Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lists
|WikiProject Lists||(Rated Project-class)|
|This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot II. Any threads with no replies in 120 days may be automatically moved. Sections without timestamps are not archived.|
Does the current text of WP:BIDIRECTIONAL have broad consensusEdit
Pls see Wikipedia talk:Categories, lists, and navigation templates#WP:BIDIRECTIONAL navbox requirements. -- Moxy (talk) 19:02, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Discussion at Template talk:Set index article#Short descriptionEdit
Merger discussion for Outdoor sculpture in Washington, D.C.Edit
An article which may be of interest to members of this project—Outdoor sculpture in Washington, D.C.—has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Ham II (talk) 21:27, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
List of heritage places in City of Canning listed at Requested movesEdit
A requested move discussion has been initiated for List of heritage places in City of Canning to be moved to List of heritage places in the City of Canning. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 17:37, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
This article apparently went through a couple of AfDs, the last one being back in 2010, and was mostly kept by default as a "no consensus". While I can see some encyclopedic value to an article like this, this one does seem to be in a bit of a mess. Some things like the formating of tables, etc. can be fixed somewhat easily, but lots of the entries appear rather random and are not supported by citations; moreover, some of them might not be current by a number of years. I'm not saying that it absolutely needs to go, but it would be helpful if some kind of standard formating and criteria for inclusion could be established so that random entries are not being added to individual subsection in a what looks to be nothing more than a haphazard manner without much regard given to the overall formatting, etc of the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:37, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
Lists of Polish gminasEdit
Please see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Lists of Polish gminas where help with a lists problem is needed. Johnuniq (talk) 06:10, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
Script for showing only the red lines in listsEdit
As many of you know, Listeria can generate list articles wholly from data on Wikidata.
While we use it on non-article-space pages for tracking and planning, we do not, yet, use it for article-space lists.
The Portuguese Wikipedia does, and has just promoted its first Listeria-generated article to featured status: pt:Lista de mortos e desaparecidos políticos na ditadura militar brasileira ("List of the killed and disappeared for political reasons during the Brazilian military dictatorship"). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:11, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
List of Chinese inventionsEdit
I have nominated List of Chinese inventions for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 18:42, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
AfDs on country listsEdit
Nominated Tony Award for Best Featured Actor in a Play for demotionEdit
I have nominated Tony Award for Best Featured Actor in a Play for demotion at Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/Tony Award for Best Featured Actor in a Play/archive1. This notice serves as service of such. Therapyisgood (talk) 08:56, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
Formal notice that Tony Award for Best Featured Actress in a Play is up for demotion at Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/Tony Award for Best Featured Actress in a Play/archive1. Therapyisgood (talk) 09:20, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
List of earthquakes in the British IslesEdit
I have been struggling for some time (intermittently) to improve the list of earthquakes in the British Isles. The problems that I have with the current article are:
- It is very long (56k), it includes more earthquakes than any other country list, despite being an area of low seismicity
- It has no real selection criteria apart from someone feeling an earthquake and it being reported somewhere
I have attempted in the past to tighten things up and change the list to be more meaningful, but I have consistently been reverted. I thought that I would ask here, because perhaps it's just me, perhaps it isn't the indiscriminate list that is appears to me to be. I would appreciate any comments, thanks. Mikenorton (talk) 11:28, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
What belongs in List of lists of lists?Edit
List of lists of lists is the ultimate, or root list for all of Wikipedia. However in many cases there is more than two levels of lists beneath it. For example, Lists of lists of people by belief and Lists of people by nationality. In these cases should the sublists be included on LoLoL if they are about a major topic? For example, should we include List of Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, etc on the main page? What about subcategories like List of American Jews? Also, how about geography? I know Lists of townlands of County Cork should not be on there, but what about broader topics that relate to one larger country or continent?—Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 18:55, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
I’d like to ask for advice please. Someone has created separate articles for each letter of the alphabet for members of the KNAW. There are two problems. Firstly most of the names don’t have blue links, although very likely many of them could in the future I suppose. Secondly the articles are all entirely sourced to the website of the KNAW itself. There is no doubt that this is reliable, but it isn’t secondary, and I’m not even sure about the copyright implications of mass-copying a database onto Wikipedia. What should be done with these list articles? Mccapra (talk) 06:44, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
Lists of schools of U.S. Catholic archdiocesesEdit
Hi! Please see the deletion discussion regarding Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of schools of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Chicago which may affect lists of schools of Catholic dioceses in the U.S.
Suggested improvement to Template:WikiProject ListsEdit
Please see the discussion at Template talk:WikiProject Lists § Template-protected edit request on 24 May 2020. —andrybak (talk) 22:45, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
Hi all, I've been trying for a long time to wrap my head around the role of profession-based lists like List of physicists and List of chemists. Before I start, I'm really not trying to be annoying or cause trouble, I am sincerely extremely confused by the state of these lists and I don't know how to help because I can't find any relevant discussions. As far as I can tell these lists have no specific criteria for what can be included and what can't, beyond ostensibly every entrant needing to have a page. But there are constant errors in both directions. First, we can find lots of redlinks and unlinked names on these lists, where I guess people are judged to be notable enough for the list but not for their own page. And second, there seems to be a broad lack of consensus on whether having a page automatically justifies inclusion in these lists; I have seen people get reverted with no talk page discussion for adding a page to these lists that "wasn't notable", even though they were adding a page that exists on Wikipedia and has not had its notability as a page challenged. The list of chemists makes things even more confusing with the announcement that "It should include those who have been important to the development or practice of chemistry" whose "research or application has made significant contributions in the area of basic or applied chemistry" -- is this distinct from WP:GNG or WP:NACADEMIC, and if so, how is it judged? If a chemist's page survived a deletion discussion because of WP:NACADEMIC point 7, does that mean that the person didn't necessarily make a significant contribution to chemistry and that chemist can have a Wikipedia page but they can't go on the List of Chemists? These are thorny questions, so should there be a talk page discussion to get consensus on every contentious entry in addition to Wikipedia's general notability criteria? Finally, what is the scale of these lists supposed to be? I was just looking at a profession where there were about 400 items on the list, and about 2700 pages in that profession's Category. Would I be helping by adding 2300 more names to the list, or is there some method by which just 400 of the 2700 pages were selected? Can somebody please point me to any previous discussions or higher level consensus precedents that determine which pages go on these lists and which don't? Thanks! - Astrophobe (talk) 07:16, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
- It occurs to me that the restriction on the list of chemists probably arose from discussions around somebody like, say, Isaac Newton, who does not appear on the List of chemists despite making various discoveries that are crucial parts of modern chemistry. That makes total sense, for the same reason that Aristotle does not appear on the List of sociologists. While Aristotle is obviously notable and obviously had important things to say about social relations, I can easily imagine that there is a (possibly silent) consensus that he is not notable as a sociologist. Fair enough. But that would seem to rule out almost no modern chemists, because if a recent researcher is notable and they are a chemistry professor then whatever advance they made or position they held that made them notable under WP:GNG or WP:NACADEMIC almost certainly counts as a notable contribution to chemistry. Except in the rare case of a chemist who has a wikipedia page because they are, say, a notorious murderer, and not for reasons related to chemistry, in which case they're clearly out of the list. And yet, even this idea isn't consistently applied, because I hardly think that Margaret Thatcher appears on the List of chemists due to her notable work at BX Plastics! No matter how hard I try I simply can't make heads nor tails of these darn lists. - Astrophobe (talk) 07:26, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
Category:Rulers of the Kingdom of Kongo has been nominated for merging to Category:Manikongo of KongoEdit
Category:Rulers of the Kingdom of Kongo has been nominated for merging to Category:Manikongo of Kongo. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Place Clichy (talk) 08:50, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
Anchors. Tools/best practices for efficient list creation and maintenance?Edit
I was wanting to link to a row in List_of_acts_of_the_116th_United_States_Congress, but I see the rows have no anchors. I also can't find any discussion of list creation tools (but for one), or a mention of them at List Assessment, let alone a requirement that featured lists be sortable or have anchors where appropriate. Adding an anchor just for the row I was interested in felt super-inefficient.
Encouraging editors to start from scratch seems primitive. I suppose one could look at featured lists for examples of best practices feature-rich lists.
Was wondering if some others more perhaps familiar with list articles would mind taking a look at this article. Given the subject (there’s probably not a lot of RS coverage of the sport of ultimate), it seems unlikely that many if not most of the entries will ever have stand-alone articles written about them which makes it kind of hazard to develop any real WP:CSC. So, the list seems to be ever expanding so that it now has more of a WP:LISTCRUFT feel to it than not (at least in my opinion). There’s also a pretty excessive use of flag icons which seems really unnecessary per WP:TOOMANY, particularly given the fact that article seems to be sectioned by country. I could see a list article of Wikipedia notable entries or maybe even clearly identifiable professional teams in recognized professional leagues, but it seems that there should be some way of verifying this so as to stop people from adding local, semi-pro, or just recreational league teams. — Marchjuly (talk) 15:09, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
Move request – List of underground newspapersEdit
Your feedback would be appreciated at List of underground newspapers#Requested move 23 July 2020. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 04:00, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
At Talk:List_of_active_coal-fired_power_stations_in_Turkey#Keeping_this_list_in_step_with_other_articles_and_lists I propose that if a list exists in a non-English Wikipedia the corresponding English list should be allowed to use Wikidata for its tables.
Your comments there would be welcome.
the tenure is more than 10yrsEdit
More than 10years in office is not followed at 42nd entrantEdit
This list includes chief ministers who have served for more than 10 years in office.
but the 42nd entrant kamraj sir served only 9years 172days only
So he is not eligible and fulfilling the main 10years in office rule
Edit war on List of My Hero Academia charactersEdit
Most of the descriptions below each characters' names have been removed, and the page has been protected indefinitely for "repeated insertions of unsourced content", despite similar content being on every character list I could find. I think this is needed of more opinions than just me and the other party member. 18.104.22.168 (talk) 13:19, 6 August 2020 (UTC)