Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lists/Archive 16

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10 ← Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16

Category:Lists of heads of state

This topic is so big that I don't quite know where to start. I'm not even sure if this WikiProject's talk page is the best place to put it (if anyone knows a better place, please say so where I should bring this up). Essentially, I see a whole lot of original research going on in most of the articles in this category. The first way in which this happens is using the vague terms "leaders" or "rulers" in their titles: Lists of "leaders"/"rulers" of country X. These names are so vague that they can include anyone from a local prince to a local bishop, and in the case of "leaders" they can include anyone ranging from the head of state, the government leader (prime minister / premier), the chairperson of parliament, to the presiding judge of the supreme/constitutional court, to the commander of the armed forces.

A more important problem usually takes the form that assumes that former state X is the/a "predecessor" of current country Y, therefore all heads of state of former state X may be retroactively listed as heads of state of current country Y, even if the name "Y" or the title "emperor/king/prince/duke/count/president/etc. of Y" didn't exist yet. This kind of framing is usually the result of national or nationalistic historiography, by which writers claim the existence of former states (even those with a different name, territory, form of government etc.) as predecessors of their own current country in order to give it 'a long and rich history', even though doing so is arguably an invented tradition.

To take my own country of birth and residence as an example: the List of rulers of the Netherlands goes all the way back to "Leaders of Frisii, Belgae, Canninefates and Batavi (before 400)" (a rather random grouping of 4 ancient tribes living in the Low Countries in Roman times). What constitutes a "leader" isn't defined. For some reason all other tribes / groups are then forgotten and we go on to focus solely on

  • the Kings of Frisia (but not the Franks or Saxons for some reason);
  • the Counts of Frisia (but not the counts of Wassenberg/Guelders, the (prince-)bishops of Utrecht, etc. for some reason);
  • the Counts of Holland and West-Frisia (but not the counts/dukes of Guelders-Zutphen, the (prince-)bishops of Utrecht, the dukes of Brabant, etc. for some reason);
  • the Counts of Burgundian and Habsburg Netherlands (but not the dukes of Guelders-Zutphen, the prince-bishops of Utrecht, the dukes of Jülich, the lords of Ravenstein etc. for some reason);
  • the Stadtholders during the Dutch Republic (and Grand Pensionaries of Holland, but not those of the other 6 provinces for some reason); both positions were originally non-hereditary and so "ruler" is misleading;
  • 'Rulers during the French period (1795–1813)' (because if you're not a hereditary monarch but an appointed president in a republic, you're also apparently a "ruler"; and entire governmental bodies also count as "rulers"),

until finally we get the first monarchy that can reasonably be identified with "the Netherlands" in 1806 (though formally still "Kingdom of Holland" until 1813).

You can frame it like that, but it's very arbitrary and unscholarly to do so, especially without sources. This is typical of the classic "Hollandocentric" nationalistic historiography of the Netherlands. You start with the Frisii/Batavi, you follow the Frisians in Holland, Holland dominates the Dutch Republic and all subsequent states called "the Netherlands", therefore we can forget about all the other tribes and provinces, and the counts of Holland are retroactively framed as "rulers of the Netherlands". Except that it is completely arbitrary pseudohistoric bullshit. I could equally claim, for example (as some writers have done), that actually Utrecht is and has always been the political centre of the Netherlands as the seat of the archdiocese of Utrecht. And so the prince-bishop of Utrecht held almost all spiritual power and to a large degree temporal power in "the Netherlands" throughout the Middle Ages; it was a much more important medieval city than swampy Holland. From the Catholic Church / Vatican / Papal point of view, that makes sense; but it is just as arbitrary. And as I used to read about a lot when I studied history in Nijmegen, that city claimed to be the true historical political cultural centre of the Netherlands, as it was the oldest city of the country, the home of the Batavi (the earliest known somewhat literate native tribe), the only city to achieve the status of free imperial city, until 1514 the capital of the Duchy of Guelders (which was the last "independent Dutch state" in the Netherlands before all were subdued by the Habsburgs in 1543, and as a duchy held the highest provincial rank within the Dutch Republic, because Holland was 'merely' a county), and so on. Does that make the duke of Guelders or the mayor of Nijmegen a "ruler of the Netherlands"? Hell no! Proud as I am of Nijmegen and Guelders, I don't want them on this list, and I don't want the ancient tribes, Frisia, Holland, Burgundy, Habsburg, the Dutch Republic and the Batavian Republic on the list either. It should begin no sooner than 1806.

A pragmatic reason not to include heads of state of so-called "predecessor states" is simply size (WP:TOOLONG) and the fact that they usually already have existing separate articles (WP:REDUNDANTFORK). There is already a Count of Holland page, there is no need to duplicate its contents again here.

This is just one elaborate example to show how many of these Lists of heads of state / rulers / leaders have really lost their ways into the territory of pseudohistoric nationalistic original research. A good example we should follow instead is List of heads of state of Greece, which starts with the First Hellenic Republic in 1822. We're not going all the way back to the Byzantines, Romans, Macedonians, ancient Greek diadochi and poleis etc.; there is a correct understanding that "Greece" as a state is a modern phenomenon, and so there were no "heads of state of Greece" before 1822.

To me this may all make complete sense. But if I were to WP:BOLDly remove all this information in dozens of articles, I am probably gonna piss a lot of people off, and I don't want to do that. I'd much rather reach a broad consensus here first about which items to include and exclude from lists of heads of state, and whether "leader" and "ruler" are just too vague or misleading as identifiers in a list title, especially if the name of the country in question was never attached to a dynastic title. Again, I'm not sure if this talk page is the place to do this discussion, if there is a better place I'll gladly move it over there. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 01:29, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

PS: At Category talk:Heads of state#2004, two Wikipedians made much the same points 19 years ago. ;) Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 10:41, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
PPS: After some further reading and thinking, I came to the conclusion to nominate the Category:Rulers as a whole for deletion: Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2023 February 4#Category:Rulers. I think this will be an important step towards solving many of the issues I have outlined here. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 16:16, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
I've renamed it Lists of rulers in the Low Countries for now, and completely rewritten it as a list of lists just like the nl:Lijsten van heersers in de Lage Landen. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 21:03, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

List articles - Orphans

Hi - there are hundreds of List of... articles here that are Orphans, and need wikilinks from other articles. See: Wikipedia:Orphan article for help. There are many "List of" topics, and easy to de-orphan. JoeNMLC (talk) 20:28, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Further opinions on article merger would be appreciated

Currently, there is a proposed merger of Libraries and librarians in fiction and Librarians in popular culture to a new page entitled Libraries and librarians in culture. But, it has been inactive since July 2022, so it would be great to get some more eyes on it, so there can a clearer consensus before moving forward. Thanks! Historyday01 (talk) 18:07, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Singing bassists article

I think Tommy Shaw should be added as a co-lead vocal to Styx. Kip Winger should be added as primary lead vocal for his band Winger. 108.66.54.207 (talk) 00:10, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Recently proposed mergers

In light of some recent drive-by editing by a certain user, I decided to propose some mergers of various pages about LGBTQ animated characters:

Also, if you haven't already, I'd encourage you to participate in this discussion about the proposed merger of Animated series with LGBT characters: 2020s and List of animated series with LGBT characters: 2020–present, which has been stale since Dec. 2022.

Thanks! Historyday01 (talk) 17:45, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

List of United States flash flood emergencies has been nominated for deletion

List of United States flash flood emergencies, which falls under your WikiProject, has been nominated for deletion. You can participate in the deletion discussion here. Elijahandskip (talk) 17:01, 14 March 2023 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Lists of LGBT figures in fiction and myth

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Lists of LGBT figures in fiction and myth#Expansion of LGBT figures in fiction and myth page, asking how to expand the "Lists of LGBT figures in fiction and myth" page so as to more fully encompass topics about LGBT characters and media within the scope of "fiction and myth", which is within the scope of this WikiProject. Thanks! Historyday01 (talk) 17:22, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Hoax-related deletion request

I have a pending hoax-related deletion request over at Wikipedia talk:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia if anybody is interested in hearing me out. 100.7.44.80 (talk) 15:37, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Head of the Donetsk People's Republic has been nominated for deletion

I'm not sure if this page falls under the purview of this WikiProject, but as it's a list I'll put this here. The page has been nominated for deletion for not meeting WP:GNG. The deletion discussion is here. Khronicle I (talk) 21:55, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

Criteria for inclusion at List of proxy wars

Hi there, I've started a discussion at this article's talk as I'm concerned about the lack of sourcing for the "proxy" label, potentially leading to issues of original research or POV. Please do contribute here: Talk:List_of_proxy_wars#Criteria_for_inclusion_/_removal_of_unsourced_entries — Czello 12:31, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:List of Jewish states and dynasties § Did attempts to change POV in this list go too far & make it more biased?

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of Jewish states and dynasties § Did attempts to change POV in this list go too far & make it more biased?. Peaceray (talk) 15:32, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

List of last notable WWII veterans.

Mel Brooks and Dick Van Dyke are not listed despite the fact they served in World War II. They are one of the last notable WWII veterans in the film industry. Jamiej2023 (talk) 08:18, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Project-independent quality assessments

Quality assessments by Wikipedia editors rate articles in terms of completeness, organization, prose quality, sourcing, etc. Most wikiprojects follow the general guidelines at Wikipedia:Content assessment, but some have specialized assessment guidelines. A recent Village pump proposal was approved and has been implemented to add a |class= parameter to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, which can display a general quality assessment for an article, and to let project banner templates "inherit" this assessment.

No action is required if your wikiproject follows the standard assessment approach. Over time, quality assessments will be migrated up to {{WikiProject banner shell}}, and your project banner will automatically "inherit" any changes to the general assessments for the purpose of assigning categories.

However, if your project has decided to "opt out" and follow a non-standard quality assessment approach, all you have to do is modify your wikiproject banner template to pass {{WPBannerMeta}} a new |QUALITY_CRITERIA=custom parameter. If this is done, changes to the general quality assessment will be ignored, and your project-level assessment will be displayed and used to create categories, as at present. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:31, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

Opening sentence of lists

I feel like I once read something in the MOS that said not to begin a list article with the opening sentence: "This is a list of X". And yet, there are so many that do this, and now I can't find where I read that. Personally I don't like it, and I think it is similar to starting a regular article with, "This is an article about X". Can someone point me to wherever I read this? Or is it not there anymore? Should it be? Thanks! Larataguera (talk) 18:57, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

Looks like you're thinking of this bullet in MOS:LEADSENTENCE: if the page is a list, do not introduce the list as "This is a list of X" or "This list of Xs...". A clearer and more informative introduction to the list is better than verbatim repetition of the title. A good example of this is the List of Benet Academy alumni. Colin M (talk) 22:29, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Where this gets tricky is for lists where the title is not an adequate description of the topic. Per Wikipedia:SALLEAD a direct statement of the criteria for inclusion is essential in the lead, especially when the title is unclear on that. It's probably best practice to put statements involving "this list" somewhere other than the first sentence. I note that the discussion of the need for clarification with titles that don't give the full story at Wikipedia:LISTNAME includes as a good example List of Finns which has a one sentence lead, "This is a list of..." I think that clarity should take precedence over a fussy avoidance of self reference, and I think the guidance at Wikipedia:SRTA is quite a bit more permissive than some might expect.
The various standards might need some work to resolve discrepancies, but I one way to square the circle is to say that clarity about the scope is essential, and that if it's necessary to use "this list" language for that, it should, if possible, go somewhere other than the first sentence. Ccrrccrr (talk) 03:16, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Minimum number of items to make a list?

Is there a minimum number of items to make a list? It would seem common sense that 1 item does not make a "list" (which I invoked to delete a 1-item list), but what is the minimum? Is there a rule about this? Because I can't find any. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 22:56, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Bolded column in lists?

There is a list within the non-list article Women in Guam History, which uses bold font for the first column of the table. I have been told by @Maile66: that this is a requirement for Accessibility for screen readers, although it seems to me to go against MOS:BOLD. It's not easy to work out the relationships between MOS:BOLD, MOS:TABLES, MOS:DTAB and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility/Data tables tutorial. To try to look at best practice I had a look at the 4 list articles which this project lists as FLs of Top importance: two are lists of individuals and have bolding in the second column of their main table (the first being images); one has no table; and The_World's_25_Most_Endangered_Primates#Current_list has no bolding. Looking at the most recent High-importance FLs, List of governors of California has a bolded 2nd column, while List of World Heritage Sites in Greece, List of career achievements by Yuzuru Hanyu and Territorial evolution of the United States have tables with no bolding. What is the current policy or guidance on this? PamD 14:26, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

PamD The formatting at question is regarding Tables. If a list is not in a table, say a bulleted list, this does not apply. What you call "bolding", is actually !scope="row" and ! scope="col" in the table format. It's there to accommodate screen readers for the visually impaired. One way or another, WP:WIAFL and Help:Table are the standards, as far as formatting tabled lists. It really doesn't matter if it's a stand-alone table list, or an imbeded table as part of an article. A table format is a table. I wasn't aware of that until I went through various reviews a few times. It's not required unless you end up at one of the reviews, but why not use the standard from the get-go. — Maile (talk) 17:02, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
Also, reading your posting above, I think one of the things that has been confusing you is which column or row this is placed, and other colored things. The Scope rows and columns are in gray. The other columns, as far as I can tell from FLC, vary from wherever the editor deems necessary. Other than the gray color, some lists additionally gave additional columns and places where they use non-gray colors. Those have nothing to do with the !scope="row" and !scope="col". As near as I've been able to figure out at FLC, editors are adding those for making the table more attractive. — Maile (talk) 17:20, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

History in memoriam

Hi all. I just stopped by to share a bit of history of this Wikiproject, remembering its founder, User:Ed. Reportedly he was a 14 year old, passionate with Wikipedia. He had cancer in 2007, I don't know if he still lives. But his memory lives on. Regards, Thinker78 (talk) 05:50, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Input request

Comments appreciated at Talk:List of plays adapted into feature films#‎Need for article split 4meter4 (talk) 19:36, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

WikiProject list discussion

There is a discussion at the WP:FRAT talk page about list creation/inclusion which could use outside input. Please join in the conversation here. Primefac (talk) 10:45, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Stuck on sorting

What obvious trick am I missing at List of UK Open Billiards Championship winners? When reverse-sorting by date, the 1988 and 1997 dates, which have a month as well as a year, unlike other entries, aren't properly ordered. Thanks! Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:48, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

It looks like it might be a known issue. See here. I tried to fix it, but this apparently goes beyond my current capabilities. DonIago (talk) 13:44, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Deprecated language in citations in UK honours lists

There is a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Orders, Decorations, and Medals/Archive 7#Deprecated language in citations for UK honours about whether citations should be updated to today's language, eg changing the 1980 "For service to the disabled." to "For service to disabled people." Members of this Wikiproject may have a view: please comment there. PamD 17:10, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

List of Survivor (American TV series) winners nominated for deletion

I nominated List of Survivor (American TV series) winners for deletion. Your input there is welcome. George Ho (talk) 23:48, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

List of Drag Race lip syncs

AfD participation welcome:

---Another Believer (Talk) 14:43, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

AfD: List of dirt track ovals in the United States (x 5)

Deletion discussion going on at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of dirt track ovals in the United States. Includes the 4 additional associated lists for UK, South Africa, Canada and Australia. Grorp (talk) 22:40, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

List of official languages and List of official languages by country and territory

This is a preliminary question, because I don't know what kind of solution to propose, and how to do it.

Unfortunately as often happens with merger and split proposals, nobody commented, so the issues remained. I could just nominate it for deletion to make sure people will see it, comment on it and a decision will be taken, but WP:DINC says I shouldn't.

As this WikiProject Lists, you are the lists experts. What should I do in this case? And which venue should I choose where people will actually comment on it and eventually a solution will be found? I'd appreciate your tips and advice! Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 12:40, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

The two main lists for a merger are:

Some extra lists or list sections to take into consideration for a mass merger:

Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 23:23, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

More articles that usually have a different subject than 'official languages', but in fact make lots of (usually WP:UNSOURCED) claims about what the 'official language' of this or that country or territory is:

Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 13:57, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

@Austronesier @Walt Yoder Could you please give me advice? Both of you have expressed an interest in merging some of these lists. What should we do with this whole situation? Nobody responded to Linshee's November 2021 proposal, nobody is responding here, and nobody is responding at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Languages#Official languages lists WP:REDUNDANTFORKs either. I don't know where to start, or how to get people's attention without nominating certain articles for deletion, but WP:Deletion is not cleanup. The only reason why I know you might be interested in solving this issue is because you both responded at the AfDs of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of languages by the number of countries in which they are recognized as an official language and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of largest languages without official status. I don't want to have to nominate this all for deletion, and upset a lot of people, when we could look at more constructive ways of better organising all this overlapping (but poorly-sourced and original research-ridden) material. If you've got any tips, please say so. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 08:39, 3 June 2023 (UTC)
Languages of the African Union has been Deleted; turned into a redirect to African Union.
@Buidhe: Hi, you also expressed an interest in merging some of these lists. What do you think we should do with this overall situation? Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 14:38, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
@Reywas92: Hi, for you the same question? Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 15:28, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
@Dronebogus: Hi, for you the same question? Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 07:03, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
  • (#23?) Medium of instruction#In different countries and regions – unintentionally, I appear to have run into yet another official languages list. Not sure if this should be included in our considerations, but the article is largely a list, large parts of it are WP:UNSOURCED/WP:SYNTHed, and it mentions the word 'official' 11 times – including in the second and third sentence: [A medium of instruction] may or may not be the official language of the country or territory. If the first language of students is different from the official language, it may be used as the medium of instruction for part or all of schooling. This implies lots of things, such as that whenever the first language of students is different from the official language, this first language is therefore not 'official' in any way, but usually these are legally recognised/protected minority/regional languages. This once again highlights the issue of whether legally recognised/protected minority/regional languages should be counted as 'official' or not. So I guess we should take this 23rd list on board. Although this list definitely should remain its own stand-alone article, it may be taken into consideration to establish WP:LISTCRITERIA, and what counts as an "official language" or not. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 07:55, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

Possible RfC

Main page: Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment § Official languages lists

I'm beginning to think I should make this an RfC, because nobody bothers to comment on this, or at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Languages#Official languages lists WP:REDUNDANTFORKs, or at Linshe's talk page proposal of 2019. No matter how many people I tag, ping, or point here, I get almost zero response. People only comment on AfDs, but WP:Deletion is not cleanup. I think short of a mass nomination of all remaining "official languages" lists for deletion, an RfC is my only option to establish a centralised discussion to address the overall structural problems of highly duplicative but mostly WP:UNSOURCED "official languages" lists. Otherwise people will just not respond. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 07:13, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

Lots of people at AfDs suggest a merger of list Foo into list Bar, but fail to see the far larger problem that we've still got about 20 lists with essentially the same scope. I know no other option than an RfC now. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 07:16, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
4 out of the 22 lists have now been deleted because I raised all these issues in them. I don't think it's controversial to say anymore that I may be on to something here. It's just a bit disappointing to see nobody else interested in the bigger picture, but only in the AfDs. WP:Deletion is not cleanup, but short of an RfC, I see no other option. Merge proposals require specific targets, have no deadlines and can easily result in no consensus; for the remaining 18 lists it is not doable to go for a merge proposal when I don't even know what the best result is gonna look like. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 23:23, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
At Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment#Official languages lists, I've asked advice for setting up an RfC to resolve all these issues through a centralised discussion. As I said there, I don't think they [the remaining 18 official languages lists] should all be deleted or merged, but I also don't have all the answers to what we should be doing instead.
I've also just numbered the 22 lists to make identification and sorting easier. Lists #6, #10, #16 and #22 have so far been deleted after I nominated them at AfD, so 18 lists remain. List #7 is still in AfD. Cheers, Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 07:33, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
List #7 was Merged. 17 lists remain. There has been some progress at the RfC preparation, but it's currently quiet. More input would be appreciated. Nederlandse Leeuw (talk) 19:50, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

AfD: List of Criterion Collection releases

Deletion discussion going on at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Criterion Collection releases (2nd nomination). Might be of interest to this WikiProject editors. Jovian Eclipse 17:10, 4 June 2023 (UTC)

Apparently this noteworthy and useful reference was summarily deleted recently. As an obvious oversight, it should be restored for notability and usefulness reasons. ntnon (talk) 19:39, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Deletion review is over thataway. I recommend reviewing the arguments raised in the AfD first. DonIago (talk) 19:52, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:List of Lockheed C-130 Hercules operators § Flag icons in section headings

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of Lockheed C-130 Hercules operators § Flag icons in section headings. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:46, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

List of rulers of Provence has an RFC

List of rulers of Provence has an RFC for possible consensus. A discussion is taking place. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 19:19, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

AfD: List of dive bars

AfD: List of dive bars ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:22, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

Discussion at My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic discography

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic discography#Couldn't the list be smartphone-friendly?, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. The discussion encompasses both the My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic discography and My Little Pony: Equestria Girls discography articles. JSH-alive/talk/cont/mail 14:42, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

Feedback request on List of fictional non-binary characters

Your feedback on a discussion, about whether 19 characters in animation, comics/manga, live-action television, video games, webcomics, and other mediums should be included on the list of fictional non-binary characters, would be appreciated at Talk:List of fictional non-binary characters#Removal of entries. Thanks! Historyday01 (talk) 13:22, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Issue with project banner

The project banner {{WikiProject Lists}} doesn't inherit the class atribute from the banner shell when placed within one. I think this should be fixed. – Editør (talk) 17:04, 10 October 2023 (UTC)

Problems with List of Wainwrights

This large list compiled from an external database by a now-inactive editor needs attention. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject_Lancashire and Cumbria#Problems with List of Wainwrights if you are interested. Thanks in advance for any help! PamD 21:36, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Table vs. bulleted list

Recently, I have been in a discussion about when to use a table vs. a bulleted list for Lists of notable alumni. In WP Fraternities and Sororities, we have a preference for tables for both chapters and alumni lists because of the sorting feature. Apparently, WP:UNI has not adopted this preference, although all of the FL university alumni articles are in table format. Discussion issues include that some lists are too short for a table and/or that not all of the cells for class year and major have content and, therefore, the table's sorting featue has limited benefit. And, there also seems to be an issue of personal preference. Has anyone ever considered a guideline for how long a list should be for a table of more specifics on when to use a table vs. a bulleted list?. MOS is not very helpful in the regard; in fact, it ischallenging to change from one style to the other because of current wording and guidelines. Rublamb (talk) 23:39, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi! I've got an idea, but it might turn into a big project, and I'm a newbie

Talk:Plant breeding#Should we have a separate article for "List of notable plant breeders" --? 

In reference to the "List of notable plant breeders" section of the "Plant Breeding" article, this is a cool section. It's got great encyclopedic merit, and I'm happy that it's here in this article. I got here by meandering through mainspace links, from Ed Currie's article, and thought "Wow, what a coincidence! I should add Ed Currie, notable plant breeder, to this list of notable plant breeders. Easy good edit."

... And now I've opened a can of worms. See, I'm certain that this subsection of Plant Breeding which lists a handful of notable plant breeders, is a good and encyclopedic subsection. But the list itself could prooooobably get much bigger, if I actually went and filled it up with plant breeders who already have wikipedia articles. But then we'd run into the whole thing of, like, should this be a subsection of plant breeding or a whole separate list? Anyhow, I see this turning into a medium-sized task, and I figured I'd ask for community consensus before haring off on some deranged meta-project.

Should I;

  • expand this subsection until it's big enough to merit its own list-type article
  • Not do that, but still do something else
  • Leave the poor botanists alone

I have no real experience with article creation, and I haven't gone through the AfC process for my first article yet, so I'd love some help with this idea, if it has any merit. 

 Atomic putty? Rien!  13:45, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
Update: wait, isn't there already a List of botanists? Ach, I'm getting a headache.. Atomic putty? Rien! 13:50, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
I have added Ed Currie to this list as well. I feel like a child wandering around in a big, dusty library. Atomic putty? Rien! 14:07, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
If you are looking for a project, the list of botanists is rather dull and in need of TLC. Ideally, a Wikipedia article isn't just a list of names. But something that informs the reader. If you want a fun project, you can make the list of Botanists look more like the List of people from Park Ridge, Illinois. I've spent a lot of time working on lists of notable people and this one is some of my better work. Dkriegls (talk to me!) 01:35, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:List of urban-type settlements in Ukraine#Requested move 27 October 2023

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:List of urban-type settlements in Ukraine#Requested move 27 October 2023 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Polyamorph (talk) 07:37, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

List of minor planets: 624001–625000 nominated for deletion

@ Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of minor planets: 624001–625000, the scope of which affects many of these list pages.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  11:01, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

& @ Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meanings of minor planet names: 623001–624000.   ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf)  23:51, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Double soft redirect

Template:Double soft redirect has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. -- 65.92.247.90 (talk) 04:53, 15 December 2023 (UTC)

Featured list removal nomination

I have nominated List of colonial governors of New Jersey for featured list removal. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Hog Farm Talk 19:16, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Second-round RfC on titles of TV season articles

 – Pointer to relevant discussion elsewhere.

Please see Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television)#Follow-up RfC on TV season article titles.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  21:54, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

List_of_multiple_discoveries, Bold_format

Editorial input is sought at Talk:List_of_multiple_discoveries#Bold_format regarding the use of bold format in the article. Mitch Ames (talk) 00:33, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

RFC involving list articles similar to disambiguation pages

Please see Wikipedia talk:Content assessment#Request for comment. older ≠ wiser 16:34, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:List of EastEnders characters (1985)#Requested move 5 January 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:List of EastEnders characters (1985)#Requested move 5 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:37, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:List of synagogue shootings#Requested move 8 January 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:List of synagogue shootings#Requested move 8 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:48, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Should Template:Dynamic list be used in sections that also have Template:Main?

I recently noticed this section, which lists alumni of a college on the college's page and also links out to a list article with a more comprehensive list. The section (as well as the list article, of course) uses {{Dynamic list}} in addition to {{Main}}. This isn't a situation that's been discussed before, to my knowledge, so I'd like to form some consensus about best practice (which we can then add to {{Dynamic list}}'s documentation).

Personally, I'm leaning toward the view that we should not include {{Dynamic list}} in such sections. My reasoning:

  • The existence of a separate main article already implies to the reader that the list in the section is incomplete, making the dynamic list notice somewhat redundant.
  • The notice will still be present at the list article, so readers invested in the topic (who will likely click through) will still have a chance to see it.
  • Such sections already have the {{Main}} hatnote, so having {{Dynamic list}} as well means two hatnotes at the start of the section, which risks cluttering.
  • Since such sections are normally more tightly curated versions of the expanded list, the invitation You can help by adding missing items is less likely to solicit useful contributions and more likely to solicit undue bloat.

I'm curious, what do others think? I'll send invites to relevant pages. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:26, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

It surely should not have both hatnotes, just {{Main}}, and should not also have a redundant third hatnote, {{Main category}}, which is only for "cases where an article section lacks a matching subtopic article but has a relevant and useful matching category". The {{Dynamic list}} belongs at the corresponding section of List of Scripps College people. If that section is being selectively transcluded into Scripps College, the unneeded hatnote can be suppressed there by putting <noinclude> around it.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  00:37, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
In principle, I don't object to both being used in some articles, but I don't like it in that particular section. I was happy with what I did at Grinnell College#Notable alumni, which provides a little bit of summary information about alumni, before naming anyone in particular. WhatamIdoing (talk) 07:29, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:List of natural satellites#Requested move 9 January 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:List of natural satellites#Requested move 9 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 18:10, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

List of Carolina Panthers seasons at WP:FLRC

I have nominated List of Carolina Panthers seasons for featured list removal. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 17:08, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

List of Los Angeles Rams head coaches at [{WP:FLRC]]

I have nominated List of Los Angeles Rams head coaches for featured list removal. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @ 14:34, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Splitting discussion for List of fake news websites

An article related to this WikiProject (List of fake news websites: 645kb) has content that is proposed to be removed and moved to six other articles. If you are interested, please visit the discussion. Thank you. Mathglot (talk) 01:12, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Divide long wikitable? List of quilombola communities in Brazil

Greetings, Viewing this list today, the entire list is one wikitable. Can it be divided into seperate wikitables for each region? Also can the column titles be in English? Asking for help here as my wikitable skills are not so great. I can manage small tables, but this list would be a challenge. Regards, JoeNMLC (talk) 18:40, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:List of association football players who died during their careers#Requested move 3 January 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:List of association football players who died during their careers#Requested move 3 January 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Reading Beans 06:34, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Merger discussion at Talk:List of Irish Americans#Merger discussion

There is a merger discussion at Talk:List of Irish Americans#Merger discussion that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 16:29, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:List of newspapers in the United States#Requested move 1 February 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:List of newspapers in the United States#Requested move 1 February 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 22:31, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football § List of footballers who achieved hat-trick records and women

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football § List of footballers who achieved hat-trick records and women. Kingsif (talk) 00:31, 9 February 2024 (UTC) – Request at the discussion for broader input and for the discussion to also ask if there should be a universal standard. As it is about a list, notifying here; list scope/function-based reasoning is of course welcome.

Wikidata for list improvement

Thought this might be useful to share .... I've recently identified an appropriate query for improving lists of people sharing a surname. This has been applied to Johnston (surname) and is being applied to Ferguson (name) (the surname section). The Ferguson-related query is below and I've identified a good transformation (utilizing a spreadsheet app) to create draft line items that about 50% of the time needs some revision before publication.

The 'ferguson' wikidata query is... 

#People sharing the surname Ferguson
#retrieving wikipedia article
#ordered by article link
SELECT ?person ?article ?DOB ?DOD ?DESC
WHERE
{
  ?person wdt:P31 wd:Q5 .   # human
  ?person wdt:P734 wd:Q2694490 .
  ?article schema:about ?person . 
  ?article schema:isPartOf <https://en.wikipedia.org/>.
  OPTIONAL {?person wdt:P569 ?DOB }
  OPTIONAL {?person wdt:P570 ?DOD }
  OPTIONAL {?person schema:description ?DESC}
  FILTER(LANG(?DESC) = "en")
}
ORDER BY ?article

The transformations are illustrated in an .ODS file on my personal Microsoft OneDrive >> https://1drv.ms/x/s!AlRFRiLY5w0ehAxPBh0YVZEWGswI?e=dnZuqq (view only). I can abstract the transformation information, but think that building a diagram would be better than a narrative and don't have time to do so at present.

Regards --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 04:02, 12 February 2024 (UTC)

Discussion at List of wealthiest animals

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of wealthiest animals#Disputed worth, which is within the scope of this WikiProject. Spinixster (chat!) 06:24, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Featured lists marked as List-Class

I've noticed that there are a number of talk pages - currently 320 - that are in a subcategory of Category:FL-Class articles, indicating that they have been assessed as featured lists, but which contain class=List (rather than class=FL) in their use of the WikiProject Lists template. This results in them being sorted into Category:List-Class List articles, rather than Category:FL-Class List articles.

I'm planning to fix all of these so that the featured lists currently in the former category are sorted into the latter category instead - however, as {{WikiProject Lists}} belongs to Category:WikiProjects using a non-standard quality scale, and given the number of pages involved, I thought I should check in with this project before doing so.

Let me know if you have any queries and/or objections to this idea. All the best, ‍—‍a smart kitten[meow] 00:51, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

 Done NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 03:45, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
@NmWTfs85lXusaybq: thank you, I appreciate you doing the work, but (by way of explanation) I was planning to wait to see if there was any objection from any members of the WikiProject before taking the action. All the best, ‍—‍a smart kitten[meow] 03:52, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

These guidelines

Was this written by a bunch of lawyers? These guidelines are torturous to read and circle around and really don't help. Is there some legit reason they are not written in direct and clear English? 136.36.180.215 (talk) 15:20, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

I think if you're hoping for the guidelines to be changed it would be helpful to provide examples that illustrate your concerns and suggestions for how they might be improved. In my experience, vague complaints that aren't accompanied by suggestions for improvement tend to be overlooked. Cheers. DonIago (talk) 18:56, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Requested move at Talk:List of Balliol College, Oxford people#Requested move 4 March 2024

There is a requested move discussion at Talk:List of Balliol College, Oxford people#Requested move 4 March 2024 that may be of interest to members of this WikiProject. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 11:48, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Lists/Archive_16&oldid=1222060371"