Wikipedia talk:Core topics, inner levels

What?
How could opera or critical theory be one of the top 45 most necessary or important articles to have in an encyclopedia? Why are there no references to any persons or institutions? This list seems bankrupt at best. -Justin (koavf), talk, mail 03:35, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Broken link
The link to the "one made earlier by Larry Sanger" has some kind of page-move error. (I'm juggling too many things mentally to figure out where else to report this, sorry). --Quiddity· (talk) 05:55, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Love
Should this not be one of the most important topics of all? I am no teenager in love... I want to point that in its facets this concept is one of the prime movers of humanity, a common theme in many religions, and the cornerstone of most literature, from Homer to now. Not to say that carnal love is the reproductive method of homo sapiens sapiens. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 141.48.167.51 (talk)

Added outline links
I've added links leading to the corresponding outlines, since those are also base articles that cover the core topics. Doing so has shown a few gaps in outline coverage (that is, which topics don't have outlines yet). Outlines present their subject's coverage on Wikipedia, by listing the articles on that subject, sort of like a table of contents on a subject. The Transhumanist 00:57, 7 July 2015 (UTC)