Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Vital articles/Level/5 page.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20Auto-archiving period: 45 days

Vital Articles

This page is within the scope of WikiProject Vital Articles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of vital articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and work together to increase the quality of Wikipedia's essential articles.Vital ArticlesWikipedia:WikiProject Vital ArticlesTemplate:WikiProject Vital ArticlesVital Articles articles

The purpose of this page is for discussions of over-arching matters regarding level 5 Vital articles, such as procedures, quotas, or other broad changes. Level 5 Vital articles are meant to be 50,000 topics for which Wikipedia should have high-quality articles.

If you want to simply propose articles to be added, removed, or swapped from the level 5 Vital articles lists, please do so at the relevant subpages: #1 People; #2 History & geography; #3 Society (arts, philosophy, religion, everyday life, recreation, and social sciences); #4 STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics).

Discussions on this page and its subpages follow these guidelines:

Voting count table (>60%)

P = passes F = fails		opposing votes
		0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9
0	supporting votes	–	–	–	–	F	F	F	F	F	F
1		–	–	–	F	F	F	F	F	F	F
2		–	–	F	F	F	F	F	F	F	F
3		–	F	F	F	F	F	F	F	F	F
4		P	P	P	F	F	F	F	F	F	F
5		P	P	P	P	F	F	F	F	F	F
6		P	P	P	P	F	F	F	F	F	F
7		P	P	P	P	P	F	F	F	F	F
8		P	P	P	P	P	P	F	F	F	F
9		P	P	P	P	P	P	F	F	F	F

1. Discussions should run for at least 14 days before being closed;
2. Discussions should have at least 4 participants before being closed;
3. For a change to the list to be implemented, it must have over 60% support;
4. For a change to the list to be implemented, it must have 4 support votes;
5. Discussions should remain open until 7 days after the most recent vote.

• 14 days ago: 01:43, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
• 7 days ago: 01:43, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Not sure what category I should put this in, but this is an important time capsule that shows human life. Interstellarity (talk) 13:49, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support

1. Interstellarity (talk) 13:49, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
2. Support, despite the unusual context, one part of me leans towards putting it with other Specific anthologies somewhere in Culture. Indented under Voyager program  4 in Tech also makes a lot of sense though. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 22:49, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
3. per nom. Fine with placing it either in Culture or under Voyager program. We may also want to consider pioneer plaque which is a similarly identifiable and widely-known capsule. Aurangzebra (talk) 18:46, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
4. Support --Thi (talk) 09:33, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
5. Support, pretty cool. Hyperbolick (talk) 02:34, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Neutral

Discussion

1. How many known time capsules exist?-
   WP:WAWARD) 00:38, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply
   ]

VA template in edit summaries

I know this has been brought before but surely there is a way for the template to work in edit summaries, because its extremely annoying to not be able to simply click on the proposal; most of the time it doesn't work but I have seen some instances were it did work. The Blue Rider 21:56, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it’s annoying to me as well. Not sure how to fix this, but willing to get some ideas. Interstellarity (talk) 21:11, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have also found this really annoying. Maybe we could try asking at

VPT? QuicoleJR (talk) 17:25, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

Because currently it is the largest and tallest church in Russia (link), it is definitely vital at this level.

Support

1. As nom.--RekishiEJ (talk) 10:19, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
2. Per nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:28, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Discuss

Not sure where this should be listed, but is an important topic for level 5. Interstellarity (talk) 13:58, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support

1. Interstellarity (talk) 13:58, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
2. Per nom.GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 23:01, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
3. Per nom as well. Hyperbolick (talk) 08:50, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
4. SailorGardevoir (talk) 22:30, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Neutral

Discussion

I'm a bit surprised that Cartogram is the thematic map that made it onto level 5 as they are quite rare comparatively. I suggest dropping the page for cartogram completely and replacing it with thematic map, a category of maps that includes cartograms. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 23:00, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support

1. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 23:01, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
2. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 05:01, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
3. Per nom. Hyperbolick (talk) 08:52, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
4. SailorGardevoir (talk) 22:30, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Discuss

Can we get the Cewbot assessment page to include articles rated NA? That’s usually an indicator that something got moved. SailorGardevoir (talk) 23:43, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Super-basic and fundamental topic. List should be under Information, as a list is one of the most common types of/ways to organize information.

Support

1. BD2412 T 01:13, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
2. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 05:00, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
3. Per nom. Don't think it’s true that these lists are just for improvement. FAs don’t get kicked out. Hyperbolick (talk) 08:53, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

1. The purpose of the VA project is to identify a list of articles that we should devote more editing resources towards to make them high quality. We don't need that for list: there is no specialized history to them (the article itself mentions that the scholarship on lists is fragmented) and their purpose and existence is straightforward; it's basically a dictionary term. Almost everything on the article seems fairly obvious. It also establishes a dangerous precedent. Where do we stop? Should we add paragraph for example? Aurangzebra (talk) 06:50, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral

Discussion

For as long as I can remember, the cutoff between early modern and modern on the vital articles page. However, recently another editor has been moving articles around to split early modern at 1800. The significance to 1815 is the end of the Napoleonic Wars and the Congress of Vienna that defined the world order for the next 99 years. 1800 is a 00 year but has no additional historical significance. _pbp 21:35, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support 1815

1. _pbp 21:35, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support 1800

1. Based on our early modern period article, which generally supports a 1500-1800 date. SailorGardevoir (talk) 22:34, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
2. Rounder number. Hyperbolick (talk) 08:54, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

   So? Aside of being a "round number", there's no watershed event that begins or ends that year. _pbp 20:47, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

   Sure you could find something. John Adams elected president, marking the tradition of transition of power in the American democracy. Hyperbolick (talk) 02:32, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

   John Adams was elected in 1796... _pbp 01:00, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

   Election of Jefferson, then, ushering in the principal that an electorally defeated incumbent head of state gracefully leaves office. Hyperbolick (talk) 03:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support something else

Discussion

FWIW, the article (which is trash, BTW) states, "There is no exact date that marks the beginning or end of the period and its timeline may vary depending on the area of history being studied." _pbp 00:10, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@SailorGardevoir: Without saying "it's what the article says", can you defend why 1800 is a good year for that split? What watershed event occurred in that year? _pbp 00:10, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It’s a nice round number that’s close to the end of the French Revolution, which is what most people consider the main event that divides the modern era into early and late periods, not the Congress of Vienna. SailorGardevoir (talk) 00:44, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Per Wikipedia:Vital articles/Level/5, VA5 quota is currently 50,075 articles, not 50,000. Countries and subdivisions is currently 1348/1400 articles. Shall we reduce the quota by 50? Making it 1348/1350. starship.paint (RUN) 08:07, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support

1. Per nom. Makkool (talk) 11:42, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
2. As nom. starship.paint (RUN) 09:51, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
3. We have too many pointless country subdivisions, so we could and should reduce it even further. Vileplume 🍋‍🟩 (talk) 21:11, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
4. Per nom, rightsizing. Hyperbolick (talk) 08:55, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Discuss

Per this discussion, the Basics and measurement list is likely to be reduced from a total of 367 articles to 350 articles soon. So, I am proposing to reduce the quota from 375 to 350, so that VA5 can move back towards 50,000 quota. starship.paint (RUN) 12:39, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support

1. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 12:39, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
2. as suggestor Makkool (talk) 13:39, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

Discuss

Thanks Hanif Al Husaini, I followed your example in using this, and it is helpful! All can try it out! starship.paint (RUN) 12:43, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]