Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of toothpaste brands/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was not promoted by Giants2008 21:20, 20 April 2014 (UTC) [1].[reply]
List of toothpaste brands edit
List of toothpaste brands (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
- Nominator(s): NorthAmerica1000 21:43, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Nomination withdrawn. Needs more entries to globalize the list, per advice below. NorthAmerica1000 22:07, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I am nominating this for featured list because the article passes the various Featured list criteria. NorthAmerica1000 21:43, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose, see User:The Rambling Man/FLC things to check for a list of basic checks you need to make. And presumably this list isn't exhaustive, for instance I cannot see Corsodyl... The Rambling Man (talk) 11:06, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose, list is very English speaking-centric and does not include many brands I'm personally familiar with in New Zealand and Japan (Macleans, Pearl Drops, Steradent, White Glo, Red Seal, Paradontax in New Zealand, and Clinica, Xylident, Sunstar's G.U.M. and other toothpaste brands, Kao's Pyuora toothpaste, etc in Japan). I assume many Korean, African, Chinese South American and other brands have been left off as well. If the list isn't meant to be exhaustive, maybe you could break it down into List of North American toothpaste brands, List of European toothpaste brands to make the project a bit more manageable. --Prosperosity (talk) 02:19, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment from nominator - (ping User:Prosperosity): This list is limited in scope to notable toothpaste brands that have Wikipedia articles. Entries can be added that are verified but without Wikipedia articles. However, adding new entries that are not verified would likely violate point #3 of WP:INDISCRIMINATE. How does this article fail the Featured list criteria? User:The Rambling Man: what specific parts of your treatise should this article comply to? NorthAmerica1000 11:41, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- All of it. Read it and find out. Let's start with an easy one, "Don't start with "This is a list of"... It isn't engaging writing and it's been discouraged for months now." And no, red links are allowed, as are unlinked items. Finally, there are dozens of brands I can buy on Amazon today, why are they not notable? I see you've linked one item to the German Wikipedia (Chlorodont), so presumably you're checking the other Wikipedias for similarly locally notable toothpastes? I also see items listed that aren't actually toothpaste, e.g. Lion Corporation, what's the deal there? Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 13:50, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- User:The Rambling Man: Lion Corporation link removed. Regarding topic notability, I base it upon WP:N, a brand having received significant coverage in reliable sources. NorthAmerica1000 22:11, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- The list makes no point of defining why a toothpaste would make the list, and why it wouldn't. Obviously there would be ones that shouldn't make the list (e.g. a small company that sells 500 tubes in a year), but there should be some sort of parameter defining the list. Purely having a Wikipedia page is not a great measure, as a type of toothpaste may be notable enough to receive a page, just nobody has written it yet. Although it's good to add brands with pages on other international Wiki projects (as they're apparently notable enough in those regions), using the existence or non-existence of a brand just because it has a page is an issue. There might be an extremely important Lithuanian toothpaste, but not necessarily a Wikipedia page about it on the Lithuanian language Wiki. --Prosperosity (talk) 02:10, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Although if having a Wikipedia page is what your definition of the list is, when I check the Japanese wiki oral healthcare category, there are pages for Clearclean, Clinica, Pyuora, Concool Repario, Deepclean, the Sunstar company, Dentor, Denthealth and Platius. --Prosperosity (talk) 02:10, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I have withdrawn the nomination. User:Prosperosity: thanks for the links, which I have added to the article. I have also copy edited the lead to state that the list contains notable brands of toothpaste as an inclusion criteria, as per Wikipedia's definition of topic notability. NorthAmerica1000 22:07, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- All of it. Read it and find out. Let's start with an easy one, "Don't start with "This is a list of"... It isn't engaging writing and it's been discouraged for months now." And no, red links are allowed, as are unlinked items. Finally, there are dozens of brands I can buy on Amazon today, why are they not notable? I see you've linked one item to the German Wikipedia (Chlorodont), so presumably you're checking the other Wikipedias for similarly locally notable toothpastes? I also see items listed that aren't actually toothpaste, e.g. Lion Corporation, what's the deal there? Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 13:50, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This candidate has been withdrawn, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 21:45, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.