Talk:List of articles every Wikipedia should have

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Please add new topics to the bottom of this page
Guidelines being agreed upon:
  1. A change of the list needs more support than opposition
  2. Proposals should be provided with a reason
  3. a change needs at least 5 supporters on the discussion page
  4. swapping like for like (category switch only with reason)
  5. single swaps (no mass changes)

Clarification to the "swapping like for like (category switch only with reason)" rule[edit]

In earlier discussions on this page, after this rule have been accepted that by people on this page, someone interpreted this rule very strictly, like an opposition against "Swap Vatican City for Scandinavia" proposal claim they are of a different category; but others interpreted the rule very loosely. like an opposition against "Swap Marlene Dietrich for Amazon rainforest" claim Amazon rainforest belongs to geography category. So what count and what doesn't count as same category? C933103 (talk) 02:05, 15 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is a good question. I think if you come here on a slow day you can get any swap you want.
The category rule was to prevent the natural degeneration to a list of biographies. For some reason, people like biographies over other types of topics. Also, its easier to compare topics of the same type. In my opinion, the rule should just apply to the broadest category.
There is also a balance rule that is used to prevent the natural degeneration to a list of topics that editors are most familiar with. This rule is sort of endlessly debatable but I think could be used to oppose both swaps you mentioned. i.e. adding yet more Italian topics and yet more American movie stars doesn't make the list more globally balanced. -MarsRover 06:53, 9 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Categories[edit]

I would like to know how the quantity of articles in each category was selected. Why shouldn't we swap articles with different categories? How many biographies in a list of 1000 is ideal? 100? 200? What are your thoughts? Interstellarity (talk) 19:30, 11 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The reason why we don't swap articles with different categories is to keep balance between all the different categories. This rule was accepted after a vote last year (if I remember well). Best regards, --Toku (talk) 08:38, 17 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
But who determine the current balance is appropriate balance? Until two or so years ago articles are added or dropped from the list across catergories at arbitary will of random users that stumble upon this page. C933103 (talk) 10:41, 28 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bolded articles[edit]

I would like to know if there should a limit on what articles we bold and what criteria should we use to determine what we should do. Interstellarity (talk) 19:31, 11 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

There should be a limit if we want bolding to be meaningful, but nobody bothered thus far. — Yerpo Eh? 08:01, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Biographies should be all unbolded and a lot of removed. Most people are obsure and inconsequential or overlaped with another ones. Dawid2009 (talk) 15:27, 27 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why we have to bold articles anyway? This list only contain 1000 articles. C933103 (talk) 10:40, 28 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Swap: Remove Ingmar Bergman, Add Marlon Brando[edit]

Brando is one of the most significant actors of all time. Interstellarity (talk) 19:41, 11 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support
Oppose
  1. Oppose Oppose removing Bergman, one of the most significant directors of all time. — Yerpo Eh? 07:59, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Hi Yerpo, I would like to know if you were to add Brando, who would you remove? My possible candidates for removal would be Marlene Dietrich, Sergei Eisentein, Federico Fellini, and Satyajit Ray. What do you think? Interstellarity (talk) 13:56, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Interstellarity: couldn't decide on any of these, I think they're quite equivalent in terms of importance. — Yerpo Eh? 14:54, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. Oppose Oppose Marlon Brando is a famous actor, but I doubt he was historically important enough to be on this list.--Opqr (talk) 11:30, 19 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3. Oppose Oppose Per Yerpo + Opqr. Best regards, --Toku (talk) 08:42, 24 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Neutral
Discussion

Swap: Remove Cuba, Add United Arab Emirates[edit]

The UAE is by far a more influential country than Cuba. Interstellarity (talk) 17:04, 17 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support
Oppose
  1. Oppose Oppose Cuba is an important country because of its influence in Latin America. Moreover, the UAE is only a secondary power (10 million inhabitants, 90% of whom are foreigners) between Saudi Arabia and Iran. --Toku (talk) 06:43, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. Oppose Oppose Cuba is certainly not a very large country, but it is the largest of the Caribbean countries and has a unique political position, so it should be on this list as a representative of the Caribbean　countries. Also, the United Arab Emirates is not on the list, but the city of Dubai is on the list instead.--Opqr (talk) 11:43, 19 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3. Oppose Oppose Per Toku and Oqpr. --Nicolas Eynaud (talk) 17:51, 19 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Neutral
Discussion

Swap: Remove Vatican City, Add Myanmar[edit]

Myanmar is a more well-known country. Interstellarity (talk) 17:05, 17 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support
Oppose
  1. Oppose Oppose Agree to remove Vatican but not convinced by a swap with Myanmar. --Nicolas Eynaud (talk) 20:26, 17 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. Oppose Oppose Oh my god, this is the fifth time in a year and a half that the Vatican has been proposed to be removed! And the first two times are your suggestions. All four previous proposals have been rejected. My conclusion remains the same, the Vatican is a major player in world politics, an important state and should be on this list.--Opqr (talk) 11:57, 19 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @Opqr: How VaticanCity (purely Catholic thing) culturally can be more significsnt thsn Mary, Mother of Jesus whichbis also central in Islam?! and I say that as someone who live in 88%-94% catholic country. We have also +50 countried on thr list and maybe something about three women Best regards.Dawid2009 (talk) 19:53, 26 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    First, your proposal is not a Vatican-Mary exchange. Regardless of the outcome of this discussion, the Vatican and Mary will not be exchanged. Please see my answer above. "the Vatican is a major player in world politics". I do not attach any importance to the cultural values ​​of the Vatican. The Vatican is a sovereign state and a major force that has a great influence on world politics backed by the Catholic Church and its followers. In order to exchange Mary for the Vatican, the minimum requirement is that a "Marian religion" independent of both Christianity and Islam be established, and that religion become so large that it can possess a sovereign state. --Opqr (talk) 10:45, 27 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    It is the Holy See which is a major player in the world politics, not Vatican City. C933103 (talk) 11:46, 13 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3. Oppose Oppose Per Opqr. Best regards, --Toku (talk) 08:41, 24 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Neutral
Discussion

Swap: Remove Austria, Add Colombia[edit]

We have too many European countries. We should have more South American countries and Colombia is a well known country. Interstellarity (talk) 17:07, 17 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support

Support Colombiais is huhely populated country with important cultural power, second to Brazil at South America ahead of Argentina and Venesuela which are listed. Austria has lack of population, not more important than other not listed countries like Hungary. Dawid2009 (talk) 07:58, 26 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose
  1. Oppose Oppose Austria remains an important cultural power. Not convinced by the proposal. --Nicolas Eynaud (talk) 20:27, 17 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. Oppose Oppose Austria is a very important country in history: former great European power, major cultural center, important religious center, etc. --Toku (talk) 06:40, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3. Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg Strong oppose--Tucvbif (talk) 07:44, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  4. Oppose Oppose Austria's cultural and historical weight is more than enough to compensate for lack of population. --Deinocheirus (talk) 02:02, 27 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Neutral
Discussion

Swap: Remove North Pole and South Pole, Add Country and Land[edit]

I'm surprised that these two items are not listed. North and South Pole are probably the weakest articles, but if you oppose the removals, I would ask that you suggest an article that could be removed. If they are added, I would bold them. Interstellarity (talk) 14:08, 18 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support
Oppose
  1. Oppose Oppose Both the North and South Poles are important geographic concepts. No nation not currently on the list is more important than the North Pole and South Pole.--Opqr (talk) 12:03, 19 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. Oppose Oppose Per Oqpr + multiple swap. --Nicolas Eynaud (talk) 17:52, 19 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3. Oppose Oppose Multiple swaps : is it swapping North Pole and Country ? North Pole and Lannd ? South Pole and Country ? South Pole and Land ? Country and Land ?. Best regards, --Toku (talk) 08:44, 24 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  4. Oppose Oppose Remember this list's title is "List of articles every Wikipedia should have", not just importance. C933103 (talk) 10:39, 28 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Neutral
Discussion

Note: state (Q7275) is included. Which meaning of "country" did you have in mind and under which Wikidata object is it? — Yerpo Eh? 16:21, 19 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Yerpo, The meaning I was thinking of is a distinct territorial body, a state, nation, or other political entity. It could a sovereign state or part of a larger state. Both country and state don't have a universally accepted definition. I would be open to considering a swap removing state and adding country. I think the primary meaning we should use if country is added is a sovereign state. Please let me know what your thoughts are and what possible additions are worth considering. Interstellarity (talk) 16:22, 22 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
So country (Q6256)? This question was much debated (check archive), and I dont' think your argument is better. So I'm against changing back. — Yerpo Eh? 17:22, 22 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Swap: Remove American Civil War, Add American Revolution[edit]

I don't think it makes much sense to list the American Civil War when we are missing the American Revolution. The American Revolution is by far a more important event historically than the Civil War. Interstellarity (talk) 19:47, 22 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support
  1. Interstellarity (talk) 19:47, 22 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose
  1. Both are very important, but fist is more widely-known and represented in art and media, especially outside USA. --Tucvbif (talk) 08:41, 23 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. Oppose Oppose Per Tucvbif. Best regards, --Toku (talk) 08:40, 24 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3. Oppose Oppose Per Tucvbif. --Nicolas Eynaud (talk) 20:06, 24 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Neutral
Discussion

Swap: Remove Roman Empire, Add Ancient Rome[edit]

Ancient Rome is a much broader topic than the Roman Empire. I would either do the swap, or add Roman Republic to it as well. Interstellarity (talk) 19:52, 22 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support
  1. Interstellarity (talk) 19:52, 22 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. Support Support Pre-Imperial Rome was already a world power of the 1st rank (think Punic wars, Mithridatic wars, Spartacus insurrection - in fact, think of all things Caesar did before even becoming a triumvir) and a significant cultural center (Plautus, Terentius, Cicero etc.). Roman mythology as an important aspect of world culture also pre-dates the Empire. So if we can cover the entire topic with one article, it is for the better. --Deinocheirus (talk) 02:11, 27 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose
  1. Oppose Oppose Not convinced because, for a lot of people, Roman Empire is the main notion (even if "Ancien Rome" is more general). Best regards, --Toku (talk) 08:40, 24 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. Oppose Oppose Per Toku. --Nicolas Eynaud (talk) 17:14, 25 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Neutral
  1. To be honest, I think it's the case when both Roman Empire and Ancient Rome are very important and even simultaneously in the list would be okay for the balance. Because the balance should be based on academic literature. So many scholars analyze both these themes every year... I understand we shouldn't have so many Western themes in the list but we have really lots, lots, lots RSs about Ancient Rome. And yes, Spartacus, Cicero and Julius Caesar are the part of the history of the Roman Republic, not of the Roman Empire. But the Roman Empire is also important, maybe more than other empires in the list.--Reprarina (talk) 10:45, 4 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Discussion

Swap: Remove Art, Add Arts[edit]

Arts encompasses more than what art encompasses. It is a highly important article for this list. Interstellarity (talk) 12:52, 23 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support
  1. Interstellarity (talk) 12:52, 23 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose
  1. Oppose Oppose I don't think "Arts" is a more important concept than the general notion of "Art". Best regards, --Toku (talk) 08:37, 24 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. Oppose Oppose Per Toku. --Nicolas Eynaud (talk) 17:14, 25 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Neutral
Discussion

Which Wikidata items are you referring to?C933103 (talk) 10:37, 28 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This one. Interstellarity (talk) 15:41, 30 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Remove Augustine of Hippo; add Mary, Mother of Jesus[edit]

There is signifiant overlap beetwen Augutine of Hippo and Thomas Aquinas who is already listed as both represent medieval philosophy related to hristianity.

We do not have figure which rerpesents women in religious sphere. The most important woman in either of Christianity and Islam most likely is the best choice to add first woman to this list. She has great results in Google trends as someone who is not living preson since over 2000 years. Source which says that Mary is the most important woman according to Quran and Muhammad so is the most influential woman in islam and one of the most important if not the most important woman in Islam: '[1]. Abrahamic Religion covers about 65% of World's population we list cities which cover say 1% of World's population. Religion isstill the mot important activity for plenty people around the world, woman too, not only for men as our list suggest. After swapping Auustine with Mary we have less bias in Christianity and bettter ballance beetwen Abrahamic religions and others. Mary is recognisable peron outside Abrahamc World. For example Fatima (city in Portugal) is place for pilgrimates from Abrahamic religion and for Buddhists, Our Lady of Fatima has 2,5 more pagewatchers than Hikaru Genji on Japanese Wikipedia @Opqr:, what do you think? Dawid2009 (talk) 07:53, 26 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Even if you ask me, "What do you think?", your argument is incoherent, and for this reason I cannot agree. Your argument has the following problems.
  1. Swapping Augustine and Mary does not balance Abrahamic and other religions at all. It is only a change within a monotheistic religion.
  2. I don't know how Augustine is treated within the Orthodox Church or within Protestantism, but I hear that in Protestantism Mary is not so important.
  3. The importance of cities and religion cannot be equated. Each has a different kind of importance.
  4. Hikaru Genji is just a fictional character, and far less important than the whole fiction of The Tale of Genji or the author Murasaki Shikibu. So Maria's Page Watchers are just a little more than Hikaru Genji, who is just a fictional character. It's not important at all.
That's my opinion.--Opqr (talk) 11:51, 26 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I pinged you beause of you are Japanese and you recently supported addition swap Orthdox Church of with no important actress (which still stay BTW) so I believe you can see how religion is culturally important. Maybe you do not know but en:Our Lady of Fatima is just random example detailic example from eronomously wide spectrum en:Mary titles but even despite this fact gets 87 of pagewatchers at Japanese Wikipedia but that is not the most important. Mary gets better google trends than every single biography except maybe Jesus. Mary has de fecto the same significance in Islam what Jesus (if not slightly more as there are plenty men with more significane than Jesus in Islam). Either of Augustine and Aquinas have lack of influence on Islam so we should drop one of them. Protestantism already is represented by Martin Luther (even though numbr of Protestans is smaller than say number of Hindus on the World). I would swap one of them for Mary and I would swap another article for thing related with not monotheistic religon. Do you see my point now more? However what do you think to discuss quotas for women at religion? @Opqr: Dawid2009 (talk) 14:23, 26 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • So why haven't you yet submitted a proposal to exchange Aquinas for important figures of other religions? Well, I don't think there are any important people in the polytheistic world who should be on this list other than the current list, so I will refuse even if it is submitted. And I don't mind that women aren't on the list of religiously significant figures. List diversity is important, but diversity is not the goal. Forcing women to be on the list when there are no important people is wrong.
Actually, I am neither for nor against the exchange of Augustine and Mary. Or rather, since I am not a monotheist, I do not have the material to judge the priority within monotheism, so I do not have the material to show my approval or disapproval. I wasn't going to upvote or downvote if you didn't fly Ping. I pointed out that the reason you showed was too unreasonable, but I think that the exchange itself should proceed according to the procedure. However, I can't judge the superiority or inferiority, so I will refrain from voting.--Opqr (talk) 11:44, 27 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Remove Marxism or Civil war, Add Business[edit]

Business is not listed, but the title says Business and Economics. I think it make sense to list Business because it is such an important topic for every language to have since it is a part of every culture. I think the two weakest articles in that particular category are Marxism, which overlaps with communism and civil war, which overlaps with war. Interstellarity (talk) 15:49, 18 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support
  1. Interstellarity (talk) 15:49, 18 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. Support Support only the Marxism-Business swap. Businesses are more important and something more essential to establishment of a new Wikipedia. C933103 (talk) 11:47, 13 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose
  1. Oppose Oppose The proposal is about removing Marxism or Civil war ? --Nicolas Eynaud (talk) 16:51, 18 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    1. @Nicolas Eynaud: To be clear, I was suggesting two articles that could be removed, only removing one of them. This proposal is not to been replacing two articles with one article. I have struck one of the articles out. Interstellarity (talk) 20:05, 18 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. Oppose Oppose I think "Economics' is enough. Moreover, to me, "Business" is too vague as a concept.--Toku (talk) 09:25, 21 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Moreover, when we have trade. Theklan (talk) 23:37, 5 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Neutral
Discussion

Swap: Igor Stravinsky for Queen (band)[edit]

Igor Stravinsky is absolutely not as important as Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky. Queen is as almost important as The Beatles. Even in Russian musical schools, Stravinsky is not perceived as more important composer than Glinka, Rimsky-Korsakov, and Mussorgsky.--Reprarina (talk) 04:08, 30 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support
  1. --Reprarina (talk) 01:10, 6 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose
Neutral
Discussion

Swap Elizabeth I for Henry VIII[edit]

Henry VIII is probably the most famous monarch in history, breaking England away from Catholicism. He is more significant than Elizabeth I. If you don't agree with this swap, please let me know your thoughts on swapping Elizabeth with William the Conqueror or Queen Victoria. Interstellarity (talk) 23:29, 10 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oppose Oppose Elizabeth I is extremely important.Reprarina (talk) 13:42, 12 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Reprarina: Why? Isn’t Henry VIII extremely important as well? Interstellarity (talk) 15:08, 14 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No, he isn't. Elizabethan era was called the Golden Age, it's the era of William Shakespeare and Francis Drake, it's the era when East India Company was born. Henry VIII is definitely less important.Reprarina (talk) 15:25, 14 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose Oppose Elizabeth I is clearly more important than Henry VIII.--Opqr (talk) 11:42, 28 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose Oppose Per Reprarina and Opqr. --Nicolas Eynaud (talk) 19:44, 28 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Swap Tim Berners-Lee for Bill Gates[edit]

Gates has been more influential in the computer industry than Berners-Lee. He is one of the world's wealthiest people. Interstellarity (talk) 23:32, 10 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Can we swap smth/smone for Discrimination?[edit]

Discrimination is the general concept that can include racism (that we already have in the list), sexism, ageism, ableism, religious discrimination etc.; it also includes individual discrimination, structural discrimination, instututional discrimination... so it's the one of the core concepts. And, when we look in the relevant academic literature, we can see the importance of the topic only grows.--Reprarina (talk) 07:57, 7 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Discrimination can be introducced in "Human rights". And it's necessary to explain more your proposal : "Smth" and "Smone" don't us give the possibility to understand it.--Toku (talk) 13:49, 11 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Swap Vienna for Toronto[edit]

We list both Vienna and Austria on the list and I think one of the two should be removed. Vienna seems to be redundant to Austria. Toronto should be added because there is no Canadian city on this list and at the very least, would add Toronto since it is the powerhouse of the Canadian economy. I would also be interested in knowing what the significance of Bogota, Brussels, Cape Town, Rio de Janeiro, and Tehran are to this list. Interstellarity (talk) 01:09, 25 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg Strong oppose Vienna is not only the capital of Austria but also is the city when many people from the list were born/lived/died (Beethoven, Brahms, Haydn, Mahler, Mozart, Schubert, Freud, Schrödinger, Wittgenstein), also it was one of the most important cities in Holy Roman Empire.--Reprarina (talk) 05:31, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose Oppose Per Reprarina. --Toku (talk) 11:42, 30 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose Oppose Per Reprarina. --ThomasPusch (talk) 12:05, 28 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oppose Oppose Per Reprarina. -Theklan (talk) 23:35, 5 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Numbers adjusted[edit]

Hello! It have been a good ride, but the numbers in every section are now right. For a while, I had 1001 items and I was turning crazy. Theklan (talk) 14:20, 6 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Retrieved from "https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_articles_every_Wikipedia_should_have&oldid=24676421"