Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lists/Archive 12

Archive 5

←

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Featured quality source review RFC

Editors in this WikiProject may be interested in the featured quality source review RFC that has been ongoing. It would change the featured article candidate process (FAC) so that source reviews would need to occur prior to any other reviews for FAC. Your comments are appreciated. --IznoRepeat (talk) 21:51, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Move discussion notice - Talk:Statue_of_Jesus#Requested move 6 November 2018

Hey there! I'm Flooded with them hundreds. There is a move discussion at Talk:Statue_of_Jesus#Requested move 6 November 2018 requiring more participation, please consider commenting/voting in it along with the other discussions in the backlog (Wikipedia:Requested moves#Elapsed listings). Flooded with them hundreds 17:28, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Proposal on overly long entries in lists

FYI

 – Pointer to relevant discussion elsewhere.

Please see: Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Lists#Overly long list items

Gist: Add brief advice about what to do about excessively large items in lists, to either WP:Manual of Style/Lists or WP:Summary style.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  23:29, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

The scope of List of film memorabilia

Fun, fun, fun!

Take a second and drop by the discussion to pick a letter!

A, B, or C?

Bags of fun! Share your view. Don't delay! Have your say.

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:27, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Requested move

There is a requested move at Talk:List of Hindu mythological or devotional films that may need your opinion. Please come and help. Paine Ellsworth, ed.  ^put'r there  01:33, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

RfC on permitting "List of foo" mainspace titles to redirect to categories instead

FYI

 – Pointer to relevant discussion elsewhere.

Please see: Wikipedia talk:Stand-alone lists#RfC about redirects to categories
 — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  06:45, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Some AfDs which may be of interest

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of HD DVD releases (2nd nomination)
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Masters of Cinema releases (2nd nomination)
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Criterion Collection DVD and Blu-ray releases
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Criterion Collection LaserDisc releases
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Eclipse releases

--woodensuperman 16:02, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

List of Doctor Who Christmas and New Year's specials listed at Requested moves

A requested move discussion has been initiated for List of Doctor Who Christmas and New Year's specials to be moved to List of Doctor Who specials. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. This move request covers the scope and intention of the article in question, and could do with some objective eyes from outside the Doctor Who project. Please do take a look if interested, and consider the draft changes at User:U-Mos/sandbox also. U-Mos (talk) 22:42, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

FL review

Please see Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/List of UFC champions/archive1. Drmies (talk) 21:27, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

List navbox template is broken!

Every single navbox on a website displays "A (B, C ·" instead of "A (B, C)". Have no idea how to find the source and fix it. Help! 188.255.85.195 (talk) 23:19, 24 January 2019 (UTC)

Presumably this is related to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Templates#Template:Film- and television-related infobox templates. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 10:11, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

"Presidents" vs. "presidents"

See Category talk:Lists of university and college leaders' to discuss the inconsistent use of "Presidents" vs. "presidents" in list titles. Any admins able to move multiple pages at once for consistency? ---Another Believer _(Talk) 04:04, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Request for comment List of churches in Sweden

I have started an RfC for this list. I would like ideas how to limit it somewhat, see tag on list and my comment on talk page for more information about what I'm trying to do. thanks. Aurornisxui (talk) 17:37, 4 February 2019 (UTC)

List of towns and cities with 100,000 or more inhabitants and an updated list

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.

---

Hello. I'm here because I'm seeking assistance regarding the article and its subpages. I'm creating an updated list for the page which takes data from the latest UN demographic yearbook (the current pages are using an outdated yearbook), however I've run into multiple problems:

• The amount of redlinks on the page: where's the correct page for each? I am unable to find this info using other lists nor the page in question.
• Missing data: I only created the table from the section in the yearbook minus the odd ones out, yet it doesn't appear to have all the cities from some countries where census data meets the list requirements, i.e. China. Are there sources I can use to verify this information?
• Incorrect links This one I'll handle myself once the first two problems are resolved.

Thanks for any assistance provided! Jalen D. Folf (talk) 17:45, 3 December 2018 (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.

The above question no longer applies as I have completed the expansion of these lists. Related to the article, an additional discussion at the article's Talk page is awaiting feedback regarding a possible merge. Jalen D. Folf (talk) 04:16, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Lists of English SSSIs

It looks as if a whole lot of URLs in references in lists like List of Sites of Special Scientific Interest in Cumbria (see navbox at bottom for the list of lists) need to be updated as Natural England seems to have rearranged its website. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK geography#SSSIs - URLs need to be updated?, and please make any comments there to keep discussion in one place. Thanks. PamD 12:31, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Lists of sources

I have a question on sources. Firstly, if there is an enormous number of sources available on a particular subject, is a List of sources on (subject) acceptable on Wikipedia? I already have such a list offline, and it would help other editors if I made it a WP list article. Secondly, as it would be a list of sources, would the individual items on the list themselves have to be sourced? That would seem contradictory. Thanks! Tony Holkham (Talk) 16:04, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

I would suggest this list is appropriate for the project space rather than the main article space: it can be just as helpful, if not more helpful, to editors if located there. There is an active WikiProject, Wikipedia:WikiProject Reliability that I am sure would be interested. UnitedStatesian (talk) 16:15, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

UnitedStatesian - thank you; that's a helpful suggestion. Tony Holkham (Talk) 16:19, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

• @Tony Holkham: What you're describing as a "list of sources" sounds like what we title as bibliographies; see Wikipedia:WikiProject Bibliographies, Category:Bibliographies by subject, etc. postdlf (talk) 16:31, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

  Postdlf - thank you. I've just looked at Bibliography of Australian history, which seems a good example. Tony Holkham (Talk) 16:46, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

• Some such lists are kept in Wikipedia space. WP:RS/PS is one place and includes links to others in WP:RS/PS#See also. --Izno (talk) 17:18, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

  Izno - thanks - I had looked there. Listing sources is one thing; reliability is another. I shall give it more thought. Cheers, Tony Holkham (Talk) 17:26, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

  As for your question re would the individual items on the list themselves have to be sourced yes, if you put it in mainspace, you need to show a couple things: the grouping of the items is not arbitrary (per WP:SYNTHESIS) and would meet the bar for WP:GNG (as in, the grouping of items can be shown to be notable). This can only be done by providing RS. I know that there are some lists of journals; for example, List of forestry journals. --Izno (talk) 18:48, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

  Izno - understood. To go back to the example I gave, Bibliography of Australian history, that isn't sourced, though, and I don't see how it could be. However, I'll look into it further, and thanks for all your responses. Tony Holkham (Talk) 21:49, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

  I imagine there are reviews of works saying "this is something to be added to your collection on Australian history". I just struggle with that whole category apparently. I get the notion that there are probably books everyone has to read to start to understand a subject, but we should be able to say how we select the books to add to these lists. Which to me says "we need an RS or two". --Izno (talk) 03:28, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Request for comments on List of Photographers

You are invited to join the discussion regarding edits to List of Photographers. The discussion is addressing the following questions:

• Within each section, should the entries by sorted alphabetically or chronologically?
• Should date of birth and date of death be added to entries?
  • Should nationality, date of birth, and date of death information be supported using reliable sources if that information is in the entry's corresponding article?
• Is the Photographers' Identity Catalog (PIC) a reliable source for nationality, date of birth, and date of death?
  • If a source is deemed reliable, should there be a limit on how many times it is used?

Your contributions are welcome. Thank you! Qono (talk) 15:05, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

List of tallest buildings

Does anyone know how lists of tallest buildings are handled? I monitor an error tracking category and recent edits at the following have introduced {{convert}} errors. I could fix them but I can't see any sources for the changes and, for example, one building went from 350 to 600 feet.

• List of tallest buildings in Nashville
• List of tallest buildings in the Waterloo Regional Municipality

Should these edits be brutally reverted? Painfully fixed? Johnuniq (talk) 22:54, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

Request for comment at Talk:List of works by Leonardo da Vinci

A request for comment is underway at Talk:List of works by Leonardo da Vinci#Talk:List_of_works_by_Leonardo_da_Vinci#RfC_-_Horse_and_Rider. The RfC addresses the following question:

• Should the wax statue entitled Horse and Rider on the List of works by Leonardo da Vinci page be included in the Recent Attributions or Disputed Attributions section?

All are invited to participate. SamHolt6 (talk) 01:22, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

A new newsletter directory is out!

A new Newsletter directory has been created to replace the old, out-of-date one. If your WikiProject and its taskforces have newsletters (even inactive ones), or if you know of a missing newsletter (including from sister projects like WikiSpecies), please include it in the directory! The template can be a bit tricky, so if you need help, just post the newsletter on the template's talk page and someone will add it for you.

– Sent on behalf of Headbomb. 03:11, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Numbering of officeholders

Is there a convention for numbering presidents and other office holders? How should we handle multiple terms of office? I have been exchanging reverts with 2405:205:1204:8A99:0:0:18BE:D0A4 and 2405:205:1208:CCD1:0:0:1432:A4 on articles such as List of Presidents of Honduras. In my view multiple presidential terms should not give new sequence numbers, for example in List of Presidents of the United States, James Madison is listed as the 4th president although his predecessor served two terms. Should this convention be followed for similar lists? Should acting and interim presidents be included in the numbering? Verbcatcher (talk) 13:18, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

We've had something like this before, see Talk:Paul Ryan#RFC: Ordinal numbers. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 23:23, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Star Trek and Star Wars lists

II don't believe that either the List of Star Trek films and television series nor the List of Star Wars films and television series as written actually should be classified as lists. Any feedback on if and how to spin materials off these lists would be appreciated. Thanks. Oldag07 (talk) 01:27, 4 May 2019 (UTC) I guess the same discussion could be made for the MCU page. List of Marvel Cinematic Universe films Oldag07 (talk) 01:43, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

I agree that a list article should actually feel like one, and stick to the minimum amount of detail. I see that the MCU list article has a proposition to break out the article to one called The Infinity Saga, which feature the more detailed information. Similarly, there is an article for each Star Wars trilogy, and some editors have expressed being in favor of a separate article for Star Trek films (which used to exist at Star Trek (film series) until I merged it with the list]]. UpdateNerd (talk) 05:30, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

I personally think more of Wikipedia need to embrace the "Overview" format, such as Overview of gun laws by nation. Some of these franchise lists can easier be classified as overviews than regular old lists. Like List of Alien characters, this is a great page but it's not what I would call a list.★Trekker (talk) 11:43, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Selection criteria

Hello, I'm not sure if this belongs here or needs a full RfC, so I'm starting here. I've been spending the last couple of weeks giving new life to List of Model United Nations conferences and have realized that no true selection criteria exists. I'm very much aware of WP:NOTCATALOG and WP:LSC, but have found no easy fix. For context, Model UN conferences are born every year and sometimes die within a few, although a significant percentage stick around. I was thinking that inclusion on this list could only happen for conferences that have existed for five years or more, or overall attendance numbers. However, I encounter a problem with secondary sources: almost none cover the date of creation of a specific conference, and the reliability of conference numbers is questionable since it always almost comes from conference organizers, who I sometimes suspect of being guilty of creative accounting.

Do you think it's best to include more stringent selection criteria? If so, in what part of the article should these selection criteria be worded? And finally, which selection criteria do you think are worth implementing? Pilaz (talk) 12:32, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Most lists do not include every factually true entry, unless it's a group that has a known, finite number of members and there is some informational value in making sure the list is comprehensive. Many lists limit entries to just those that have or merit articles, which is a very easy line to draw. postdlf (talk) 18:33, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Splitting national drink from national liquors

Please discuss at Talk:National_dish#Splitting_National_drink_from_List_of_national_liquors AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:10, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Discussion now at Talk:List_of_national_liquors#Splitting_National_drinks_from_List_of_national_liquors AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:52, 16 May 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of List of minor planets: 500001–501000 for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of minor planets: 500001–501000 is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of minor planets: 500001–501000 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. –dlthewave ☎ 18:53, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

List of IEEE Fellows

I am thinking of working on a list but I am not able to come up with a good structure for it. I would love your opinion. I want to make a list of IEEE fellows. I am thinking of making a page like List of Guggenheim Fellowship with all the years listed on the main page of IEEE. Then each year will have its own fellows. I am thinking of listing three things for each fellow, name, institution and citation. So there will be three columns and ever year will have some 80 to 100 fellows. What are your thoughts on this? HRShami (talk) 17:10, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

List of tallest buildings in Peoria

• Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
• List of tallest buildings in Peoria (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs|google) AfD discussion

Short list and short referenced article on short buildings. Needs improvement, if you can find sources. List itself could be made longer. See discussion on article talk page. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 12:34, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject Genealogy

If anyone here is interested, we are looking for volunteers at WikiProject Genealogy. We have many lists of "notable descendants," as well as family trees, that need to be organized, standardized and verified. Thanks! Tea and crumpets (talk) 01:10, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

List of former tractor manufacturers

Would some others mind taking a look at this? I'm not sure I'd classify it as WP:LISTCRUFT per se, but it seems as if over the years people have been trying to add (in good faith) pretty much every former tractor company that ever existed regardless of whether the company meets WP:ORG. I guess that's one approach per WP:CSC, but that means it will likely be a never ending list. Perhaps it would be best to limit the entries to at least those which already have Wikipedia articles written about them, but that would seem to eliminate most of the entries. Some of these might be foreign companies which have non-English Wikipedia articles or be good candidates to meet [WP:ORG; so, I guess they might be able to be kept using {{ill}} in the hope that someday someone might write an article about them per WP:REDYES. The links to external websites should also be removed per WP:ELLIST and WP:LINKFARM, etc. I have no problem in going in a trying to clean things a bit, but I just wanted some feedback from others first. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:58, 9 July 2019 (UTC)

Up for deletion: List of tallest buildings in Columbia, Missouri

• Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
• List of tallest buildings in Columbia, Missouri (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs|google) AfD discussion

Needs moire and better sources. Several of the buildings on on NRHP. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 14:44, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

RfC regarding manners and causes of death.

Some of you may be interested in this question about the "Deaths in 20xx" pages. Some of you may not. InedibleHulk (talk) 21:38, 28 September 2015 (UTC)

List of churches in London

Comments invited as to how best to divide up Wikipedia's 9th biggest article, at 445k bytes. Please comment here. Thanks, Johnbod (talk) 02:28, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

FLRC

I have nominated List of cetacean species for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 01:08, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

List of Artemis missions‎

There is an issue with a new page: List of Artemis missions‎. The creator(s) copy/pasted walls of text from the Artemis program and added a couple of tables, and they call this a "list". The duplication with the parent article is expansive, and are rejecting the guidelines per WP:Stand-alone lists. Your input is appreciated. Cheers, Rowan Forest (talk) 18:12, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

RfC: terrorist incidents list criteria

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of terrorist incidents#RfC: List criteria. – Levivich 18:06, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

List of Old Etonians by occupation

This new draft is open to anyone interested in expanding it. FoxyGrampa75 (talk) 19:26, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

List length within article, when to make stand-alone

How long is too long for a list in an article? Here specifically looking at the large list at the bottom of Shortages in Venezuela, which I think is definitely large enough to move to a stand-alone...tks ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 12:40, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

I've seen lists that are much longer, and which occupy a much greater proportion of the article. Splitting off the Venezuela ones won't make much difference. See also WP:SPLIT. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 13:06, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

I'm sure there are bigger lists, but in what quality level articles? Any at or above GA? ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 13:21, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

That list strikes as something that could be summarized as commodities in the general and entirely removed accordingly. It strays into unnecessary detail to get the gist that Venezuela has issues right now with providing basic goods and services. --Izno (talk) 13:41, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

My thoughts exact-a-ly.. ♦ Lingzhi2 (talk) 14:14, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

List of discoveries, disagreement as to whether it is possible to include a Bibliography

Hello to any viewing editor,

please go to Talk:List_of_Discoveries#Scope_of_the_article, for the relevant disagreement. The contending editor Dialectric has stated that there is a reason for not including a bibliography:

I support the removal of the bibliography, and the restoration of the title to List of Discoveries, which was changed without prior discussion by Armoracia-1 on September 5, 2019‎. As a list article, a bibliography is redundant, as all items should have adequate sourcing included in the item. I have not seen any other list articles which include a bibliography. Wikipedia:Dispute resolution and WP:RFC provide a number of tools to address issues at this page if we cannot agree.Dialectric (talk) 14:36, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

My contrary argument is,

how many list articles are there and of that number (the total number) does any have a bibliography...is the necessary determinant for the reason you have provided

I think the bibliography is necessary on the basis of Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lists → WP:SOURCELIST:

Adding individual items to a list Lists, whether they are stand-alone lists (also called list articles) or embedded lists, are encyclopedic content just as paragraph-only articles or sections are. Therefore, all individual items on the list must follow Wikipedia's content policies: the core content policies of Verifiability (through good sources in the item's one or more references)

Armoracia-1 (talk) 17:16, 22 September 2019 (UTC)