Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5/Society/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Board (tabletop) game changes

Game section is currently under quota at Games (355/365 articles). As a board game fan, I feel that that section is very heavily skewed towards old/classic games that outside a few (chess, go, poker, etc.) are almost forgotten and have dubious vital significance. On the other hand, we list only a single pen-and-paper RPG (Dungeons & Dragons), and only three eurogames. The concept of Amerigame, which is effectively the other half of the modern board game scence (eurogames being the other half) is not even vital (classic Amerigame example would be Monopoly). Disclaimer: I will shortly notity Wikipedia:WikiProject Board games of this discussion, I hope nobody minds? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Add Amerigame

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.

---

Concept, not a game. Crucial concept. Per above. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Support--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 08:10, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Support per nom. --Grnrchst (talk) 10:54, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
4. Support per nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 11:24, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
5. pbp 22:23, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
6. Support per nom. J947 † ^edits 07:25, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. I don't think classification systems are that significant for board games - they generally stand or fall on their own. SnowFire (talk) 07:27, 20 November 2023 (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 Cooperative board 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.

---

An important subgenra of board games. We either compete or cooprate. Note that Cooperative game is a disambig, and Cooperative video game is not a vital entry yet - I think coop stuff is not as big in video games as it is in board games. Perhaps once we have a proper article about coop games (board+videos) it could be swaped in. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Support--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 08:10, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Support per nom. --Grnrchst (talk) 10:54, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
4. Support per nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 11:26, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
5. pbp 22:23, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
6. Support. J947 † ^edits 07:26, 6 November 2023 (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 Adventure board 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.

---

Another classic board game genre. (For some reason we just list Race game) in our list. Classic example: Talisman (board game). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Support per nom. --Grnrchst (talk) 10:54, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
3. pbp 22:23, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose: I don't want the games to be overshadowed by the number of genres listed. We've only got space for ~50 board game articles and this looks like it's past the line. J947 † ^edits 07:32, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Per J947. I don't think genre is very significant for board games - they generally stand or fall on their own. SnowFire (talk) 07:27, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
3. No interwikis, short article, which mentions often integrate various Role-playing game  5 mechanics. starship.paint (RUN) 12:33, 11 December 2023 (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 Tabletop role-playing 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.

---

We currently list generic role-playing game, parent to both digital and non-digital games. Video games get also Massively multiplayer online role-playing game, Action role-playing game and Role-playing video game and even History of Eastern role-playing video games plus History of Western role-playing video games (which might merit removal considerations for being too detailed to be vital?). Pen and paper games don't get... anything outside DnD being listed. Sigh. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Support--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 08:10, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Support per nom. --Grnrchst (talk) 10:54, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
4. Support per nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 11:26, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
5. Support per nom. --Totalibe (talk) 19:25, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
6. pbp 22:23, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
7. Support –J947 † ^edits 08:44, 6 November 2023 (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 Live action role-playing 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.

---

A bit veering off from the topic, LARPs are a big hobby and a third dimension to RPGs, outside pen-and-paper and digital. Surely they can be mentioned here. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Support--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 08:10, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Support per nom. --Grnrchst (talk) 10:54, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
4. Support per nom. --Totalibe (talk) 19:25, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
5. pbp 22:23, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
6. J947 † ^edits 08:45, 6 November 2023 (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 Miniature wargaming

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.

---

Major aspect of wargaming (which is V5). Games Workshop stuff like Warhammer franchise are a major hobby and a major type of games out there. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Support per nom. --Grnrchst (talk) 10:54, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Support per nom. --Totalibe (talk) 19:25, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
4. Dawid2009 (talk) 05:39, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose. In terms of popularity this one probably makes the cut but I'm not convinced that the size of the models / format of the game lends much in the way of vitality. J947 † ^edits 08:48, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

   @J947: Please read The Guardian on How Games Workshop grew to become more profitable than Google... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:04, 6 November 2023 (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 Social deduction 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.

---

Not a great article, but a major common type of "light/party" games (party game is V5). Ultimate Werewolf, Love Letter, Bang!, Coup, The Resistance. If you playd some modern board games in the recent memory you probably played this type of game. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Support--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 08:10, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Support per nom. --Grnrchst (talk) 10:54, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
4. Support per nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 11:28, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
5. Support per nom. --Totalibe (talk) 19:25, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
6. pbp 22:23, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
7. Support, covers relatively small ground compared to many of these proposals but IMO its specific strategy makes it fairly important. Not sure why Not a great article matters here – one primary goal of VA is to encourage improvement of these articles if they're not up to scratch. J947 † ^edits 08:50, 6 November 2023 (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 Turn-based strategy

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 vital element of board game and also video games and even card games and arguably most games. We list similar concepts for games (Playing card, Boss (game), game balance, etc.). For anyone wondering, we don't seem to have an article on the concept of turns in game, just Timekeeping in games (not vital - maybe it should be?). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Support per nom. --Grnrchst (talk) 10:54, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Support per nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 11:27, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
4. Support per nom. --Totalibe (talk) 19:25, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
5. pbp 15:13, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Switched to oppose now. Gameplay mechanisms of board games ≠ vitality. J947 † ^edits 00:30, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Would it help if I pointed out this is key concept for video games too? And card. And arguably even social games, kid games, etc. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:06, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Discuss

Neutral – so ubiquitous and basic that it isn't as vital. J947 † ^edits 08:52, 6 November 2023 (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 Paper-and-pencil 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.

---

Tentatively think this one passes the line for general game type.

Support

1. Support as nom. J947 † ^edits 09:14, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Specific pencil-and-paper games (why is the order reversed? Weird), maybe, but I don't think the group as a whole is particularly interesting any more than "games involving dice." SnowFire (talk) 07:27, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Discuss

• Thinking. And noticing that Hangman (game) nor Connect Four are vital. Hmmm. Hangman is a arguably a modern classic...? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:31, 6 November 2023 (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 Game of the Goose

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.

---

Now for specific titles, starting with removal suggestions.

Game of the Goose's claim to significance is "It is considered the prototype of many of the commercial European racing board games of later centuries. It attained great popularity in the 16th century." but IMHO it is a board game history trivia, and this is not a vital topic - heck, we do not even have an article on history of board games (although we should). The game is effectively forgotten today.

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Per the quote in nom's rationale pbp 22:23, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Weak oppose. I'm a big fan of having historical spread in board games here. J947 † ^edits 08:55, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Oppose Historically vital, it is a predecessor to the roll-and-move type of board games --Makkool (talk) 16:33, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Discuss

This is definitely obscure currently, but still receives some coverage in RS in the past decade, e.g., 1, 2, 3, so I don't think it's entirely forgotten today. But overall I am unsure on whether this should remain vital. VickKiang (talk) 00:13, 2 November 2023 (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 Halma

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 strategy board game invented in 1883 or 1884". Completely nothing in the article suggest it was significant for anything, even the history of board games. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Chinese checkers is a variant of Halma, but that is all I could find, and something being the source of something vital does not make it vital. QuicoleJR (talk) 11:31, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Doesn't seem vital enough. SnowFire (talk) 07:27, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
4. pbp 16:10, 28 November 2023 (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 Jungle (board 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.

---

"a modern Chinese board game with an obscure history". Completely nothing in the article suggest it was significant for anything, even the history of board games. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Support --Totalibe (talk) 18:54, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Support. Interestingly, I actually played this, but it is fairly obscure in basically every country, with little information indicating its significance. This game is likely more popular in China, with some Chinese sources I can found, but it does not seem to be significant enough to justify level 5. For instance, comparing this with Chinese Checkers, which is also on level 5 and a historic Chinese game but with significantly higher popularity and available sourcing, this is much less significant. VickKiang (talk) 07:43, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
4. J947 † ^edits 08:57, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
5. SnowFire (talk) 07:27, 20 November 2023 (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 Ludus latrunculorum

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 two-player strategy board game played throughout the Roman Empire". Cool, but historical trivia, rules are not certain. No indication it was particularly influential on anything.

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Support If the rules have been forgotten then it is not particularly vital.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 08:10, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Support per nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 11:24, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
4. Support Doesn't seem to have been a game that really survived past its era of origin. --Totalibe (talk) 18:54, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
5. Weak support seems like it was fairly important but without the rules, eh. J947 † ^edits 08:59, 6 November 2023 (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 Nine men's morris

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 historical board game dating to the Roman Empire that doesn't seem particularly influential on anything. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. pbp 14:23, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

   @Purplebackpack89 Why? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 00:35, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

   @Piotrus: This is a game that's been played off and on for 2,000-3,000 years, is still sold to this day (I've received catalogues that sell it) and you're essentially arguing that it be replaced by games that, while they have contemporary acclaim, they're relatively recent pbp 03:47, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

   Yes. Perhaps we can keep it. But the fact is this game is much less popualar today than "modern" games. See BGG stats. Sure, vital list is should not be biased for modern era, but for board games I feel it is significantly biased against them at present. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:02, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

   @Piotrus: I'm sorry to say this, but considering how BGG rates checkers, I'm not sure how reliable it is as a vitality determiner, or at least one of "generic"/"classic" board games like checkers and Nine Man's Morris. It seems to be more geared toward comparing modern games to each other. pbp 04:09, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

   @Purplebackpack89 Fair. AFAIK, BGG is used by modern gamers, not hobbyists of classics, and this is reflected in the ranks there. Good children games popular with children will also have poor score there. Still, I do not know better data. Use with caution, yes, but it is a datapoint. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:35, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

2. Oppose Unlike ludus latrunculorum, this has continued to endure since the times of ancient Rome, evidence of strong staying power. --Totalibe (talk) 18:54, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Oppose. Dawid2009 has mentioned it a lot as a potential VA4 entry. J947 † ^edits 09:05, 6 November 2023 (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 Hex (board 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.

---

A modern (20th century) game that is however "not special" as far as I can tell. Mostly forgotten and not played today. Current BGG ranking is ~4,000 (~200 in abstract category): [1]. Just niche history of board games trivia.

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Per nominator's comment. SnowFire (talk) 07:27, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
3. If this is different than the concept of a hex map I will support removal pbp 16:13, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Weak oppose: seems to be both fairly popular and mathematically important. J947 † ^edits 00:36, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

   @J947 Please elaborate on "fairly popular"? I cited BGG rankings which are pretty low. This is not a popular game AFAIK. @VickKiang for 3O. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:27, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

   It's well-viewed and has tournaments played globally. J947 † ^edits 01:30, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

   @J947 Hmmm. In all of these regards it seems pretty average comparing to the other games I listed here as suggestions for additions (which arguably means that my suggestions may be meh but having this in is pure randomness). Page views give it a mediocre rank of #299 Wikipedia:WikiProject Board and table games/Popular pages (comparable to #305 for Twilight Empire; for other suggestions here - Gloomhaven is #258; Terraforming Mars #477; Arkham Horror #376; Talisman #350, Pandemic #268 and Twilight Struggle #512). The Competition section for the game is unreferenfed and seems comparable to other games (here are some international competition events for TMars [2], [3], [4]; a tournament for Twilight Imperium got covered by Polygon [5], others). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:31, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

   Yeah so given that Hex seems to stand alone even today among these games, when its influence is in the past, gives it the edge. I'm umming and ahhing over this one – and I'm trying to avoid relying on pageviews – but that its pageviews stand up to modern games is a testament to its importance. J947 ‡ ^edits 10:56, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Discuss

Isn't the concept of hex-based board games notable at this level? pbp 22:23, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@Purplebackpack89 You mean Hex map. I'd support adding the concept to vital concepts in gaming, unmlike this old forgotten game. To quote User:QuicoleJR from a bit above: "something being the source of something vital does not make it vital" _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 00:37, 2 November 2023 (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 Alquerque

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 strategy board game that is thought to have originated in the Middle East". Nothing in this short article suggests it was significant even for the history of board games. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Per nominator's comment. SnowFire (talk) 07:27, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
3. J947 † ^edits 00:39, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
4. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 12:35, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

Discuss

1. "It is considered to be the parent of draughts (US: checkers)" is nothing significant? Lorax (talk) 04:21, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

   Fair, but is this enough to make it vital, or is it just history trivia? Nothing in the article suggests the former. Parents of vital topics (people, whatever) are not always or even often vital... _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:51, 13 November 2023 (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 Agon (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.

---

19th century strategy game whose claim to fame is that "it is notable for being the oldest known board game played on a board of hexagonal cells". Other than that nothing in the article suggests it is important or significant in anyway, and it is of course forgotten today. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Support--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 08:10, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Support per nom. J947 † ^edits 09:06, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
4. Per nom. SnowFire (talk) 07:27, 20 November 2023 (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 Ludo

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 variant of Pachisi. Although old, nothing suggests it was particularly influential, or popular, similar to the Roman Empire era board games I discuss above. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Speaking anecdotally but this is the only variant of Pachishi I recall hearing about, being popular or playing while growing up (in the UK). --Totalibe (talk) 19:25, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

   As an addition, I will also point out this article: Ludo King, a mobile app based on Ludo, that was developed in and became popular in India, where Pachisi originated. We have evidence of Ludo, the derivation, bouncing back to India and itself becoming popular there. --Totalibe (talk) 18:54, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

2. pbp 22:23, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Oppose, very popular. Would rather remove Cluedo than Ludo. That sort of level of popularity AFAIK. J947 † ^edits 09:08, 6 November 2023 (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 Twilight Struggle

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.

---

Now for the additions. Per article (see reception and awards), arguably one of the most important modern board games. Aproaching 20 years of history, based on the reception section and backed up by my familiarity with the modern board game scence, it is still considered one of the best if not the best 2-player modern board game. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Was #1 on BGG for a long time. (Bias alert + excuse for a humble brag: I took a very deep run into a major TS tournament back in the day against the best players, so obviously partial here.) SnowFire (talk) 07:27, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Weak oppose – insufficient space at this level. J947 † ^edits 00:47, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Per J pbp 16:19, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
3. We have hit the quota for board games. Need a swap. starship.paint (RUN) 13:06, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
4. Seems significant (and popular in niche hobbyist board game circles) but not vital. --Makkool (talk) 16:44, 14 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.

Add Twilight Imperium

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 admit, the article doesn't really say it that special, but we judge the merit of vital inclusion on more than our article. As far as I know this is the modern classic (1997) 4X lenghty, multiplayer American-style game. BGG for the newest edition lists it as "RANK: OVERALL 5 THEMATIC 3 STRATEGY 5" [6] --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Support tenatively Dawid2009 (talk) 21:36, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Weak oppose – doesn't really reach the same standard as the others listed. J947 † ^edits 01:03, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Per J pbp 16:19, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
3. We have hit the quota for board games. Need a swap. starship.paint (RUN) 13:07, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
4. Seems significant but not vital. I would prefer to list a more historically relevant game like Cosmic Encounter (it's an earlier example of a "variable player powers" board game) --Makkool (talk) 16:42, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Discuss

Explain to me why this or the other Twilight game are more significant than something like Nine Man's Morris that is millennia old. Do we ONLY look at contemporary acclaim and sales and disregard everything else? pbp 03:53, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Balance is needed. Hard to achieve in video games, where we have a ton of entries from the last decade even. But it feels grossly unblanced when 90% of board games we mention are historical things that nobody knows except historians, and then one looks at video games, where have as I said several dozens of games from the last decade or so. If we were to chart dates of introduction if vital board games, video games, and maybe tv shows and other media, I think the scope of the problem would become clear. Or in other words. Modern board game hobby is arguably as vital as history of board games, and it is weird that one of those topics takes 90% of the entries in that section. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:58, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

@Piotrus: In regards to the "but video games..." line of thinking, two major things here:

1. I don't have a lot of faith in the way VA5 space is allocated to video games. I think there's too many overall and too many recent ones
2. I think it's a mistake to organize board games (a thousand of years history) the same way as video games (a 51-year-history). pbp 15:16, 3 November 2023 (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 Pandemic (board 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.

---

Another crucial modern classic board game (from 2008), Pandemic (re)defined and popularized the concept of coop board games. See Acclaim and reception and Awards section. Its "Season 1" stand-alone variant (2015) has been in Top 5 of BGG listings, right now #2. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Per nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 11:23, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Dawid2009 (talk) 05:40, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
4. Per nom. Probably more important than the article on co-op board games, honestly. SnowFire (talk) 07:27, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
5. Per nom, amongst the most notable modern board games. We have only three entries along that line (Catan, Ticket to Ride (board game), and Carcassonne (board game); Pandemic is equally prominent and has been covered in various books and used in studies (see Google Scholar). VickKiang (talk) 01:15, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. I think we should have one and one only co-op board game article on this list. Willing to defer to others as to which one that should be, but I've already put a support down for the general article above so ¯\_(ツ)_/¯. J947 † ^edits 01:02, 23 November 2023 (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 Talisman (board 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.

---

Classic and famous adventure-style game from 1983, still played today. Decent article, see reviews, reception, legacy, awards section. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Skeptical here. Wasn't really THAT influential? SnowFire (talk) 07:27, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

   @SnowFire Subjective experience, perhaps; it was very influential in Poland. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:34, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

2. Weak oppose – insufficient space at this level. J947 † ^edits 00:49, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Per SnowFire and J pbp 16:19, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Discuss

Woah, woah, woah...we consider something from 1983 "classic", but we're deleting games that are thousands of years old? pbp 04:03, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

We don't have to delete stuff if you don't want to. But being thousands of years old is not always vital. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:46, 3 November 2023 (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 Arkham Horror

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.

---

Classic and still popular coop game (1987), still enduring through a bunch of spinoofs (Arkham Horror: The Card Game and Mansions of Madness). A bit obscured by its spinoffs, it is now in ~400 BGG ranking, but the two linked spin-offs are in Top 100 ([7]). I am suggesting it for inclusion as it and its franchise are good mix of influential classics + modern games still played. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose – insufficient space at this level. J947 † ^edits 00:50, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Per J pbp 16:19, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
3. per J. starship.paint (RUN) 12:50, 11 December 2023 (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 Gloomhaven

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.

---

2017 adventure game that has almost contantly, since its release, been in Top 1 of BGG best board game rating. See Release and reception and Awards sections in the article. BGG page [8], currently ranks are RANK: OVERALL 3 THEMATIC 2 STRATEGY 3. Effectively "best board game" of the last decade, or close. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Not necessarily permanently opposed to this one but six years is little time to establish lasting influence. J947 † ^edits 00:51, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Per J pbp 16:19, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
3. We've hit the quota for board games. Need a swap. starship.paint (RUN) 13:08, 11 December 2023 (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 Terraforming Mars (board 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.

---

And here, arguably best or non-aguably one of the best eurogames of that period (2016 vintage). Steady in BGG Top 5 since its release, now at #6 (everything slowly drops as new stuff comes out, just like with video games). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Per nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 11:34, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Dawid2009 (talk) 05:40, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Looks solidly VA6 to me. It doesn't look to my non-expert eye to be one of the 40 most vital board games of all time. J947 † ^edits 00:54, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
2. We've hit the quota for board games. Need a swap. starship.paint (RUN) 13:13, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
3. Too recent IMHO --Makkool (talk) 16:38, 14 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.

Add Shadowrun

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 noted, we list only once specific pen-and-paper RPG, which is ridclous (ping User:BOZ who may suggest a few more...? GURPS, Call of Cthulhu would be my suggestions for two more additions). We need several more. I'd start with Shadowrun, which would balance fantasy D&D with sci-fi setting. It has been in print since 1989, has 100+ books (game books, dozens of fiction novels), some digital and board game tie-ins, etc. It won many awards, has been translated, etc. See article (reception, reviews, awards...). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:21, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Support--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 08:10, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Support --Totalibe (talk) 18:54, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
4. Dawid2009 (talk) 05:41, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
5. Per nom. SnowFire (talk) 07:27, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
6. J947 † ^edits 00:55, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

Discuss

Thanks for the courtesy ping. :) I'm not going to vote in any of these, because I'm not sure that I can be unbiased, and also because the criteria may be beyond my grasp. That said, if you want some RPGs to consider, GURPS and CoC as you said should be two of them, and I would add to that list the following for consideration: Champions (role-playing game), Cyberpunk (role-playing game), RuneQuest, Traveller (role-playing game), and Vampire: The Masquerade. For something RPG-adjacent, I would also suggest looking into Battletech and/or Warhammer, and of course for CCGs I would suggest Magic: The Gathering if it's not already included. BOZ (talk) 04:40, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@BOZ Thanks. Some if not all of those certainly need voting on, although I admit I have never heard of Champions. MtG is included. BattleTech and Warhammer (game) are not, and both are easy candidates IMHO, much more influential than probalby half the video games we have. Sigh. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:37, 1 November 2023 (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 Warhammer (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.

---

The 1983 tabletop miniature wargame that made this hobby into the big thing it is today, spawning a ton of spin-offs including the science fiction Warhammer 40,000 one, a popular RPG (Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay), many video games and more than 150 novels. While technically it has been succeeded by Warhammer Age of Sigmar, it has left a major mark on the tabletop gaming scene and is still widely played. Granted, our article is meh and does not discuss reception/significance of this, but here's a random recent news piece: The Guardian on How Games Workshop grew to become more profitable than Google (Games Workshop is the company that owns Warhammer franchise). To not have any Warhammer item in our Vital list is a clear oversight, and I think the game that started it all is an obvious fix for that.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:04, 1 November 2023 (UTC) PS. See also data in #Wikipedia:WikiProject_Board_and_table_games/Popular_pages, which TL;DR shows several Warhammer-related entries in Top 100, and one, WH40K, in Top 10. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:28, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:04, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Support --Totalibe (talk) 18:54, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Dawid2009 (talk) 05:41, 4 November 2023 (UTC) and the fiction too

Oppose

1. Maybe Warhammer 40K, but OG Warhammer kinda lives in 40K's shadow to my knowledge. SnowFire (talk) 07:27, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
2. To not have any Warhammer at this level is glaring, but surely wouldn't Warhammer 40,000 be the better add to make? J947 † ^edits 00:59, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

   Though I'm not totally opposed to having both as pageviews would seem to indicate. J947 † ^edits 01:05, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

3. Warhammer 40,000  5 has been added and we've now hit the quota for tabletop games. starship.paint (RUN) 13:15, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Discuss

• @Piotrus, Totalibe, Dawid2009, SnowFire, and J947: - I recently closed a discussion adding WH40K to Level 5. starship.paint (RUN) 16:27, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

  @Starship.paint The odds are this will not pass, but the last vote was 16 days ago. What's the treshold for archiving due to inactivity and not enough votes? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:22, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

  @Piotrus: - it's passing at the moment. The old threshold, 55%, still applies for discussions started before the closure implementing the new rule. I just wanted to check if the support votes wanted to reconsider given the new development (WH40K addition) starship.paint (RUN) 03:24, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

  Speaking for myself, I still think that this is more vital than Zelda (which has 4-5 entries IIRC a relevant discussion here...). Sure, I know, otherstuffism, but for now I see no major problem with giving WH two vital spots. Although I'd prefer to see miniature wargaming pass first, so I'd support a swap too. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:57, 9 December 2023 (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 BattleTech

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 major tabletop miniature wargame with tons of spin-offs just like Warhammer (and unlike WH it even got an animated cartoon series). Very likely the franchise that popularized the concept of mecha outside Japan. Mecha is not vital, IMHO an oversight. Neither is Robotech nor Macross, sigh, but we have to start somewhere. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:04, 1 November 2023 (UTC) PS. #139 at Wikipedia:WikiProject Board and table games/Popular pages. Just below #129 Ticket to Ride (board game) which we list, and above stuff like War (card game) (#171) which we also list.

Support

1. As nom.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:04, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Not significant enough, but agree the Mecha article itself should be added. SnowFire (talk) 07:27, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
2. J947 † ^edits 01:00, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
3. pbp 16:34, 28 November 2023 (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 Call of Cthulhu (role-playing 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.

---

If DnD is the fantasy RPG and Shadowrun covers the sf example, this could be argued to be the most influential horror one, although I admit it may be tied here with Vampire: The Masquerade. I am choosing this one since VtM article says it was inspired by CoC. The only issue is that it has not really spawned a franchise, since it is effectively part of the wider (and public domain) Cthulhu franchise (Cthulhu is V5 already). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:04, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:04, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Support --Totalibe (talk) 18:54, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Dawid2009 (talk) 05:41, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
4. One disclaimer: There's been lots of Call of Cthulhu RPGs, not just Chaosium's version, but I guess this works as an overall-nod. And VtM is definitely more important than CoC, unfortunately, but there's room for both. SnowFire (talk) 07:27, 20 November 2023 (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 Cyberpunk (role-playing 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.

---

Shadowrun is a mix of sf and fantasy. Cyberpunk is arguably a year older and represents one of the most popular and still enduring pure sf settings for RPGs. A bunch of spin-offs and a minor franchise are associated with it, see also awards, reception. Perhaps the most famous recent spin-off is the Cyberpunk 2077 video game. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:04, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:04, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Support --Totalibe (talk) 18:54, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Cyberpunk wasn't that big. Kind of a surprise it got resurrected by 2077, really, but before then it was pretty minor, and I don't get the impression that it's become super-major after the game. Shadowrun is sufficient for covering cyberpunk RPGs. SnowFire (talk) 07:27, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
2. D&D and Shadowrun is probably enough for this genre pbp 16:34, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
3. We've hit the quota for board games. Need a swap. starship.paint (RUN) 13:08, 11 December 2023 (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 Traveller (role-playing 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.

---

Rounding up my proposals is this classic space opera RPG. I think this is the oldest RPG from the ones I suggested (1977) and is it still played with new editions etc. although I don't think its franchise can rival the other ones. Still, see Reception and Awards. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:04, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:04, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Dawid2009 (talk) 05:42, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Per nom. SnowFire (talk) 07:27, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. There's a very limited amount of space for RPGs. J947 ‡ ^edits 09:51, 16 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.

Add Candy Land

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.

---

According to this article, the 9th-best-selling board game of all time. pbp 04:29, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. pbp 04:29, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
2. I just spent 10 minutes arguing TP should be added first, b/c I did not notice that it was at V5 already. Sigh. Sure, I'll buy it that CL is influential, but I'd strongly suggest we also add Rummikub. Not sure what their sales data is based on, but in my subjective experience it is more popular - at least among teens+ (CL is described as a children game, Rummikub is something adults can enjoy too). Page views for Rummikub on wiki are more than double than for CL: [9]. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:07, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
3. This is reasonable as the game has garnered high amounts of sales and cultural legacy. VickKiang (talk) 08:29, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
4. Iconic. QuicoleJR (talk) 12:55, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
5. Support --Totalibe (talk) 18:54, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
6. Support -TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:32, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. J947 † ^edits 07:30, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

   Kids' games aren't typically that vital. Especially when we already list snakes and ladders and race game, an extra American example of this genre seems like overkill and I'd rather a more serious modern board game like the others proposed. Surprised this has garnered the support it has. J947 † ^edits 01:09, 23 November 2023 (UTC)

Discussion

# Good article. I am not opposed per se to adding Candy Land, but based on the same article, the 7th-best-selling board game is not vital and should presumably be added first (Trivial Pursuit) before we add the 9th (they list Backgammon at 8th and it is V4). I'd support such an addition (for TP) and the reason I do not support CL at present is b/c I do not understand why we would add it but not TP (subjective, but I think TP is more famous than CL; BGG stats for both are roughly comparable but those are a measure of critical acclaim by adults, not of popularity). Wikipedia article views give TP a daily average of 403 vs CL with 368, wich weakly but still supports my view that TP is more famous (hence, vital) than CL. The article, for what it is worth, seems to match what I know about board games (note: being popular and selling well is not the same as being a good game... some games don't age well (Monopoly is a BAD game) ... anyway, I digress :P). Rummikub (#10) is very popular in many countries and I'd support adding it too. We list some other stuff from that list (everything before #7, Othello/Reversi #12, Stratego #13, Catan #15, Risk #14). Other stuff we do not list but I do not have strong feelings about from that list is Pictionary #13, Connect Four #18, Blokus #19 and Cranium (board game) #20. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:01, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

1. I am not convinced on the website's reliability. RSN discussions are brief but the concerns here isn't great, and it says that We also relied on Wikipedia in this very article. So, the overall ranking probably isn't too off, but I would recommend taking this website with a grain of salt. VickKiang (talk) 08:29, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
2. I've never heard of it. Sounds like its legacy is very American – something to be aware of. J947 † ^edits 19:41, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

   @J947 Did you want to comment or oppose? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:29, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

   Comment. As I said, I don't know it. J947 † ^edits 05:32, 6 November 2023 (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 Rummikub

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.

---

Per discussion and sources/page views above. A game from the 1940s, so arguably a classic, still popular today. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:45, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:45, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Sure pbp 15:18, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Dawid2009 (talk) 05:42, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
4. J947 † ^edits 09:10, 6 November 2023 (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 Play money

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 article is in a rather sorry state, but I think the concept is vital enough to a wide variety of tabletop games to warrant a VA5 rating.

Support

1. pbp 15:18, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. While this is used in popular classics such as Monopoly and Game of Life (which are already vital) it is not a common element of most board games and is just one of many types of resources used in board games (Catan for example uses wood, clay, sheep, etc.). Meeple is much more common as a component (but has no article - I'll make one in the near future probably). Ditto for game piece (disambig with the relevant board game term beign a redirect to a glossary as well). Ditto for gameboard. I cannot believe we don't have articles on those key concepts. The current Play money is so poor that it might well not survive an AfD and end up being redirected to the Glossary of board games. PS. What we have articles on that I'd still consider more vital: shuffling, timekeeping in games (that concept is also relevant to videogames), tile-based game (we have no article on tile (game piece)). Probably more stuff to consider in Game mechanics (worker placement has no article...). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:18, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Not convinced this is a vital encyclopaedic topic. J947 † ^edits 01:23, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Oppose. Per Piotrus. Google Books sourcing are very limited and GS refs are mainly about the concept of play money in economics and marketing, but this article is entirely about the tabletop gaming concept, which very few RS discuss in-depth, so I am unconvinced this is a significant game concept. VickKiang (talk) 07:43, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
4. Not significant enough. SnowFire (talk) 07:27, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Discussion

For whoever cares - I've created the article on meeple. But I don't think it is vital to the world culture (vital for board games, however...). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:36, 20 November 2023 (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 Wordle

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 are going to.have any non video games from 10's and 20's then Wordle and Spiget Finner probably come first Dawid2009 (talk) 05:44, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. Nom.
2. I am not supporting a video game. I am supporting the word game in 'The New York Times. I try to play every day plus Merriam-Webster's quordle variant and Encyclopædia Britannica's octordle variant.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:35, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
3. I'd support it but for the video game category. It is a web-based game primarily. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:54, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Too recent IMO. J947 † ^edits 05:19, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Too recent, essentially a variant of already-listed Mastermind (board game).--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 10:30, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
3. I play Wordle and as much as I like the game, it is not vital. The Blue Rider 02:08, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Discuss

This is a video game. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:28, 5 November 2023 (UTC)

No it is not. Dawid2009 (talk) 05:04, 6 November 2023 (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 Makruk

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 same level of vitality what xhaturagna, shogi Janggi, Cianggi .on website playok.com daily is more popular than Shogi which is level 4 article Dawid2009 (talk) 05:43, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

• Comment. Thai chess. Good for globalizing the vital list, although I've never heard of them. Neutral for now. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:52, 6 November 2023 (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 Uno

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.

---

Classic card game Dawid2009 (talk) 05:43, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. Support-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:36, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Support due to high placement (#14) on Wikipedia:WikiProject Board and table games/Popular pages. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:37, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Support – we list several card games that this seems to eclipse. J947 † ^edits 01:15, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
4. Support Over half a century old, well-known with good pageviews and "playing a UNO reverse card" having become a meme lately.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 10:26, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
5. Support per all above. starship.paint (RUN) 15:27, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

Discuss

• Comment. Reasonably well known, even if the article doesn't really make the case for it. I'll mull this one over. Ping User:VickKiang for their 2c? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:51, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
• Comment. Ping User talk:Dawid2009 who seemingly forgot to "support as nom". --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:37, 7 November 2023 (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 Hanafuda

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.

---

Classic non-western (Japanese) card game. #64 at Wikipedia:WikiProject Board and table games/Popular pages, higher than many other items we list, including a bunch of other card games. Hanafuda's Go-stop variant (unlisted, #281) is a classic old-folk game (and gamblign game) in Korea, where I live. Another Japanese variant, Karuta, at #214, is listed as V5. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:41, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:41, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
2. 'Support Per nom Dawid2009 (talk) 19:23, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Support Per nom --Makkool (talk) 16:35, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose so this can be closed. The Blue Rider 00:42, 19 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.

Add Cards Against Humanity

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 most popular modern (2011) party board game based on Wikipedia:WikiProject Board and table games/Popular pages, where it ranks #72, higher than many other games (card or not) we list at V5. See also reception and criticism in the current article. Culturally significant IMHO. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:41, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:41, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Per nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:56, 6 November 2023 (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 Diplomacy (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.

---

1. 100 on Wikipedia:WikiProject Board and table games/Popular pages. Modern board game classic (1954). From the article: "Diplomacy was the first commercially published game to be played by mail (PBM); only chess, which is in the public domain, saw significant postal play earlier. Diplomacy was also the first commercially published game to generate an active hobby scene with amateur fanzines; only science-fiction, fantasy and comics fandom saw fanzines earlier. Competitive face-to-face Diplomacy tournaments have been held since the 1970s." Culturaly significant, major history of board games title, much more so than some of the historical ones I propose to remove above. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:41, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:41, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Support – absolute classic, and good representative of the late 20th century board game era. J947 † ^edits 09:12, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Support QuicoleJR (talk) 13:57, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
4. Support Seem to recall this game was a big deal when my parents were about my age pbp 21:50, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
5. Per nom. SnowFire (talk) 07:27, 20 November 2023 (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 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.

---

I know this is a little off-topic to board games but we have the American die-cast car company but not the British one pbp 21:59, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. pbp 21:59, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Weak support for Toys. I do remember them from my childhood in Poland as a luxury toy brand, for what little it is worth. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:38, 7 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose – don't think we should list either this or Hot Wheels to be honest. J947 † ^edits 01:03, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

   Hot Wheels is definitely vital. QuicoleJR (talk) 01:30, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

   Subjectively, I never heard of Hot Wheels. I assume they had/have smaller market share in Europe than Matchbox. Pageviews give HW 2:1 victory over Matchbox, for what it is worth. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:11, 8 November 2023 (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.

General discussion about board games

Arguably, many other titles can be considered. Race for the Galaxy, 7 Wonders (board game), other stuff from BGG Top 100 [10]. Bottom line is that board games are a big hobby, and we list over a 100 'Specific video games and series' but only half a dozen modern board games. Time to fix this, if not by reducing the number of video games, then by replacing some forgotten historical board game trivia entries with modern stuff that people actually know. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

We could increase the quota for board games. QuicoleJR (talk) 11:35, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

The quota for "Specific video games and series" was very recently increased from 100 to 105, there was neither much support nor much objection. We could reverse that and allocate that 5 quota to board games at least.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 08:54, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

That quota increase was taken from another video game section. QuicoleJR (talk) 12:48, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

I know, I left that out as not that important. The video game hardware section (where the 5 quota was taken from) is only 1 over the current quota and I wouldn't mind leaving its quota as is.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 13:16, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Video game industry is probably 10-15 bigger than the Tabletop game industry. But the problem is that much of the board game quote is given to historical topics of little relevance, whereas video game stuff is all pretty recent. Which means that there are plenty of modern video game titles but very few modern board game titles in our list. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:33, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

That makes sense to me. I have been wanting to make a console removal list for a while anyway, and this was a good excuse to do it. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:08, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

I'm sold on the additions of genres of games, less so on a) removals of older games, or b) additions of critically-acclaimed but recent and not-particularly-popular games. Also, I'm considering nominating play money as a gaming concept. pbp 22:23, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Arguably half of the video game entries are about "critically-acclaimed but recent and not-particularly-popular games"... _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 00:38, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

The video game list is too large and probably fatally flawed. Also, all video games are recent in board game terms. For example, Monopoly and Cluedo are less than 100 years old, but are still decades older than Pong or any other video game pbp 03:56, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Quibble, but Monopoly is based on The Landlord's Game that is over 100 years old. For some reason it is not vital, whereas we list as vital many less famous (IMHO) history-of-board-games landmarks (titles). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:00, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

20 best-selling board games OAT

This article tried to calculate the 20 best-selling board games of all time. We have most of them but not all. "Generic" board games are noted as such

20. Cranium (unlisted)

19. Blokus (unlisted)

18. Connect Four (unlisted)

17. Mancala (generic, Level 4)

16. Stratego (Level 5)

15. Risk (Level 5)

14. Catan (Level 5)

13. Pictionary (Unlisted)

12. Reversi (Level 5)

11. The Game of Life (Level 5)

10. Rummikub (Unlisted)

9. Candy Land (Unlisted)

8. Backgammon (Generic, Level 4)

7. Trivial Pursuit (Level 5)

6. Battleship (Level 5)

5. Cluedo (Level 5)

4. Scrabble (Level 4)

3. Monopoly (Level 4)

2. Checkers (generic, Level 4)

1. Chess (generic, Level 4)

pbp 04:25, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Board and table games/Popular pages

Is now live, if anyone wants more inspirtation. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:25, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

20. Tic-tac-toe (classic, Level 5)

19. Contract bridge (classic, Level 5)

18. Magic: The Gathering (third specific modern title, Level 5)

17. Hasbro (company, unlisted, perhaps vital under companies?)

16. Carrom (classic, Level 5)

15. Playing card (generic, Level 5)

14. Uno (card game) (second specific modern title, unlisted, proposed above)

13. Roulette (generic, Level 4)

12. Backgammon (generic, Level 4)

11. Major Arcana (generic, unlisted, perhaps vital but under general culture?)

10. Elo rating system (generic, unlisted, not very vital IMHO)

9. Mattel (company, unlisted, not very vital IMHO for board games but perhaps vital under companies?))

8. Mahjong (classic, Level 4)

7. Blackjack (classic, Level 4)

6. Tarot (classic, Level 4)

5. Warhammer 40,000 (unlisted) - proposed above through Warhammer (game) (classic) entry. Higher than I'd expect, but it drives the point we need a Warhammer entry in our vital list... I'll note that its publisher, Games Workshop is #44, and Warhammer Fantasy (setting) is #95. Modern Warhammer Age of Sigmar which replaced the classic entry I proposed is now at #128.

4. Monopoly (Level 4)

3. Game (generic, Level 3)

2. Go (game) (classic, Level 4)

1. Chess (classic, Level 4)

Thoughts: Uno was proposed above, I'll switch to support based on that. Pokémon Trading Card Game at #33 is the fourth modern title (Level 5). #35 is Catan (listed at V5). At #45 there is The Campaign for North Africa but it may be a false result due to folks searching for the historical event and landing there. Rummikub which I proposed is #48, probably sixth modern title. Hanafuda at #64 is unlisted (we do list related Karuta which is at ~#200 - add, switch or list both?). Seventh modern title I notice is the party game Cards Against Humanity, at #72, unlisted, eight is another party game, Codenames (board game) at #91. Then #92 Yu-Gi-Oh! Trading Card Game. #99 is Diplomacy (game), a "modern classic" that we should likely discuss and at #100 there is a modern game John Company (board game) that while good and popular likely represents another false positive due to name being related to something historical. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:25, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

More than half of the TV articles are U.S. TV programs

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.

---

Currently, out of 369 general television articles (including genres/organisations/networks/awards), 186 are American television programs.

• General Television: 109 articles over the limit (369/260)
• Television programs: 108 articles over the limit (288/180)
• American television programs: 96 articles over the limit (186/90)

It's pretty obvious what is mainly contributing to the problem. There are two ways forward here. (1) Increase the quota, or (2) Cut articles. If we will not increase quotas, then we will have to cut. We have to recognize that there are simply too many acclaimed American television programs out there. Awards are given out every year. We will have to be more ruthless in cutting shows, perhaps we could consider the impact both over time and place (global scale). Getting awards cannot be enough. starship.paint (RUN) 09:40, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

American (Hollywood) influence in film/TV is very significant. I do think there is undue focus on some American (Western...) topics in a number of vital categories, but here I am not sure we have a problem. Now, an argument can be made that we have too many TV articles in general, compared to other areas - that I could see. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:08, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

The Hollywood is significant in general, but it doesn’t mean that all individual shows are as vital. Either all the shows should have some confirmed international significance, or otherwise we should balance representation between the countries/languages. In any case, it’s probably better to cut now than to increase the quota. Kammerer55 (talk) 22:59, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Increase the quota for U.S. TV programs and parent categories

This is an option on the table, someone is free to propose it. starship.paint (RUN) 09:41, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

• I'd support it. We can move some numbers from history by region. Ex. I think that some US TV shows are much more vital than history of some minor US states or stuff like 'geological history of the United States' that I see there (see discussion below). US is important, but we have some problems with what is vital, likely due to the focus on US history vs world history. Hollywood's stuff is much more vital than some minor American town that nobody outside its state would've heard about. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:00, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose We're literally adding American TV shows as we remove significant American politicians? Something doesn't see right here... pbp 20:13, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
• Given that we have several proposals ongoing to remove US TV programs, we should at least give those a chance before raising the quota. Totalibe (talk) 12:23, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

  @Totalibe We also have others for adding more... _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:01, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

• To have 880 pop musicians but only 180 television programs is insane. J947 ‡ ^edits 23:23, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Well put. I'll also note another elephant in the room: AFAIK we don't list a single Chinese TV show. While few are world-famous yet, many are quite influential in China, and China is, well, big. We should at least have a few. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:13, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

American TV section

This is the only regional subsection with a listed quota. The rest of them do not have one. What should we do about this? QuicoleJR (talk) 20:05, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Looks weird but is fine IMO – helps to control the regional balance of the section without mandating quotas for all non-American shows. By the way, we've got a lot of threads open on American TV now. It would be clearer if they were all listed in one or two threads, otherwise we'll repeat ourselves. J947 ‡ ^edits 02:00, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

First, procedural note - perhaps merge this section to the ongoing disussion above at #More than half of the TV articles are U.S. TV programs? Second, setting quotas for country stuff is hard. I'd focus on Television programs (290/180 articles) first. Note TV is under Wikipedia:Vital articles/Level/5/Society and social sciences/Culture, unlike most other work of art, which are under Wikipedia:Vital articles/Level/5/Arts (radio programs - 35/35 - and podcats -2/2 - are with TV too, as are magazines and newspapers at ~80 each, only newspapers get by country split). Literature gets ~1000 articles with no by country split, just by genra/period. Music gets 800 entries, performing arts, 200, visual arts, 500, modern visual arts (which includes film), 300, fictional characters, 130. Looking at this I don't think TV is overrepresented, and as I said, American film and TV is much more significnat than non-American. If anything, I think we should increase the TV quota to roughly what is overquota now. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:11, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Moved. J947 ‡ ^edits 02:18, 28 November 2023 (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.

Quota enforcement for 20th century fiction (243/240 articles)

As I am browsing through that section I will see if I can suggest best candidastes for removals to bring this to or under the quota. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:12, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

@Piotrus: FYI some of the 20th century fiction articles I've myself considered for removal are Lucky Jim  5, The Moviegoer  5, The Last Samurai (novel), Memoirs of Hadrian  5, Henderson the Rain King, The Kingdom of This World  5, Red Sorghum (novel)  5, and Rickshaw Boy  5.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 10:33, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

@LaukkuTheGreit By all means, please suggest their removals below. I checked just one, The Last Samurai (novel), and it is obvious removal for me (no awards, just one interwiki). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:11, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Remove A Dance of the Forests

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 play with no interwikis and no claim of no particular significance in the article's body. A stub article (was misrated as a start, corrected now). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:12, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nominator --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:46, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
2. Support One of the least-viewed articles in the whole Arts section. Despite the article claiming "the play remains an influential work", it's hardly as influential as some of the fiction we don't list (e.g. Shōgun, Legend of the Galactic Heroes, Flowers for Algernon, Neuromancer...)--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 11:35, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

   @LaukkuTheGreit I'd support those (proposed Neuromancer). But LOGH being vital? I haven't considered it (as much as I love the show). Probably should add B5 first (vote above), since LOGH is called the B5 of anime... _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:59, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

3. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 01:32, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
4. per nom.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 11:48, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
5. per nom Respublik (talk) 18:17, 11 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 The Last Samurai (novel)

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.

---

Just an above average novel, some good reviews but nothing that suggest vital-level. Only one interwiki. Suggested above as non-vital by LaukkuTheGreit. Please add more entries to vote on, folks. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:11, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 08:49, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
2. Support Premature addition, very limited fame or influence despite its supposed acclaim. Only 23 years old, out of print for much of its existence, sold decently but not amazingly.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 11:49, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
3. Support per nominator. The Blue Rider 14:07, 19 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 Henderson the Rain King

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.

---

4 interwikis only, did not win the Pulitzer Prize. Neither significant impact nor lasting popularity is apparent. starship.paint (RUN) 13:58, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. as nom. starship.paint (RUN) 13:58, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
2. Support--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 15:13, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
3. Notable, a bit above average, but not vital. I don't think even all Pulitzer Winners are V5? And 4 interwikis shows the book had next to no impact outside its primary market. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:16, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
4. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 11:47, 11 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 Green Hornet

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.

---

Comic book trivia - Western non-DC, non-Marvel character nobody remembers today outside comic fan diehards. Just 14 interwikis and <300 daily pageviews put him way under the average for the superhero fictional characters. Very much the type of entry that needs to swapped for something from the underrepresented 'Eastern folklore' or such. Flash Gordon  5 will be enough for non-DC/Marvel superheroes at V5, I think. --_{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. Support--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 10:42, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
3. Not enduring. starship.paint (RUN) 11:47, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nom Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 14:12, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
5. Support-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 11:44, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
6. Not important in the slightest. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:13, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

Neutral

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 the following sf films

Based on Wikipedia:WikiProject Science Fiction/Popular pages, and controlling for some recentism. Top 200 entries analyzed for now - traditionally, listing stuff that IMHO should be vital, with rationales below. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:48, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

• @Piotrus: - as you can see from Blade Runner  5, Specific films (200/200 articles) is at full quota. Adding any of your proposals would exceed the quota. Could you propose some removals? starship.paint (RUN) 12:41, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

  @Starship.paint I'll try to do so shortly. The Human Condition (film series), The Story of the Kelly Gang, The Leopard (1963 film), Contempt (film), Close-Up (1990 film). Roundhay Garden Scene, Hoop Dreams seem not very vital (some are just historical trivia, like the oldest surviving film or such). But I need to review 100+ entries to see if there are even weaker entries. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 14:19, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Add Power Rangers

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.

---

Major franchise aimed at teenagers. Debuted in 1993. "consists of 30 television seasons of 22 different themed series and three theatrical films released in 1995, 1997, and 2017" --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:48, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:48, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

Discussion

1. User:Piotrus, right now Specific films (200/200 articles) is right at quota and you are suggesting 8 additions. Would you care to suggest any removals?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:10, 15 November 2023 (UTC)

   Power Rangers is a TV show, not a film. But yes, I should take a look at what to remove, good idea. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:52, 15 November 2023 (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 Aliens (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.

---

Not to be confused with Alien (film), but arguably nearly as vital. Extremly influential in sf and popculture. From the lead of what is Featued Article: "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. " One could argue that Alien (franchise) should also be vital... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:48, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:48, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
2. This one is famous in its own right as an action film. SnowFire (talk) 04:26, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
3. --Thi (talk) 18:06, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

Discussion

1. Would that be better than swapping the first film with Alien (franchise)?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:58, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

   Space-saving this could make sense, but arguably, the first two movies and the rest of the growing franchise are very influential themselves. A3 and subsequent sequels were less influential, just building on the earlier very succesfull movies. If we can afford two slots, I'd rather have the first two movies in vital, particularly since this one is considered, as noted, among the greatest sequels ever. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:07, 15 November 2023 (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 Predator (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.

---

Another classic sf film. From the lead: "the film has since been considered a classic of the action and science fiction genres and one of the best films of the 1980s... The success of Predator launched a media franchise of films, novels, comic books, video games, and toys. It spawned three sequels and one prequel" (and some crossovers). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:48, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:48, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Way more notable than John Kerry and Newport, Rhode Island. The Blue Rider 12:28, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

   You're going to have to explain that one, @The Blue Rider:... pbp 01:41, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

   I'll take a stab and say that outside US, more people have heard of this movie than about the other topics. Page views from pl wiki: Predator, 38. John Kerry, 49. Newport, 14. So, in Poland, Predator is more notable then the town, at least. I don't know if we can easily get global statistics, but I have a feeling Kerry will not age well compared to the movie. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:17, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

   I've never heard of Newport, Rhode Island... I've watched this movie. I know of John Kerry. I note that Newport isn't listed at Globalization and World Cities Research Network. starship.paint (RUN) 13:40, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

   Piotrus, even by your own pageviews metric, Kerry is viewed more than some rando movie... pbp 19:37, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

   But Newport isn't, so what's the conclusion? Look, you're an American so obviously have heard of these two, but people outside of it have no idea of who is John Kerry or these obscure city; in contrast the film is considered a classic in western countries. The Blue Rider 19:48, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

   It is intentional that modern pop culture subjects (Kerry, to be fair, arguably fits in this category) receive less representation here than their recognisability would seem to justify. Not in opposition, but Predator (film) is not very vital for an encyclopaedia compared to its popularity, lol. J947 ‡ ^edits 21:09, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

   People outside of a home country haven't heard of 90%+ of the VA5 politicians. People IN THE U.S. haven't heard of 90%+ of the American activists at VA5. pbp 22:43, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

   Using solely how well-known is a subject is a flawed metric anyway, most people in the US have heard of random pop singers, such as Demi Lovato but that doesn't make them vital. The Blue Rider 11:56, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Not as notable as John Kerry or Newport, Rhode Island pbp 00:27, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
2. This franchise pales in comparison to Arnold Schwarzenegger's Terminator franchise and Carl Weathers' Rocky film series.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:37, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

   @TonyTheTiger Only haf the interwikis, but page views for Predator (franchise) are slightly higher than for Rocky (franchise) (less so than for Terminator (franchise)). Which does suggest we should probably add Terminator franchise first. Woyld you support it? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:39, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

   What do we have from each of the 3 franchises currently (films, stars, directors)?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:56, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

   We could check films, but how are stars and directors relevant? Is Schwarzenegger relevant only to The Terminator? Surely n ot. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:18, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Discussion

@The Blue Rider and Purplebackpack89: Apples and oranges, eh? :P --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:13, 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 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

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 to be confused witbh the first novel in the series, the titual [[The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy (novel)], which is not Vital either. I'd argua that either it or the franchise should be added, if not both. The franchise makes a better case: "a comedy science fiction franchise... an international multimedia phenomenon; the novels are the most widely distributed, having been translated into more than 30 languages by 2005". The series creator, Douglas Adams, is V5 already. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:48, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:48, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Pretty famous. SnowFire (talk) 04:26, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
3. --Thi (talk) 18:08, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

Discussion

The original radio series is already at level 4. It's in Society rather than Arts because radio broadcasts are a form of mass media (which I find inconsistent and would prefer to see changed).--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 08:18, 13 November 2023 (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 Men in Black (1997 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.

---

Classic sf comedy that also spawned a minor franchise (several sequels and various tie-ins). Here, clearly, the first movie is the most influential - the franchise did not really became that big. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:48, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:48, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Popular but not impactful on society/film to be vital. Aszx5000 (talk) 13:38, 29 December 2023 (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 V for Vendetta (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.

---

Another modern classic, this one more serious. Consider: "The film is credited for popularizing the use of the Guy Fawkes mask by anti-establishment political groups and activities; David Lloyd stated: "The Guy Fawkes mask has now become a common brand and a convenient placard to use in protest against tyranny". --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:48, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:48, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Per nom. Aszx5000 (talk) 13:40, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

Discussion

We already list the original graphic novel, the article of which has some coverage on the cultural impact.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 08:40, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

@LaukkuTheGreit True, but I'd argue that the film was more influential than the comic book series. From the comic article's legacy: "Since the film adaptation, hundreds of thousands of Guy Fawkes masks from the books and film have been sold every year since the film's release in 2005". So it was the film that influenced the popculture. In this case a swap could also be considred; bottom line I think the film is more influential and vital than the comic. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:04, 15 November 2023 (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 The Fifth Element 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.

---

Back with comedy, arguably the most influential non-Hollywood sf comedy or maybe even non-Hollywood sf movie, although it obviously had Hollywood ties (Bruce Willis, etc.). "The film has been described by CBS News, Rotten Tomatoes, and ComingSoon.com as a science-fiction cult classic."

Support

1. As nom. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:48, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Not vital enough for me in terms of cultural impact. Aszx5000 (talk) 13:41, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Discussion

1. I'm skeptical here. It did okay at the box office but I don't think it had a particularly deep cultural impact. The pageviews are admittedly impressive, but I wonder if something weird is going on here. SnowFire (talk) 04:26, 20 November 2023 (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 Godzilla (1954 film) and/or Godzilla (franchise)

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 based on my consideration of the titles mentioned in science fiction article (see also suggestions for novels a bit above). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:27, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

The 1954 film was is the first film in the Godzilla franchise. The film spawned a multimedia franchise that was recognized by Guinness World Records as the longest-running film franchise in history. The character Godzilla has since become an international popular culture icon. As a side bonus, it is non-American, helping to address systemic bias we have in vitals. Sidenote: Godzilla is V5 (Godzilla  5 but if Zelda games discussed somewhere above get 4-5 entries, well... c'mon. I am tempted to say that both the original film and the franchise deserve to be at V5. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:27, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nominator, supporting both. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:46, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
2. Support both, but there also needs to be a quota increase for film. If only one, then add the franchise page. Totalibe (talk) 13:20, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
3. Support the franchise per nom, neutral on the film. starship.paint (RUN) 13:27, 13 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.

Add Planet of the Apes (1968 film) and/or Planet of the Apes franchise

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 based on my consideration of the titles mentioned in science fiction article (see also suggestions for novels a bit above). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:27, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

SF movie classic. Planet of the Apes' success launched a franchise, including four sequels, as well as a television series, animated series, comic books, and various merchandising. Here I think one of those two may be enough but I am having trouble deciding which one, but probably the original film over the franchise. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:27, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nominator, supporting the 1968 strongly and the franchise weakly. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:46, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
2. Per nom for Planet of the Apes (1968 film). Aszx5000 (talk) 13:42, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
3. Support. The Blue Rider 00:29, 23 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.

I had made a counting mistake with video game votes years ago

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 reviewed the tables here and just noticed I had accidentally skipped three of pbp's remove votes, namely those for Super Metroid, Metroid Prime and Metal Gear Solid (1998 video game)  5. They should've had the following final values:

Article	P	K	R	Notes
Metal Gear Solid	43	1	2
Super Metroid	43	1	2
Metroid Prime	33	0	2

I had used >33 P as the cutoff point when I did the video games mass removal, so Metroid Prime should've been removed but the others would've still remained. Is it OK if I remove it now?--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 21:39, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

I think so. The Blue Rider 22:19, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

There seems to be general consensus to properly enact past consensuses.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:32, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

I went ahead with the change.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 09:31, 14 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.

Remove TV shows

Since I proposed some additions above, yet we are indeed terribly over quota: Television (365/260 articles): Wikipedia:Vital_articles/Level/5/Society_and_social_sciences/Culture. Frankly, I would support reducing quote on geographical entries (towns, etc.) and adding some here, but that's a different discussion. Anyway, removal ideas below. Please keep in mind we are drastically over quota... we need to remove ~100 articles, and below I have less than 20 suggestions in pass one: start class articles with no clear indication of significance/reception/cultural impact. If you think something here needs keeping, well... what can we remove? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Remove 7th Heaven (TV series)

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.

---

While the series is described as commercially succesfull, it did not seem to lead to any major franchise/spin-offs, nor did it leave a mark on popculture. Single Emmy nomination is as much as it got. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nominator. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
2. This is part of a mass nomination above, but I will support it here anyway. QuicoleJR (talk) 15:20, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
3. I can't never stress enough how nonsensical it is to list so many entertainment-related articles. Thank you for the initiative. The Blue Rider 12:28, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
4. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 08:19, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
5. Per nom. Aszx5000 (talk) 14:57, 30 December 2023 (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 The Bob Newhart Show

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.

---

Two Emmy nominations is the most I can say for it. Nothing to suggest cultural significance. Just three interwikis suggest very little international impact for this show. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nominator. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
2. The Blue Rider 12:28, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
3. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 08:28, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
4. Bob Newhart himself is a VA5, that's enough coverage his showS (there were at least two) deserve pbp 20:17, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
5. Per nom. Aszx5000 (talk) 14:57, 30 December 2023 (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 The Partridge Family

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.

---

No significant awards, or even nominations, to speak of, nothing in the article suggests above average commercial or cultural significance.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nominator. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
2. It got a few spin-offs but they were all short-lived. The article does not have an Influence section. QuicoleJR (talk) 15:26, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
3. The Blue Rider 12:28, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
4. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 08:28, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
5. pbp 20:17, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
6. Per nom. Aszx5000 (talk) 14:57, 30 December 2023 (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 Ironside (1967 TV series)

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.

---

Nothing again in the article suggests this show was particularly influential or such. The lead does have a claim that "The show earned Burr six Emmy and two Golden Globe nominations ", so arguably we have some awards here, but nothing in terms of cultural impact, at least, not in the article. -_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here}

Support

1. As nominator. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
2. The Blue Rider 12:28, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
3. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 08:28, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
4. Per nom. Aszx5000 (talk) 14:57, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. This show was important for its early positive portrayal of the physically challenged.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:43, 27 November 2023 (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 The Lone Ranger (TV series)

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.

---

Again, a show that seems very mundante. The best claim to fame from the article is "The Lone Ranger was the highest-rated television program on ABC in the early 1950s and its first true "hit"". This seems like a footnote-level importance for the history of US TV, nothing vital anywhere here.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nominator. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
2. The Blue Rider 12:28, 25 November 2023 (UTC
3. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 08:28, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
4. Per nom. Aszx5000 (talk) 14:57, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose This was a classic TV series and one of the early portrayals of a native american in a positive/heroic role.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:39, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Per TonyTheTiger. Or possibly swap for the character or the franchise, which began on radio and also included movies pbp 20:17, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Soft oppose per above, the argument seems less convincing then the reasons outlined above. Respublik (talk) 18:08, 11 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 The Dick Cavett Show

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.

---

Possibly one Emmy (not mentioned in the article but suggested by my quick scan of accompanying template), no franchise, some minor trivia in the 'in popular culture' section that's pretty footnote-level. Just four interwikis. This does not seem vital. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nominator. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Dick Cavett is already listed anyway Totalibe (talk)
3. The Blue Rider 12:28, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
4. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 08:28, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
5. As with Bob Newhart, having Dick Cavett the guy will give us enough coverage pbp 20:17, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
6. Per nom. Aszx5000 (talk) 14:57, 30 December 2023 (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 Lassie (1954 TV series)

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.

---

Two-time Emmy Award winner but not much else I can see. Mind you, we can discuss swaping in Lassie (character) or Lassie Come-Home (original novel). Or Lassie Come Home, the 1943 classic movie, which the Library of Congress being deemed "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant" and recommended for preservation - which is more than I think we can say about this TV show. None of those articles are vital anyway, although I think the character likely should be. But the TV show again seems middling and we need to cut stuff here, folks. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nominator. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Support swapping for the character Totalibe (talk) 13:59, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
3. The Blue Rider 12:28, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
4. Support removal per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 08:28, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
5. Per nom. Aszx5000 (talk) 14:57, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Something from this franchise needs to remain VA. I am not sure what.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:19, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

   @TonyTheTiger I agree, but not this. Feel free to propose a swap or an addition. Keeping a mostly forgotten TV show instead of the more iconic character/novel/movie is the worst outcome IMHO. We have two supports for swap, if you you add your own we can probably close it with a swap. @The Blue Rider @Starship.paint - what do you guys think about swaps here? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:47, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

   Consent to swap for character changed vote.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:44, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

   Fail to see how the dog is vital, WikiProject Television ranks it as mid-importance. The Blue Rider 09:18, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

   Neutral on swap. starship.paint (RUN) 01:29, 1 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 Da Ali G Show

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.

---

Minor British show, just 18 episodes, no awards, no reception (just some minor controversy section), just a minor franchise (few sequels/spin-offs) no popculture impact... this is not vital. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nominator. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
2. The Blue Rider 12:28, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
3. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 08:28, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
4. pbp 20:17, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
5. Per nom. Aszx5000 (talk) 14:57, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Weak Oppose - First appearence of characters such as Borat Sagdiyev and Brüno Gehard, even if their films overshadowed the show in which they originated. Totalibe (talk) 13:59, 23 November 2023 (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 Coffee Prince (2007 TV series)

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 2007 South Korean television series with only 17 episodes. While the article's lead states that "Hailed as a hit for its high ratings, the drama received positive reviews from critics and won multiple awards.", the awards are primarily Korean. K-wave is a thing, I know, but no franchise, no popculture impact - this is not vital stuff. Cut, cut, cut. (Compare to similar vital entry on Full House (South Korean TV series), which at least has an unreferenced claim about cultural significance in the lead...). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nominator. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Not that knowledgeable about K-Drama but just browsing the page leads to picks that seem better, such as The World of the Married or Reply 1988 (or for that matter, Squid Game which seems like a no-brainer but has receieved a strangely high amount of opposition on its nomination here). Totalibe (talk) 13:59, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
3. The Blue Rider 12:28, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
4. Per nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:58, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
5. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 08:28, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
6. Per nom. Aszx5000 (talk) 14:57, 30 December 2023 (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 Mahabharat (1988 TV series)

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.

---

94 episodes/1 season long Indian show that does not seem particularly special. No awards, no franchise, no popculture significance. Some minor trivia like "During its rerun in COVID-19 lockdown in India, it became the second most watched Indian TV show" or (unreferenced) "Mahabharat along with Ramayan (1987), became one of the most successful television series based on an epic in Indian television history." (note qualification: "based on an epic"). Just an average TV show, it seems.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nominator. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
2. The opposing argument is extrapolating immensely, wrongly associating the importance of Mahabharata and Hinduism as the reasons for this show's vitality. An excerpt by a single newspaper is not what infers vitality. The Blue Rider 12:28, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
3. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 08:28, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
4. Per nom. Aszx5000 (talk) 14:57, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. The show is based on the epic Mahabharata which one of the most prominent texts in Hinduism, so this was not a regular TV show, but a serialization of a religious text, hence the "popculture significance" might be a bit wrong term here, and the main "franchise" here is the whole Hinduism. For example, three episodes of the show were dedicated to the narration of the Bhagavad Gita (part of the epic) which is one of the most well-known religious texts in the world. The show by its own also seemed to be a significant event for Indian TV as the Guardian calls it "Indian television's defining moment" [11], and it even attracted 5 million viewers in the UK at the time [12]. --Kammerer55 (talk) 22:46, 20 November 2023 (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 Bigg Boss

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.

---

"an Indian reality show franchise based on the Dutch reality show Big Brother." Big Brother is vital. This is just a minor spin off. Just two interwikis suggest no international impact for this regional variation. Article has no info on awards or any cultural significance. While it is an umberall entry for a number of shows like Bigg Boss (Hindi TV series), well, this is why Big Brother is Vital 4. - wait, it's not? We should V5/V4 Big Brother (Dutch TV series) and/or Big Brother (franchise), unless I am missing something, this is a big ommission. Perhaps consider a swap here (for the franchise?)? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nominator. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
2. As well as this, US Big Brother should be swapped for the franchise page as it didn't even originate in the US. Totalibe (talk) 13:59, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
3. The Blue Rider 12:28, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
4. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 08:28, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
5. Per nom. Aszx5000 (talk) 14:57, 30 December 2023 (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 Les Guignols

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 daily satirical latex puppet show broadcast on the French television channel Canal+". 30 years in the running until 2018 (how many episiodes/seasons, the article does not make clear), but other than that, the article makes no claim for why this should be vital (no franchise, popculture impact, commercial success...). Sorry, but this seems like a niche French thing that did not break out. Interestingly, pl wiki article on this has an unreferenced claim that the show had a significant event on French popculture, something our article does not even say. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nominator. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
2. The Blue Rider 12:28, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
3. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 08:28, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
4. Per nom. Aszx5000 (talk) 14:57, 30 December 2023 (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 Matador (Danish TV series)

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 lead contains unreferenced claims about this being important for the modern Dutch culture. 4 seasons, 24 episides. No suggestion of international impact (10 interwikis, shrug). No awards, no franchise... what makes this vital? Perhaps it is "the most important Dutch TV show ever" (note: those are my words, the article does not say this clearly) but would that be enough to make this vital? And is this so? Does each country get a quota? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nominator. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
2. The Blue Rider 12:28, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
3. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 08:28, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
4. Per nom. Aszx5000 (talk) 14:57, 30 December 2023 (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 Four Corners (Australian TV program)

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 longest-running Australian television program in history". Other than this, nothing here suggests this is vital. Does being a longest-running show in a mid-importance country = vital status? I think we need more than that. Just three interwikis suggest next to no impact outside Australia, and the article does not even suggest this is influential for the Australian culture. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nominator. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Totalibe (talk) 13:59, 23 November 2023 (UTC)
3. The Blue Rider 12:28, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
4. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 08:28, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
5. Per nom. Aszx5000 (talk) 14:54, 30 December 2023 (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 The Crocodile Hunter

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 first stub I saw (misrated as start, I fixed it). Unreferenced claim in the lead that "The show became a popular franchise due to Irwin's unconventional approach to wildlife." and "With a nearly 11-year run, the series is the second longest-running program of any Discovery Communications network, behind MythBusters."- Myth Busters are V5, ok, but nothing here makes it clear why this franchise is vital. Nothing about popculture impact or such is in the article. Heck, I'd even suggest a swap for Crocodile Dundee ("the highest-grossing Australian film worldwide", which IMHO is what most folks will think of when they hear something aobut a crocodile hunter and media...). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nominator. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

1. I'm fine having two Steve Irwin-related articles as VT5; he's vital enough. The Blue Rider 12:28, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Neutral on this but leaning soft oppose, the franchise/brand is more well known than the show, but this seems like the best target available. Impact irrespective of Steve somewhat justifies the VA. Respublik (talk) 18:15, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Discuss

1. I'm just going to say I am genuinely really surprised that this is a stub, this series is iconic. The only reason I'm not opposing is that may be redundant to Steve Irwin, who is already on the list. Totalibe (talk) 13:59, 23 November 2023 (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 Bananas in Pyjamas

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.

---

"n Australian children's television series". Moderately succesfull but we need to cut stuff. No awards, just nominations. Tiny cultural impact section. "syndicated in many countries and dubbed into other languages" - but just 26 interwikis, suggesting again rather moderate impact. Teletubbies, also just V5 (should we move it to V4?) has ~100 interwikis; and Sesame Street (at V4), ~80 (perhaps some US-centric bias there, folks, and a swap to consider...). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nominator. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
2. The Blue Rider 12:28, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Support--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 14:42, 1 December 2023 (UTC)
4. Per nom. Aszx5000 (talk) 14:54, 30 December 2023 (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 A Country Practice

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.

---

1000-episode long Australian soap, but its record was surpassed since. Reasonably succesfull (lead claims broadcasted in 48 countries, but just 8 iwikis forn ow). Awards imited to Australia (Logie Awards). Nothing on cultural impact, no franchise. Given we need to cut stuff, I can't see why we should keep this. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)

Support

1. As nominator. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
2. The Blue Rider 12:28, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
3. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 08:28, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
4. Per nom. Aszx5000 (talk) 14:54, 30 December 2023 (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 Cops (TV series)

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 show's vitality is not apparent. Sure, it ran for a while, won a couple awards, and caused some minor controversy, but there are a lot of shows that fit that description. This show does not stand out much. Also, we have too many American shows.

Support

1. As nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:04, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
2. Per nom. --Kammerer55 (talk) 22:33, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
3. Per nom. Aszx5000 (talk) 14:53, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Oppose

Discuss

1. I am ambivalent. It seems relatively major but there's no great reception/legacy, just some awards and information that it is one of the longest-running (30+ seasons). 17 interwikis suggest only mediocre syndication (impact) outside US. Lenghty criticism under reception is still more than in articles about many other shows I've reviewed (some of which I proposed for removal above), which is why I did not propose this one for removal. Anyone who feels like this one should go - scroll a bit up and consider voting in removal discussions there, too :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:56, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

   Just because it is not as egregiously non-vital as others being removed does not mean it is vital. We need to pare down American shows, and I do not see how this is one of the most important ones. QuicoleJR (talk) 22:41, 5 December 2023 (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.