talk) 07:59, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. per nom. Makkool (talk) 12:03, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. If the overall genre is 4, 5 for the film genre makes sense pbp 17:55, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Iconic. Kevinishere15 (talk) 21:11, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. Makes sense to me. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:28, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss

Note that the medium-neutral Western (genre)  4 is VA4.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 12:48, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Swap American cheese with Casu martzu

FAILED
Not removed, 2-4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:23, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:23, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

American cheese is already represented by Processed cheese at level 5. Casu martzu is notable as a traditional cheese of Sardinia and because of legal challenges concerning it.

Support
  1. As nom. Sahaib (talk) 11:00, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Support removal. American cheese is quite literally just processed cheese and is eaten practically nowhere else besides the United States. And for good reason. I honestly don't even know if American cheese is the most widespread type of cheese in the United States, I think Cheddar cheese  5 and Mozzarella  5 might be equally as prevalent or very close. λ NegativeMP1 21:02, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Oppose. A much larger volume of "American cheese" is consumed and eaten around the world then Casu martzu. While I could see adding Casu martzu, I think we would need to find something else to swap with. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 16:00, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Oppose add. Casu is too obscure a cheese. Neutral on removal pbp 17:54, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Oppose removal, American cheese is definitely important and popular enough to keep on the list. Neutral on add. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:32, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Oppose Idiosincrático (talk) 16:56, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
Discuss
  1. @GeogSage: another option could be Pizza cheese which is also represented by Processed cheese (as well as cheddar cheese, Mozzarella and parmesan). Pizza (at level 4) already has Hawaiian pizza, Neapolitan pizza, New York–style pizza and Sicilian pizza at level 5. Sahaib (talk) 16:45, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
    I would probably support Pizza cheese before American cheese as Pizza cheese is a category more then a cheese. I've had a lot of weird cheese on Pizza including Ricotta, and provolone, so it's a weird article that feels like having one for Sandwich cheese. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 18:55, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
    I once nominated Pizza cheese for deletion... pbp 22:07, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Too Many British universities?

We have removed, or are removing, many American universities, to the point where the number of American universities will likely end up at 40-50. We should probably consider cutting British universities, of which we list 26 (plus two prep schools), down to 15-20. I am aware that several British universities are rather advanced in age, and several have significant portions of attendees from elsewhere in the Commonwealth, but, even so, if 60-70 American universities are too many, we need not list every University in the Russell Group. For example:

  1. I would support trimming them. I started with American universities because I'm more familiar with them, if anyone wants to dive into cutting these I'd likely support anything outside the big names. University of Oxford  4 for example would be a no from me. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 22:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Remove King's College London  5, London School of Economics  5, Queen Mary University of London and University College London  5

PARTIALLY PASSED
Queen Mary University of London removed 4–0, the rest not removed 2-4. Makkool (talk) 19:33, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

All are part of the University of London  5 pbp 19:21, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Support all
  1. pbp 19:21, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 21:32, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
Support some
  1. Queen Mary University of London is well-respected but at the same tier as less notable state schools in the United States. Aurangzebra (talk) 16:51, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Support Queen Mary University per Aurangzebra. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:43, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose all
Oppose some
  1. King's College and University College London are considered some of the greatest schools in the world. University College is ahead of both Yale University  4 and Columbia University  4 on the US News and World Report college rankings. I'm not British but we have to be fair here: we list much, much worse schools in the US and the rest of the world both in terms of academics and total impact. I also would not want to remove London School of Economics, which is arguably the foremost economics institution in the world. 25% of all Nobel Prize in Economics can be attributed to alumni or staff from LSE. Aurangzebra (talk) 16:51, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
    @Aurangzebra: The thing is that, regardless of their ranking, they are still schools within a school. A school itself that is listed, but only at VA5. pbp 22:00, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
    You're arguing with the wrong guy for this because I do not subscribe to the philosophy that the constituent parts of a thing are necessarily less vital than the parent. Some examples I've brought up or seen recently:
    - Georges Bizet  5's opera Carmen  4 is at a higher VA than him. This makes sense: Bizet wasn't a particularly successful composer with the exception of Carmen while Carmen is one of the most known and acclaimed operas of all time.
    - The non-VA Metropolitan Transportation Authority runs the New York City Subway  4. And yet it is the constituent subway that is VA4. This makes sense since it is the subway that gives the MTA its vitality, not the other way around. If the MTA disappeared tomorrow, there would be hiccups but NYC would recover quickly. If the subway disappeared tomorrow, New York City  3 and the surrounding areas would grind to a halt. The subway is also what people recognize, not the other buses, trains, and light rail that the MTA runs.
    For a college-specific example:
    - The University of California  5 system has a child university, University of California, Berkeley  4 that is at a higher VA level. As a caveat, I am biased here because Cal was my undergrad alma mater but I think this makes perfect sense. Out of all universities, Berkeley is likely responsible for the most physics and computer science breakthroughs of the past century and a half. 16 chemical elements have been discovered there including 2 named after the university. Thousands of companies spun out from Berkeley alumni totaling trillions of dollars in market cap. Pioneers of the free speech movement in the '60s. 10th most NCAA titles of any school. The list goes on and on. Meanwhile, the University of California is simply an administrative vessel that attributes its significance to its member universities. I think a very similar case is happening here with the University of London. Aurangzebra (talk) 23:37, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
    @Aurangzebra: If I proposed removal of the University of London, would you support it? pbp 23:53, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
    I think I'd be more likely to support that. But, to be honest, I'm not sure how much traction it would get considering that it does have 81 interwikis and that there is a substantial faction of people on here who seem to prefer keeping the parent system over the member universities. I think if we want to make further cuts to universities, it might be less controversial to target German universities or even the other UK public universities that are not as prominent even if they are their own thing (e.g. Newcastle University etc.). Aurangzebra (talk) 20:50, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Oppose King's College, University College London, and LSE per Aurangzebra. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:43, 22 February 2025 (UTC)


Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Imperial College London  5

FAILED
Not removed 2–2. Makkool (talk) 19:33, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Former constituent (until 2007) of the University of London  5 pbp 19:21, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Support
  1. pbp 19:21, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 21:32, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. I don't know how we could ever consider ourselves unbiased if we remove ICL. It is regularly considered a top 15 university globally. Like, there's no controversy to that: find any ranking that compares global universities and you will likely see ICL in the top 15. #12 on US News and World Report, #8 on Times Higher Education. Also, a top 5 public university. Aurangzebra (talk) 16:57, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. per Aurangzebra. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:44, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove University of Southampton and University of York

PASSED
Both removed 5–0. Makkool (talk) 19:33, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Among the newest and smallest British Universities listed pbp 19:21, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Support all
  1. pbp 19:21, 19 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 21:32, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 18:48, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:22, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  5. per above. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:45, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
Support some
Oppose all
Oppose some
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Doctor Doom

PASSED
Removed 4-0. Nominations of other characters can be done separately. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:27, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:27, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Comparing to other comic book characters we do not list I don't think this article is vital enough. As far as I can gather from reading the article and my own memory, if it serves. There are some comics dedicated solely to this character, but then so do many many characters we don't list. There has never been a game, a movie, a TV show, a cartoon dedicated solely to Doctor Doom. Compare with other villain articles we don't list which most have had movies games or shows dedicated to them, like The Penguin, Silver Surfer, Lex Luthor, Deadpool (which will be removed any minute), Magneto (Marvel Comics), or Thanos, all seam more vital. We do not even list the Fantastic Four, which is where Doctor Doom usually appears, and appeared first, I cannot see him being more vital than the comic book/story he appeared in. I am very sure the article less vital than Wolverine (character) which we don't list, who has had numerous movies and games, unlike Doctor Doom. We also don't list Avengers (comics), which seems higher importance. Also to end, every single one of the articles I listed as a comparison here, appears in more languages in wiki than Doctor Doom does, some of them twice as many in fact.

Support
  1. Support  Carlwev  01:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Support swap with Thanos, oppose straight removal. I know that in the proposal where I suggested removing Deadpool I criticized a possible bias towards Marvel characters, but I do think that even though we list a lot of Marvel content, we need a Marvel antagonist. And unlike Doctor Doom, who is more or less still regulated to a comic-book villain (he is scheduled to appear in future Marvel films, but the MCU is widely considered to be past its prime at this point), Thanos has basically been solidified in pop culture due to the insane commercial success of Avengers: Infinity War and Avengers: Endgame (the #2 and #6 highest grossing films of all time), which themselves were just the crown jewels of the Marvel Cinematic Universe  5, which by that point had already been teasing and leading up to Thanos for about a decade. Sure, Doctor Doom might be an iconic villain, but I think at this point Thanos has far surpassed him and can be considered a truly iconic character. Even taking into account possible RECENT-ism concerns (since those films are only about 6-7 years old), I think they've left a big enough mark on film history and pop culture to where I don't think they'll ever be viewed as "obsolete" or outdated. And that includes the recognizability of Thanos. Also, a straight removal would leave us with only villains from superhero media: Catwoman  5 and Joker (character)  5, which I think is too few. In-fact, I think we under-represent fictional antagonists in general compared to protagonists. λ NegativeMP1 02:04, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Support swap with Fantastic Four or Wolverine, not sure about the Thanos swap, he was an obscure character for most of his existence, only becoming popular due to 2 specific movies, most of the other characters we list have more legacy than that, he also doesn't seem as influential as the others. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:24, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Support removal. Not famous or culturally significant outside serious comic book fans. (Even casual fans may not have heard of him). Swap-wise, I concur with Kevinishere15 (that FF or Wolvie are more famous and enduring than Thanos). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:29, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Productive efficiency

PASSED
Removed 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:28, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:28, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A stub in 6 languages, although not identical, we already list Productivity which should cover it enough for VA. Suggest swap with Rationing below.

Support
  1. As nom.  Carlwev  15:08, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Minor concept. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:20, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Very niche. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:27, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Support – Idiosincrático (talk) 16:54, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Rationing

PASSED
Added 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:31, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:31, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Important enough for level 5. An argument could be made for level 4. Many people in the west have never known rationing, but it is in living memory during World War 2, and other times. We do list scarcity but that article does not mention rationing at the moment. It has many sub articles, concerning rationing per nation, suggesting it is a world wide issue. I suggest adding this instead of productive efficiency above. It is in 35 other languages compared with 6, and has over double page views. [4]

Support
  1. As nom.  Carlwev  15:08, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Certainly vital. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:16, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Sure. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:20, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Support as level 5. EchoVanguardZ (talk) 17:36, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Racial segregation

PASSED
Added 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:34, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:34, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

We list Apartheid at level 4, a while ago at level 3. The overview is at least level 5 vital if not higher, there are many times and places that have had this, especially historically, but up to modern day.More vital than Jock in Social studies. Racial segregation has a huge impact on history, societies and the people in it, not to mention of interest to law and planning, even if the concept is undesirable. In 52 other languages and has many sub articles covering different times and locations it has taken place, suggesting world wide present and historic importance.

Support
  1. As nom.  Carlwev  16:28, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Should be level 4. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:42, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:19, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Definitely vital. The biggest issue is that "race" is a contentious term, and some languages may not see a reason to distinguish this from other forms of segregation (such as between Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland). EchoVanguardZ (talk) 17:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Jock (stereotype)

PASSED
Removed 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:36, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:36, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Not sure why we need this. In the movies, they are often the antagonist, we list bullying.

Support
  1. As nom.  Carlwev  16:28, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Outdated. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:19, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Too niche. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:59, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Support – Idiosincrático (talk) 16:54, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add African French  5

PASSED
Added 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:37, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:37, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Spoken by an estimated 320 million people, which is more than most languages and dialects we do list. Rated High-Importance by WikiProject Africa.

Support
  1. As nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:38, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. J947 ‡ edits 23:41, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. sup  Carlwev  23:58, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. per nom. Makkool (talk) 18:17, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Reconnaissance

PASSED
Removed 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:50, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:50, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Espionage is level 4. Gathering information through means, other than deception, seems at least level 5, and higher importance than listing several ranks, some of which are being removed. I would also prefer an article like this instead of listing loads of different models of military tanks planes and boats we list or are suggesting. Suggesting removing Customer service representative to keep numbers the same above, also in the wider society page.

Support
  1. As nom.  Carlwev  18:11, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Important military concept. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:01, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 20:05, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:46, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Prohibition

PASSED
Added 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:54, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:54, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

We list many articles in law. We list around 50 alcoholic drinks, including 8 cocktails. Anyone interested in things vital to alcohol, Prohibition is more vital than Rum and Coke. The article covers prohibition in many countries past and present, it is a world wide topic, many nations still have it especially Muslim countries. In the USA the word can refer to the whole time period when it had Prohibition, showing how significant it was to the history and culture of the country at the time. There are several categories covering prohibition, so it has a wide reach.

Support
  1. As nom.  Carlwev  17:31, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. EchoVanguardZ (talk) 18:08, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Sure. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:25, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. Per nom. Makkool (talk) 08:23, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Kidult

FAILED
Not added 1-3. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:38, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:38, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Important part of modern subculture. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:02, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Support
  1. As nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:02, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Never heard of the term and it seems to be niche.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:06, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Strong Oppose too niche. -1ctinus📝🗨 19:47, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Never heard of this. I think Peter Pan syndrome is the more commonly known name for this idea (more interwikis, more page views, higher importance on Wikiproject Psychology) but I wouldn't vote to add that either. Aurangzebra (talk) 19:59, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Survivor (franchise)

PASSED
Added 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:45, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:45, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

To TV shows. It seems like we are going to remove a bunch of TV shows above so we probably have room for one more. One of the only truly global TV franchises in the world (examples range from Survivor Pakistan to Survivor Venezuela). Survivor popularized the vote-based style of competition gameplay which is ubiquitous now in reality TV. Extremely popular in most countries it has premiered in. The American version of Survivor is ranked by both Time and TV Guide as one of the best TV shows of all time. It is also Top-Importance in Wikiproject Television, the highest possible ranking. 20 interwikis. Aurangzebra (talk) 20:19, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Support
  1. As nom. Aurangzebra (talk) 20:19, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. Survivor is the biggest ratings wise over The Amazing Race/The Bachelor and has rankings on all time lists, like the Big Brother franchise it is representative of it's genre (reality competition). 61.8.121.53 (talk) 05:50, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Per above and per below. Kevinishere15 (talk) 06:00, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
  4. λ NegativeMP1 20:03, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion

A bit off topic so I apologize. I saw we include, Jade Goody, but not Big Brother (franchise). I can't imagine she is more notable than the whole franchise where she first appeared. In any case, not sure on Survivor, but I would imagine Big Brother is a more important TV show. But I may be wrong, my eyes may be clouded as I'm not big on reality TV, and different shows may be more or less popular in different countries, or absent completely.  Carlwev  20:52, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

I would support that swap if you proposed it. I'm also not big on reality TV (I don't watch either show) but from my research, it seems like Big Brother was inspired by the Survivor format, so much so that the Survivor production team filed a lawsuit against them for infringement. Though Survivor didn't win the lawsuit, Big Brother ended up changing their format regardless because they basically were the exact same thing and Survivor was the one dominating the ratings. So I think Survivor is notable for inspiring Big Brother (and hundreds of other reality shows) on that front as well. Also worth noting that even though Big Brother has almost twice as many interwikis, Survivor has twice as many daily pageviews on average (1063 vs 507). Aurangzebra (talk) 21:10, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
Survivor (franchise) and Big Brother (franchise) are the big two reality franchises. Survivor should be added, Big Brother (American TV series) should be swapped with the BB franchise article and The Amazing Race (American TV series)/The Bachelor (American TV series) should be removed. TAR and the Bachelor are very local compared to the big global two. The Bachelor also holds similar relevance with Love Island (2015 TV series) - just in different countries. There's no need to single one out, they both should not be on here. Big Brother by far is the bigger brand globally though over Survivor, but both are just as important - the most popular Big Brother countries are Big Brother (British TV series), the US one linked before, Big Brother Canada, Big Brother (Australian TV series), Big Brother Brasil (a heavy hitter in Brazilian TV), Bigg Boss (Hindi TV series), Pinoy Big Brother, Big Brother Naija and Grande Fratello - so pretty much every permanently lived in continent has a popular version of Big Brother. Meanwhile in the Survivor fandom they normally stick to the big 4 (US, Survivor South Africa, Australian Survivor and Koh-Lanta) but many countries do have adaptions. The difference is that in most countries Big Brother utilizes public voting (other than US/Canada which took Survivors contestant voting). Survivor also hit number one in a year for US ratings as a whole and is still a top rated show today "“Survivor”: The OG still has legs. Among adults 18-49, the CBS competition series is this year’s top-rated entertainment series." [5]. I think if we cover 4 Game shows (which are not watchable like normal shows per se), 3 reality competition franchises (which are still actively rewatched and have big fandoms) are ok. Big Brother and Survivor as a franchise and American Idol are the big 3. (American Idol is so singularly important to the history of American broadcasting it shouldn't be merged into a wider franchise article). Survivor is pretty much a non presence in the UK unlike BB. BB is reality king in the UK, Survivor the reality king in the US - so depending on where you live it'll be different expectations, but both should be listed. BB is also more important to British broadcast tv history than The X Factor (British TV series) (which is listed). 61.8.121.53 (talk) 05:50, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add AOL  5

PASSED
Added 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:58, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:58, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

An important online service provider, who helped spread internet use in the US. This proposal failed in Tech, so I'll try to get it to Politics and economics. Add to Companies.

Support
  1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 16:35, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Literally essential to the history of the internet. λ NegativeMP1 20:01, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Per above. Kevinishere15 (talk) 08:17, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
  4. Pushing to the finish line. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:57, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Sandman

PASSED
Added 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:56, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:56, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Surprised the sandman is not already listed, examples of the character in other media include a Marvel character, several DC characters such as Sandman (Wesley Dodds), a Neil Gaiman comic book (which is listed as vital) plus its TV series adaptation, a fairy tale, a short story, a wrestler, a weirdly creepy song, the longest-running animated television series in history, etc.

Support
  1. As nom. Sahaib (talk) 21:55, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. It should be able to Enter this list. ...I'll see myself out. λ NegativeMP1 22:14, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. Give me a dream. Kevinishere15 (talk) 06:23, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
  4. Per nom. Makkool (talk) 08:23, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Franchising

PASSED
Added 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 05:00, 9 March 2025 (UTC) PrimalMustelid (talk) 05:00, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

An argument could be made for level 4 for franchising. Aparently there may be over 2 million franchises world wide bringing in over 2 trillion dollars annually. In the USA alone 8.7 million people are thought to work for a franchise. The article appears in 66 other languages and averages over 800 daily page views. It is at least level 5 vital. [6]

Support
  1. Support as nom.  Carlwev  19:49, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
  2. EchoVanguardZ (talk) 07:22, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
  3. Sahaib (talk) 09:44, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
  4. Per nom. Makkool (talk) 08:23, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Kyunki Saas Bhi Kabhi Bahu Thi  5

PASSED
Added 4–0. Makkool (talk) 20:00, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Very popular and culturally important in India, a country of over a billion people. Indian television is horribly underrepresented, and this show would make a good addition. It received several awards, received very high ratings for several years, and seemingly had a major impact on Indian culture. Rated High-Importance by WikiProject India.

Support
  1. As nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 15:44, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
  2. Interstellarity (talk) 01:54, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. PrimalMustelid (talk) 02:20, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
  4. Per nom. Makkool (talk) 19:24, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Patronage

PASSED
4–0. Makkool (talk) 20:03, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Surprised this was not listed.

Support
  1. Interstellarity (talk) 01:24, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. λ NegativeMP1 08:52, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:26, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
  4. JpTheNotSoSuperior (talk) 18:48, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Procurement

PASSED
4–0. Makkool (talk) 20:05, 16 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

We do this every day in society.

Support
  1. Interstellarity (talk) 01:26, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
  2. λ NegativeMP1 08:52, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. PrimalMustelid (talk) 01:25, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
  4. Per nom. Makkool (talk) 19:24, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Rework the 20th century specific musical works

PARTIALLY PASSED
Only adding Pierrot lunaire got enough support (4–0). I'll close this and start a separate new discussion for these. Makkool (talk) 18:01, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The section listing 20th century specific musical works is highly unrepresentative of 20th century western classical music. Of the 29 works listed, 16 were written before 1920 and only 4 after 1950, including Giazotto’s Adagio in G minor which is a musical scam (and could arguably be put in the Baroque section) and Karl Jenkins’ The Armed Man, which is of debatable historical importance. In addition, while atonality is a defining characteristic of a lot of classical music in this period, there is no atonal work on the list, including Cage’s 4’33’’ which doesn’t use any musical idiom. While the 20th century is full of very influent composers (59 level 5 articles), 4 composers (Debussy, Mahler, Rachmaninoff, Sibelius) have written 14 works on the list, which is almost half. While Debussy and Mahler are central figures of the evolution of musical language, Rachmaninoff and Sibelius (4 works on the list each), although important composers, shouldn’t be this overrepresented and account for a fourth of 20th century music. ThomEmilAlbe (talk) 17:36, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

I suggest at least the following removals : The Armed Man, Csárdás (Monti), Finlandia, Symphony No. 2 (Rachmaninoff), Suite bergamasque, Piano Concerto No. 3 (Rachmaninoff), and at least the following additions : Pierrot lunaire, Music for 18 musicians, Violin Concerto (Berg), Le Marteau sans maître. ThomEmilAlbe (talk) 22:39, 8 October 2024 (UTC)
Support - excellent points, the list would benefit from these changes Makkool (talk) 11:41, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
Oppose removing Suite bergamasque  5 (contains the world-famous Clair de lune which doesn't have a separate article) and Finlandia  5 (Sibelius's by far most famous and culturally impactful work, I'd rather remove one of his two listed symphonies), support adding Pierrot lunaire  5.
While I agree avant-garde music may need more representation, your addition suggestions are mostly more obscure than removals, with Pierrot lunaire  5 by Arnold Schoenberg  4 a notable exception, plus Music for 18 musicians and Violin Concerto (Berg) have weak vitality claims. Lulu (opera) seems a more promising 12-tone composition addition than the violin concerto by the same composer. If we're struggling to remove 20th century works, other eras can perhaps be trimmed instead (I already proposed removing a less important Beethoven piece below.). Additonally, a few people's works dominating may be just natural due to Pareto distribution, although the VA project's non-overlap principle can justify counteracting this.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 12:05, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
If this passes I'm going to nominate to replace a Sibelius symphony (probably the 7th) with the much more famous Finlandia, the final "hymn" part of which has been quoted and adapted around the world, for example as Be Still My Soul (which itself has albums with separate Wikipedia articles), and just recently at Jimmy Carter's funeral. It's also one of his compositions to have a Britannica article.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 09:33, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
I must agree with you about Finlandia. I strongly believe that there should be one instrumental work associated with minimalism on the list, which is why I nominated Reich (I might also nominate Einstein on the beach to replace Nixon in China in the opera section, though it is more of a dilemma). ThomEmilAlbe (talk) 17:04, 12 January 2025 (UTC)
Support - I think Music is a section that needs some deep house cleaning and reorganization. We have added things individually without considering the whole of the list. GeogSage (⚔Chat?⚔) 20:26, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Just to clear up the margin, I interpret from the following discussion that The Armed Man, Csárdás (Monti), Symphony No. 2 (Rachmaninoff) and Piano Concerto No. 3 (Rachmaninoff) have unanimous support for removal from the 4 participants. Suite bergamasque has only 2, because I'll be changing my support to oppose. If I understood correctly, @ThomEmilAlbe: would also support swapping a Sibelius symphony with Finlandia. I would also support that, and I think the 7th symphony would be the best one. So, it would be 3 votes for swap in total. Pierrot lunaire, the only add, has 4 votes for support. The rest of the adds only have 3. Makkool (talk) 17:58, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

I'm neutral towards The Armed Man, Csárdás (Monti), Symphony No. 2 (Rachmaninoff), Piano Concerto No. 3 (Rachmaninoff), Music for 18 musicians, Violin Concerto (Berg) and Le Marteau sans maître.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 21:45, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
I stand corrected, your non-opposal was not a support. So then the total counts would be:
  • 3-0-1 The Armed Man, Csárdás (Monti), Symphony No. 2 (Rachmaninoff), Piano Concerto No. 3 (Rachmaninoff)
  • 2-2-0 Suite bergamasque
  • 4-0-0 Pierrot lunaire
  • 3-0-1 Music for 18 musicians, Violin Concerto (Berg), Le Marteau sans maître
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Customer service representative

PASSED
Removed 4–0. Makkool (talk) 17:58, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A stub and only in 3 other languages. We already list Customer service at level 5. I don't wish to talk down about anyone who does the job, (it's part of my job), but it's kind of surprising there is even a separate article. That being said I do not know why it needs two articles, I do not know what vital information could be at the representative article that could not be included in the parent article. Professions like Doctor and teacher as separate from education and medicine, an argument can be made for. But if we start duplicating every single job with every single worker on top, the section could double in size and primarily just duplicate the same information without adding anything new.  Carlwev  18:11, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Support
  1. As nom.  Carlwev  18:11, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
  2. Too niche of a job; it's enough to have customer service. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:01, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
  3. PrimalMustelid (talk) 04:49, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
  4. Per nom. Makkool (talk) 19:24, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose


Discussion

@Piotrus: - Your point seems to agree with my point, not disagree. Have you misread the thread title? Or simply added your name in the wrong line? Easily done. You are aware this is a proposal to remove the article, not add it? Pretty much for the same reason you state?  Carlwev  10:51, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

I did. Corrected - I support removal. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:24, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add Old Time Rock and Roll

FAILED
Not added 1-4. Makkool (talk) 17:57, 19 March 2025 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

For a song that was not a smash hit at the time of its release, it has become very important.

Support
  1. as nom.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:23, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Has five interwikis and Bob Seger himself, the creator of the song, is not at this level already. I could probably be swayed if some influence or importance was proven here, especially since I'm all for adding older songs, but I don't really see this one at the moment. λ NegativeMP1 16:37, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
    The song is developing a legacy and importance based on its use in Hollywood. The WP:LEAD summarizes the rising importance of the song. The Tom Cruise scene is now one of the scenes that gets adapted/reimagined in all kinds of works. It has had longevity well above similarly successful songs as noted in the article. We are suppose to highlight articles in need of attention. That article really needs someone who wants to work on presenting the rising legacy of the work. One could also make the case that its importance could be based on Tom Cruise  5 rather than Bob Seger-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:23, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
  2. Per above -1ctinus📝🗨 17:32, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
  3. Per above Makkool (talk) 08:23, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
  4. Per above. JpTheNotSoSuperior (talk) 19:02, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Neutral
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Vital_articles/Level/5/Society/Archive_17&oldid=1290355804"