Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5/Society/Archive 7

Archive 1

←

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Add Amusement arcade

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.

---

Arcade game is at V4. I think the type of venue where arcade games are played should be listed here.

Support

1. As nominator. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 01:51, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
2. Ah, the fond memories of youth. Of course, V5. An interesting oversight consdering video game topics tend to be overrepresented at V5. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:26, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
3. -TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:51, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
4. per above. More important than some individual video games. starship.paint (RUN) 09:57, 7 March 2024 (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 United Microelectronics Corporation

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 convinced we need more than one semiconductor fabrication plant on the list beyond TSMC  5.

Support

1. As nominator. 𝒻eminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 13:01, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
2. -TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:36, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
3. The article does not make it clear why this company is vital. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:04, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
4. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 08:30, 6 March 2024 (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 Smile  5

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've nominated a bunch of nonverbal communication topics above. This is another one we don't currently list.

Support

1. As nominator. feminist🩸 (talk) 08:27, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
2. definitely Aurangzebra (talk) 08:40, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
3. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 10:59, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
4. :) starship.paint (RUN) 15:16, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
5. 🙂 QuicoleJR (talk) 13:29, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
6. @Feminist: Thanks. And a lot of them need to go on V4 as soon as they are ok'ed here, which is generally not a problem... you can probably start the noms early per snow. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:23, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
7. (◕‿◕✿) Vileplume (talk) 12:50, 4 March 2024 (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 Flirting  5

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 very common practice in Everyday life. Place this under Courtship  4

Support

1. As nominator. feminist🩸 (talk) 08:31, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
2. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 11:04, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
3. Definitely vital. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:28, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
4. Sure. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:24, 2 March 2024 (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 Haute couture

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 list nine individual fashion designs, we should list the concept.

Support

1. As nominator. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 02:07, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
2. Per nom Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 11:48, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
3. -TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:54, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
4. Support agree. Gizza (talk) 01:37, 11 March 2024 (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 Austrian school of economics

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 Austrian school of economics had a profound impact on economic thought and policy. The school, with figures like Ludwig von Mises  5 and Friedrich Hayek  4, has significantly shaped classical liberal and free-market theories. Its emphasis on individualism, subjective value theory, and critiques of central planning have enduring relevance in economic debates and policymaking, making it an essential subject for understanding diverse economic ideologies. The Blue Rider 16:07, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Support

1. As nominator. The Blue Rider 16:07, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
2. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 02:21, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
3. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 05:48, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
4. Support an important influence on the likes of Reagan and Thatcher. Gizza (talk) 01:37, 11 March 2024 (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 Catwoman  5, add Fantastic Four

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 Batman character. 52 interwikis, ~1,700 pageviews are not bad, but I stand by by view that we need to remove some superhero entries for balance reasons. She also suffers from being a supporting character with no movie or TV series of her own, and no memorable impact on pop culture. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:28, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:51, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
2. essentially swap her and for the more important Fantastic Four Encyclopaedia Britannica: Fantastic Four, created in 1961, that brought an element of realism to the genre unique for its time. A cornerstone of Marvel’s universe of characters, the Fantastic Four remains one of the most popular superhero teams in comic book history [...] quickly became a triumph for Marvel ... By the late 1960s the Fantastic Four’s acclaim had extended beyond comic books. There have been four animated series and three films of the characters. starship.paint (RUN) 14:22, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

   Support swap with Fantastic Four. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 14:14, 8 January 2024 (UTC) Strike per below. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 05:12, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

3. Support add The numerous animated series and films document vitality.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:26, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
4. Support addition. Neutral on removal. I do think Marvel’s first family should be on here, but I’m not sure if we need to get rid of Catwoman to add them. I do think we should have at least three supervillians, and she is probably the most visible female villain in comics. At the same time though, she is not on par with either the Joker or Dr. Doom. SailorGardevoir (talk) 02:45, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose Catwoman as an individual female villain. Removing her leaves 4 male villians. Since we also only have one female superhero (Wonder Woman  4) out of 14 removing Catwoman would make it 1 out of 19 in the higher joint Superhero media subjects category. Catwoman should only be swapped out for an individual woman (not a group with a woman).-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 11:38, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

   @TonyTheTiger "one female superhero" - Western, there is Sailor Moon (character)  5 there too. I'd consider supporting Supergirl, although quota remains a concern. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:33, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

   With the first name Sailor, I assumed she was male without looking further. That still does not address the lack of female villains without Catwoman.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:07, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

2. Oppose. Was about to write the same as Tony yesterday, could see a case for a replacement with Harley Quinn, but that's likely a recentism. Respublik (talk) 18:20, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
3. Definitely not convinced by the claim of her not having a pop culture impact, dedicated works aside Totalibe (talk) 10:16, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
4. Oppose both. I can see arguing in the 60s or 70s that the Fantastic Four were more prominent, but due to a bad luck of licensing and poor movies / few TV shows made with them, Catwoman seems to eclipse the FF in popularity / notability. SnowFire (talk) 05:12, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Neutral

Discuss

• @Piotrus: - I guess Catwoman (film) was so bad until you refuse to acknowledge its existence. starship.paint (RUN) 11:45, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

  That said though, how about swapping her for the Fantastic Four, which has had multiple TV series and multiple films? I think the main reason why 20th Century Fox bought Spider-Man, X-Men and the Fantastic Four from Marvel was because these were tbe most popular characters. starship.paint (RUN) 12:02, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

  @Starship.paint: Ha, forgot about that dud, but the film was hardly noticeable outside being pretty bad :) No Joker here. And yes, I'd support a swap for F4. Feel free to propose this an an option or vote accordingly and treat my comment here as a vote for swap that can be copied or referenced as needed. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:25, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

• @Piotrus, Starship.paint, and Hanif Al Husaini:, I just wanted to make sure everyone saw my objection. Also, she is an extremely popular Halloween costume (probably by a wide margin over all the other villains combined).-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:25, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
• @Respublik and Totalibe:, do you also oppose adding Fantastic Four? --Makkool (talk) 13:40, 12 March 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 Tazos for Milk caps (game)

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.

---

Tazos is a brand of Pog or milk cap, and not enough well-known to be VA5

Support

1. pbp 20:24, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
2. I think I proposed removal a short while ago, which I assume failed. Might be prudent to ping particpants of this - can be found in archives I am sure. Anyway, I support adding milk caps as less commercial and more historical/global.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 00:32, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
3. The Blue Rider 00:32, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
4. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 15:09, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

Discuss

@Piotrus: - it's still active above #Remove Tazos 5 starship.paint (RUN) 15:09, 8 March 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.

Remove Tazos

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.

---

Another toy/collectible that exists and is notable but not vital. 8 intewikis, <100 daily pageviews, nothing in the article suggests this is special (vital). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:21, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:08, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
2. Never heard of them and the article does not even have a picture of them.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:44, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
3. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 08:12, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
4. SailorGardevoir (talk) 23:17, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

1. At least in my country tazos used to be incredibly popular, would only support as a swap with Milk caps (game). The Blue Rider 01:11, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Discussion

Have proposed swap with milk caps below pbp 20:25, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

#Swap Tazos for Milk caps (game). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:39, 9 March 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 Simmering  5

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 very common food preparation technique.

Support

1. As nominator. feminist🚰 (talk) 14:55, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
2. Seems vital. QuicoleJR (talk) 21:40, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
3. Per nom Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 04:57, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
4. Support per above. Gizza (talk) 01:33, 11 March 2024 (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.

Swap: Add Gnocchi  5 and Momo (food)  5, remove Chebureki

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 former Soviet Union is overrepresented under Dumpling  4, comprising two articles out of the three we list. We should have a more geographically diverse selection of dumplings. Both Gnocchi and Momo receive significantly more page views than each of the dumplings we list (daily page views last year: Gnocchi 1,857; Momo 1,609; Jiaozi 714; Pelmeni 409; Chebureki 210), and both have a broader reach worldwide than Pelmeni and Chebureki.

Support

1. As nominator. feminist🚰 (talk) 13:08, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 15:06, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
3. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 02:46, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
4. Great suggestions. Gizza (talk) 11:19, 19 February 2024 (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 Mordred

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.

---

Same logic as with Morgan above, and roughly the same popularity: 36 interwikies, ~1500 daily views. Another key figure in Arthurian mythos - is it too random to include Guinevere and Lancelot but not Mordred or Morgan, IMHO, and their interwikis and daily views are about the same. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:32, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:51, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
2. SailorGardevoir (talk) 19:21, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

Neutral

Discuss

1. Lancelot is quite prominent, I think, more than Mordred? starship.paint (RUN) 11:42, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

   Lancelot is already V5. I think their interwikis and daily views are similar. For what it is worth, ChatGPT weakly agrees with you, while also pointing out that Morder's role as the "ultimate antagonist" in the Arthurian saga makes him quite notable. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 12:31, 8 January 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 Jack-in-the-box  5

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.

---

Bunch of toy additions above. What to add? Jack-in-the-box has 18 interwikis, 302 daily page views, is in the National Toy Hall of Fame (which is a bit US centric so not everything there screams vital IMHO), has few centuries of history and is a popculture icon too. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:57, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:08, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
2. Obviously. QuicoleJR (talk) 21:13, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
3. -TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:45, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
4. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 03:03, 18 March 2024 (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.

Sports team shakeups (some removals, some swaps, some adds)

There's a thread above to reduce the number of sports teams so we hit our quota. We are currently over by 8. However, it is does not look like many of these are currently passing. I have several new proposals I'd like to add on top of Starship.paint's to clean up the list a little bit more while also making it more representative of what teams should be considered vital.

Remove Green Bay Packers  5, Chicago Bears

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 have way too many American football teams. People complain about the number of baseball teams in other threads but no one seems to mind that we have 6 American football teams, a sport that has almost no traction outside the US (at least baseball has widespread support in Latin America and East Asia). I think we only need 3 or 4: Cowboys for being 'America's team', Steelers/Patriots for winning the most Super Bowls, and then Notre Dame for their notoriety in college football. I think, if pressed, I would also be OK with removing the Steelers.

Support Packers

1. As nom. Claim to fame is that they have the most wins of any NFL team but this is a very hyperlocalized accomplishment. Aurangzebra (talk) 10:54, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Oppose Packers

1. They constitute a good portion of the econony of Green Bay, Wisconsin, also, they are community owned, which is pretty unique, were a pioneering team for the development of NFL and, as you said, they have the most wins. The Blue Rider 01:04, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

   Eh, Green Bay isn’t even V5, but perhaps it should be? Vileplume (talk) 12:50, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

   User:OhnoitsvileplumeXD, see Wikipedia:Vital_articles/Level/5/Everyday_life/Sports,_games_and_recreation#American_football.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:13, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

   I wasn’t talking about the Packers, I was talking about the city. Vileplume (talk) 13:44, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

   That would be a reasonable nomination, but it has little to do with this nomination.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:43, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

2. Per The Blue Rider. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:09, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
3. Per TBR-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:35, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Discuss

Support Bears

1. As nom. Only 1 Super Bowl win. Plenty of championship wins before the NFL-AFL merger may be their one claim to fame but this is not a VA5-worthy accomplishment. Aurangzebra (talk) 10:54, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
2. Per nom. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:09, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 09:32, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
4. Support per nom. Gizza (talk) 08:57, 19 February 2024 (UTC)
5. Regretable support.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:35, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Oppose Bears

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 United States women's national soccer team

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.

---

Dreadful lack of women's teams on this list. If there's only one woman team we should add, it should be this one. Most successful women's soccer team, contributed to the professionalization of female sports, first woman's team of any sport to reach a certain level of celebrity etc.

Support

1. as nom Aurangzebra (talk) 10:54, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
2. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 02:52, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
3. Makes sense. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:49, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
4. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:24, 30 January 2024 (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 St. Louis Cardinals and Chicago Cubs, Add Los Angeles Dodgers

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.

---

Willing to die on the 'adding the Dodgers' hill. To sweeten the deal, I propose removing two baseball teams if it means we can add this one. TonyTheTiger and I covered all the rationale in the 'Add Los Angeles Dodgers' thread somewhere above but the general gist is that they are the dominant powerhouses of the West, they broke the color barrier with Jackie Robinson, and they are globally known for consistently being pioneers in attracting international talent (first Spanish sportscaster, first Japanese transplant etc.). I can guarantee you almost everyone in Japan knows the Los Angeles Dodgers as well as the vast majority of Latin America. If there can only be three American baseball teams on this list, the Dodgers should be one.

Support Remove St. Louis Cardinals

1. as nom Aurangzebra (talk) 10:54, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
2. support removing any team but the Yankees to add the Dodgers as explained below.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:10, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 09:25, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
4. Support --Makkool (talk) 12:48, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
5. Per nominator. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 20:02, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
6. Vileplume 🍋‍🟩 (talk) 09:36, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

Discuss

Support Remove Chicago Cubs

1. support removing any team but the Yankees to add the Dodgers as explained below.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:10, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 09:25, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
3. Support --Makkool (talk) 12:48, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nominator. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 20:02, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
5. Vileplume 🍋‍🟩 (talk) 09:39, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

Discuss

1. I personally don't agree with removing the Cubs for the reasons in the Cubs thread above but if that is the compromise needed to add the Dodgers, willing to go along with it.

Support Add Los Angeles Dodgers

1. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 10:54, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
2. as I have stated above, the Dodgers are one of the two most important baseball franchises. The New York Yankees have dominated on the field with by far the most championships. On the field, the Dodgers are approximately on par with St. Louis Cardinals and well above the Chicago Cubs and Boston Red Sox. However in the executive offices they are by far the most influential franchise. Jackie Robinson Day is an indication of how significant their racial breakthrough was. By hiring the first full time Spanish language broadcaster and then building up a Spanish language broadcast network that transmits in dozens of countries, they have had broadened the sport making kids all over Latin America dream of playing in the major leagues. For many this dream has come true. Then by being the first team to raid Nippon Professional Baseball talent (Hideo Nomo), the first team to play a South Korean baseball player (Chan Ho Park), the first team to play a Taiwanese player (Chin-Feng Chen), the first MLB team to allow a female sports journalist into a locker room (Anita Martini), and First MLB team to employ a female lead trainer (Sue Falsone, 2012), they became the most influential team in baseball.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:10, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
3. Per nominator and TonyTheTiger. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 20:02, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Not an expert in baseball, but I'm seeing that we're getting over quota in the games, sports and recreation section. --Makkool (talk) 12:48, 14 March 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.

Remove Essendon Football Club

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 Australian rules football, a sport that has zero importance outside Australia, needs two teams. It seems like Essendon is the worse of the two on the list so I think we can remove them.

Support Remove Essendon

1. as nom Aurangzebra (talk) 10:54, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
2. Per nominator. The Blue Rider 01:06, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 09:32, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
4. Support not vital at this level. I'd also be tempted to swap Carlton with Collingwood. Gizza (talk) 01:36, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
5. Per nominator. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 20:03, 19 March 2024 (UTC)
6. Vileplume 🍋‍🟩 (talk) 09:40, 21 March 2024 (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 FC Porto

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.

---

They are definitely a storied club but they are arguably not even the best club in Portugal (that honor may go to SL Benfica). No major international dynasties like the other clubs on this list and no history of being extremely rich and globally connected and supported like PSG/Chelsea. I know about FC Porto and its history because I like and follow soccer but I do not think it has the name recognition of the other teams on this list to warrant a spot here. As a sidenote, when we do clean up this list a bit, I want to add a proposal to include at least one historic South American club (such as Boca Juniors or Santos FC - both clubs achieved more international success than Porto and have arguably contributed more to the game through their history). Let me know what your thoughts are on that idea.

Support

1. as nom Aurangzebra (talk) 10:54, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
2. Support per nom. --Makkool (talk) 12:48, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

1. FC Porto has more international honours than Benfica and it was a very strong club during the 1980's, 2000's and 2010's, winning 2 Champions. One thing you have to understand is that football clubs in Portugal exerce a lot of power in politics; and they have been involved in multiple scandals, such as Apito Dourado, Luís Filipe Vieira, Football Leaks and many other non-notable corruption investigations. The Blue Rider 11:59, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

   Fair points. But a couple of things: SL Benfica is the most decorated club in Portugal, they rank 8th in UEFA's all-time club ranking as opposed to Porto in 9th, they were voted 12th in the FIFA Club of the Century rankings (Porto isn't on this list at all), and 9th in the IFFHS Top 200 European clubs of the 20th century rankings list (Porto is 29th). So Porto may not even be the most notable team in Portugal. On top of that, many clubs are heavily involved in their country's politics (think Francisco Franco and Real Madrid) and involved in corruption scandals (e.g. Calciopoli and Juventus). Both the examples I listed are more notable pieces of evidence for each of these topics than Porto's respective involvements with theirs.

   It really pains me to remove it because I know they are significant but when we only have a quota of 50 teams, I'm just not sure what else we can remove at this point (especially if we want to look into including at least one woman's team). I would actually propose increasing the sports teams quota to 60 so we wouldn't have to deal with these tough decisions but I'm not sure how popular that would be. Aurangzebra (talk) 22:14, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

   SL Benfica is the most decorated club domestically but not internationally. FC Porto is almost always ahead of Benfica in the UEFA Club coefficients. If FC Porto has to be removed then will only support it if AFC Ajax  5 also is, since Portugal is a more important country regarding football than the Netherlands. The Blue Rider 01:09, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

   Don't know if I agree with either of those things: Netherlands has been runner-up at the World Cup 3 times (as recently as 2010), Portugal's best finish was 3rd in 1966. They have achieved similar performances at the Euros and there are 4 Dutch players (maybe more? gave up counting after I searched for the obvious ones) in VA5 sportspeople versus 3 Portuguese. I specifically did not choose Ajax here because of their Golden Age in the 1970s with Johan Cruyff  4 which was arguably the best European decade for any club outside the big 5 countries.

   Once again, I do think Porto is notable, I just had to make a judgment call for what to cut to hit quota. Ideally, we add more quota for sports teams. I have no clue why we can only have 50 sports teams but 100+ video games. Aurangzebra (talk) 03:28, 25 January 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.

Dog agility

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 popular type of animal sport with international participation. --Makkool (talk) 13:05, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --Makkool (talk) 13:05, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
2. Weak support; slighty popular I suppose. The Blue Rider 14:23, 3 March 2024 (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.

Fix The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy link in the Film section to the page for the 2005 film instead of the book

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.

---

Pretty simple request I hope. In the section Wikipedia:Vital articles/Level/5/Arts#Specific films, the link for The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy leads to the book page, rather than the page for the 2005 Film, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. Sorry if this is the wrong way to ask for this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hwamplero (talk • contribs) 23:38, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Great catch! Just went in and fixed this. Though it does lead me to start thinking about why The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (film) is even on this list... I think I'll start another thread because this film is certainly not anywhere as notable as the others on this list. Aurangzebra (talk) 00:18, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

What was listed was The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, which is that franchise and what was proposed to be listed. The Blue Rider 00:26, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Oh my bad, undid it. Aurangzebra (talk) 00:55, 25 January 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 Club Penguin

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.

---

Massively played game during the 2000's and 2010's affecting the life of millions of children. The Blue Rider 22:14, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Support

1. As nominator. The Blue Rider 22:14, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
2. Conditional support if there is quota to fill. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:24, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
3. I think that this probably makes the video game list. QuicoleJR (talk) 03:06, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

1. I think Roblox would be a better addition in terms of longer-lasting popularity. Iostn (talk) 18:25, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

   Roblox  5 is already V5. Vileplume (talk) 19:24, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

2. It's a popular game, but can't say that it's vital. Besides, we need less game, sports and recreation articles rather than more. --Makkool (talk) 12:43, 14 March 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.

Two sci-fi movie swaps and one pedantic subcategory switch request

Remove Interstellar (film), Add one of the suggestions below

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.

---

Interstellar isn't in the same ballpark as the rest of the movies on this list. It received positive reviews when it came out but it was only the 10th highest grossing movie of 2014 and only won an Oscar for Best Visual Effects. I know it is hard for sci-fi movies to get the respect they deserve at the Oscars but it wasn't even nominated for Best Picture/Best Director/any of the other categories that usually serve as proxies for notability. It is not even the most critically acclaimed Christopher Nolan sci-fi movie: that honor goes to Inception which is not on this list (but was nominated for Best Picture in a pretty stacked year). I like to use the website They Shoot Pictures, don't they's rankings as a proxy for movie notability since they aggregate tens of thousands of rankings into one list, balancing sys bias while also factoring in popular sentiment with the inclusion of fan-favorite polls. Interstellar is 1369th overall. Their top 5 sci-fi movies (that aren't already included on this list/aren't Alien (film) which I will discuss separately) include:

- Stalker (1979 film): 47th in the overall movie ranking list, 47 interwikis, ~1800 daily pageviews last year. Personally, don't like this pick since we already have Solaris (1972 film)  5 by the same director (though I wouldn't mind a swap between the two).

- Close Encounters of the Third Kind: 206th in the overall movie ranking list, 47 interwikis, ~2200 daily pageviews last year. Also don't really like this pick since we have a bunch of more notable Steven Spielberg works on here already: Jaws (film)  5, Schindler's List  5, Jurassic Park (film)  5, and E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial  5.

- The Thing (1982 film): 211th in the overall movie ranking list, 48 interwikis, ~3700 daily pageviews last year. Wouldn't mind this pick: spawned a massive cult following and an entire media franchise. Has a sizable Legacy and Cultural Influence section on their Wikipedia page. Only issue is that this might fit better under Horror and Thriller.

- Brazil (1985 film): 225th in the overall movie ranking list, 46 interwikis, ~1000 daily pageviews. Not as well known as the other movies on this list but still a cult classic (and has a short Legacy section). Maybe not my first choice as a replacement though.

- Eraserhead: 243th in the overall movie ranking list, 40 interwikis, ~1600 daily pageviews. We have other David Lynch classics on here such as Mulholland Drive (film)  5 and Blue Velvet (film)  5. But unlike Close Encounters of the Third Kind + Steven Spielberg, Eraserhead is pretty synonymous with David Lynch. Was one of the films that popularized the midnight movie movement. Also a staple of film schools everywhere. Probably a decent pick.

I am also fine with swapping in Inception (film) (1144th overall) if we want something more recent than these choices since it was critically acclaimed and became a massive pop culture phenomenon. Also popularized the now ubiquitous BRAAAM sound effect.

Support Removal

1. as nom. Support removal, open to any of the suggestions above but I lean towards Inception (film) or The Thing (1982 film) Aurangzebra (talk) 02:14, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
2. Support swap with The Thing (1982 film)  5--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 09:17, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
3. Though, but I'd support a swap due to recentism bias for any of the first four (never heard of Eraserhead, despite beinga sf fan... ). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:59, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
4. Support removal. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 18:28, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
5. Support swap with The Thing (1982 film)  5. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 10:24, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
6. Support swap with the Thing. starship.paint (RUN) 08:29, 6 March 2024 (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.

Swap Aliens (film) with Alien (film)

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.

---

Aliens (film)  5 is the sequel to Alien. The intro claims that "Aliens is now considered among the greatest films of the 1980s, and among the best science fiction, action, and sequel films ever made, arguably equal to or better than Alien," an argument that is presented without evidence. To the contrary, Alien is 131th on the overall film list and Aliens is 383th. Alien spawned the entire massive Alien (franchise) including Aliens itself. It is also the movie that first featured the iconic trope of an alien bursting out of someone's body. It also beats Aliens in almost every one of our other customary metrics: 65 interwikis vs 59, 5700 daily pageviews vs 4200, and a much longer Legacy Section.

Support Swap

1. as nom. Aurangzebra (talk) 02:14, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

Discuss

Alien (film)  5 is already included, under the "Horror and thriller" section.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 09:17, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

What Lakku said. I'll note that Aliens was added just few days ago - it was my proposal. I think both are vital. Side note: I am still bummed nobody even commented about my proposal to add Ghost in the Shell (1995 film).... _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:56, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Oh sorry, completely missed that. In that case, I'm fine with Aliens. Will withdraw this proposal. Aurangzebra (talk) 10:15, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

@Piotrus: Also, I responded to your GitS proposal! Unfortunately, I did not think GitS was a great replacement for vitality reasons (even though I did personally love the movie) but we can brainstorm another replacement (since there does seem to be a consensus that Wall-E should be removed). I added a few possible suggestions from the ranking list on TSPDT. Aurangzebra (talk) 10:19, 27 January 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.

Move Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind to the Romance films subgenre

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 pedantic but I think this movie is more of a romance film with sci-fi elements as opposed to a sci-fi movie (similar to how we classify The Matrix has an action movie instead of a sci-fi movie).

Support

1. as nom. Aurangzebra (talk) 02:14, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

Discuss

I consider item moves within a subpage free actions, within WP:BRD. Especially since we got rid of subquotas. Better not clutter VA talk pages with minor practically cosmetic proposals.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 09:31, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

good point, will do. If anyone feels strongly, feel free to revert. Aurangzebra (talk) 10:26, 27 January 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 We Are the Champions  5 with When You Wish Upon a Star

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.

---

Since I’m already here, I might as well that I feel is a glaring omission. This Academy Award-winning song has basically been Disney’s theme song since 1940. If we’re not going to have the 1940 Pinocchio film on here, then at least have this song. (I don’t see anything to swap this out.) UPDATE: remove “We Are the Champions”. If “We Will Rock You” isn’t vital, neither is “We Are the Champions”. It’s an either/or situation.

Support

1. As nom. SailorGardevoir (talk) 02:37, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
2. Support addition--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 07:50, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Queen's song has had more cultural impact in pop culture than this specific Disney song. --Makkool (talk) 19:40, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
2. As someone not very interested in music, I'll oppose with the rationale that a song that "even I" can recall and hum a bit is very likely vital at this level. PS. I am neutral on the addition. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:14, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Discuss

I'd prioritise items in the bottom 10% Arts list for removal. Note: Before nominating one, check if it has a falsely low pageview count due to a recent move (by e.g. using this and toggling the left-side box for redirect inclusion, preferably with time range starting from 2020-01-01).--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 07:50, 23 February 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 Art criticism  4

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 similar topic Literary criticism  4 is at level 4.

Support

1. As nominator. feminist🩸 (talk) 12:58, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
2. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 13:05, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
3. The Blue Rider 13:40, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
4. Culturally important. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:51, 2 March 2024 (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 Five Nights at Freddy's

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 culturally influential video games of all time. Vileplume (talk) 22:49, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. Vileplume (talk) 22:49, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

1. We list too many video games, this isn't particulary ground-breaking. The Blue Rider 23:07, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

   Even if we reduced our number of video games to an extent, I’d probably still support. Vileplume (talk) 02:36, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

2. Oppose Newer and in my estimation less important than some video game subjects we don't list yet, such as Fate/stay night  5 and Ace Attorney.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 18:05, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
3. "One of the most culturally infulential" seems like an ovestatement honestly Iostn (talk) 23:24, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
4. Oppose --Thi (talk) 10:21, 4 March 2024 (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 Art world

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.

---

Art world  5: it seems an odd thing to list for mine. I don't think we list any analogous topics for other categories, and I'm not sure it adds much.

Support

Support as nom. J947 ‡ ^edits 07:10, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 09:18, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

1. Per nom. --Makkool (talk) 08:15, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Keep. This article may as well be entitled "Art industry". The production, preservation, and consumption of fine art, as well as investment in it, is as much an industry as the production, distribution and consumption of any other product. We list stuff like Food industry  4, Automotive industry  4, Sex industry  5, etc; we can list "Art industry". feminist🩸 (talk) 02:04, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
2. per feminist. Aurangzebra (talk) 06:45, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
3. --LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 09:49, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
4. Per feminist. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 00:51, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
5. Per feminist. J947 ‡ ^edits 04:48, 6 March 2024 (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 Live at the Apollo (1963 album)

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.

---

Another good representation for live albums. Usually held to be one of the greatest live albums of all time. Will also give James Brown  4 some representation.

Support

1. SailorGardevoir (talk) 07:56, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Just 10 interwikis. I do not think that this is as important to society as many of our current nominations. Look at how much we are adding here, we're going further and further from 50,000... starship.paint (RUN) 08:37, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
2. per starship.paint. You are making a bunch of really good suggestions but not only are we over-quota but we keep finding much larger big-idea articles that are obvious inclusions which is bloating this list even further (you can see this in pretty much all of feminist's suggestions). Maybe if you suggest some swaps, it may be easier to vote for these proposals? Aurangzebra (talk) 01:14, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
3. Per above. If this is to be added only to include a live album, we should hold for now. --Makkool (talk) 21:33, 6 March 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.

Add American Idiot and/or The Black Parade

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.

---

Made by Green Day  5 and My Chemical Romance  5 respectively, these are probably the two of the biggest albums of the 2000s, and definitely for Pop-punk  5 in general. I kind of want to have both, but if we only had room for one, I get it.

Support American Idiot

1. SailorGardevoir (talk) 18:23, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
2. Support only American Idiot for now as a representative of post-2000 rock (of which none are currently listed). American Idiot was actually bigger at its time of release but I think Black Parade may be eclipsing it in longer-term influence, though. Iostn (talk) 16:42, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Support The Black Parade

1. SailorGardevoir (talk) 18:23, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Per TBR. feminist🩸 (talk) 07:08, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
2. I can't really support such music albums when we're still adding enduring society-wide concepts like Screaming, Question, Auction, Lease, Risk etc. Even though I do like American Idiot. starship.paint (RUN) 08:31, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
3. Per above --Makkool (talk) 21:33, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
4. Per The Blue Rider and starship paint. Gizza (talk) 01:50, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

Discuss

• We don't usually list a lot of albums and Green Day and My Chemical Romance are only level 5 vitality. The Blue Rider 18:59, 4 March 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 "Yeah! (Usher song)"

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 signature song of Usher (musician)  5 and according to Billboard the number 2 song of the decade.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:18, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Support

1. -TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:18, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
2. Support --Makkool (talk) 21:33, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah! But no, Usher is only level 5 vitality. The Blue Rider 16:22, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

   You know we got works (sometimes multiple) by level 5 people, or even those who are not listed as vital at all, right? SailorGardevoir (talk) 19:17, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

   Exactly. Notice that it was the number 2 song of the decade.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:47, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

   Generally, we avoid listing sub-articles of level 5 articles. The Blue Rider 20:20, 6 March 2024 (UTC)

2. Per TBR. feminist🩸 (talk) 12:48, 14 March 2024 (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 Hull House

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 Jane Addams  4 legacy and a prime example of the settlement movement.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 11:49, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

N.B. According to Settlement and community houses in the United States, it is "the most famous settlement house in the United States". According to List of historical settlement houses, it is considered historic.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 10:26, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Support

1. As nominator. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 11:49, 21 January 2024 (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 Time Inc.

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.

---

Defunct media company. We list Time (magazine)  4 at V4 and dozens of other magazines at V5, and that is enough.-feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 03:28, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Among those are the following Time Inc. magazines Sports Illustrated  5, Fortune (magazine)  5, People (magazine)  5, Life (magazine)  5, and Entertainment Weekly  5-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:53, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Support

1. As nominator. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 03:28, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 09:36, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 13:28, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nominator. The Blue Rider 15:29, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
5. Per nominator. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 20:07, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Weak Oppose. I am not sure if the fact that we have a bunch of Time Inc magazines means this article is vital or redundant. I think such an article should be well managed unless the content of the article can be found in these other magazines.TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:53, 24 January 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.

Remove Tonka or swap for Matchbox (brand)

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 a toy but "American producer of toy trucks". Just 4 interwikis but 400 daily views. I assume this is somewhat popular in the states - but being European I've never heard of it. I don't think it is vital enough, but instead I'd suggest adding Matchbox (brand), a European brand that is more famous - a bit more pageviews and 20 interwikis. Hot Wheels  5 is already V5 (25 interwikis, ~1000+ daily views. The swap will also make our listings a bit less US centric. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:31, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. Prefer swap. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:08, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
2. support addition.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:10, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
3. Support removal per nom. Prefer Toys R Us over Matchbox. starship.paint (RUN) 08:15, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
4. Support removal. The Blue Rider 13:41, 31 March 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Other than Hot Wheels what has this company famously produced? Toys R Us seems like a better addition. The Blue Rider 12:17, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Discussion

1. See also ongoing #Add_Matchbox_(brand) elsewhere on this page. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:11, 13 January 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 Model figure  5

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.

---

Scale model  4 is V4. At V5 we list Model car  5 and effectively two entries for model trains (Rail transport modelling  5 and Toy train  5). Why not figures? This also covers the very popular in Japan (and among anime and manga fans) Japanese figures (which don't have their own article??). 6 interwikis, just 40 page views... I am genuinely surprised. Garage kit are a subtopic of this (not vital either). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 14:28, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:08, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
2. Surprised it was not listed yet. QuicoleJR (talk) 21:14, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
3. This should be added.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:55, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
4. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 09:47, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Too specific; Toy soldier would be a better entry eitherway. The Blue Rider 18:58, 10 March 2024 (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 Model aircraft  5

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.

---

As I said above, we list at v5 model car and two entries for model trains. Why not this? 14 interwikis, ~100 daily views. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 14:28, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:08, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
2. Model planes are a very popular kind of toy. QuicoleJR (talk) 21:15, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
3. We should probably have ships too.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD)
4. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 09:49, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Too specific. The Blue Rider 18:37, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

   @The Blue Rider But Scale model is V4 _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:03, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

   Would rather add Aircraft spotting. The Blue Rider 15:13, 29 March 2024 (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 Slur

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.

---

Slurs are a pretty key part of our social fabric and cultural history. Unfortunately, the article for slur redirects to 'pejorative' which doesn't have the same connotations. Similarly, racial slur redirects to a list of slurs which I don't want people to have easy access to if they're randomly browsing the VA5 list. That being said, I do think the idea of a slur is an important VA5-worthy social studies concept especially with the ideas behind it like reappropriation (maybe we can add this instead? But it does seem a bit niche) being so critical to modern history. Maybe this is already covered by Profanity  4 - let me know what you all think. 37 interwikis. Aurangzebra (talk) 06:15, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom (but propose naming it as slur instead of pejorative) Aurangzebra (talk) 06:15, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

   Comment I have never seen a renaming/nomination before. I am not sure this is the proper venue for the renaming.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 10:52, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

   @TonyTheTiger: WP:RM? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:23, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

   Yes.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:39, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

2. I support the renaming and the nomination with the caveat above.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 10:52, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
3. Support, basic concept in communication, sadly. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:23, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
4. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 15:44, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

1. This topic seems to be more on slurs in the linguistic sense, which isn't VA5. It's the specific attacks & cultural milleiu that are important, not the linguistic side, though. SnowFire (talk) 05:16, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

   Yea but you do agree slurs, in the cultural and social sense, are a VA5-worthy topic right? One purpose of Vital Articles is to identify critical articles which could use editing support - we really should have an article about slurs and their historic and social context on Wikipedia and, hopefully, adding this as a vital article (under Slur, not Pejorative) will assist with that effort. Aurangzebra (talk) 05:04, 25 January 2024 (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 Catholic social teaching

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.

---

Started with Pope Leo XIII  5, in response to the social question and as a counterpoint to Marx and Engels' The Communist Manifesto  4, proved pivotal in the modernization of the Catholic Church. The numerous encyclicals stemming from this social teaching significantly transformed politics, economics, and the lives of many. This transformative influence persists today, exemplified by Pope Francis  5, as the Church continues to navigate and address contemporary societal challenges.

Support

1. As nominator. The Blue Rider 00:45, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
2. V5, influencing many people for long, long time. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:23, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
3. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 06:21, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nominator. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 20:04, 19 March 2024 (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 Tatami  5

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 removed Divan (furniture) recently, but some within that discussion brought up the issue of geographic diversity. Tatami has 41 interwikis compared to 20 for Divan, and has around 3x the page views.

Support

1. As nominator. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 02:44, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
2. Popularized as Japanese culture is worldwide famous too. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:47, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
3. Support --Thi (talk) 09:56, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nominator. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 20:12, 19 March 2024 (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 Philips  5

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.

---

Although it's currently a shell of its former self, Philips used to be the largest tech company in Europe, with a long history and having pioneered a wide range of products including lighting, audiovisual media, consumer electronics, semiconductors, and medical devices.

Support

1. As nominator. 𝒻eminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 13:07, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
2. Weak support. I recognize it - but I am European. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:12, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
3. SailorGardevoir (talk) 09:12, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
4. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 06:20, 16 March 2024 (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.