Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5/Society/Archive 3

Trim most Constructed languages
Languages are currently mildly over-quota at 617/600 (although I can see arguing that the quota should be bumped upward some). Anyway, as a low-hanging fruit, we currently have 8 articles on specific Constructed languages. Now, the article constructed language itself is a fine VA5, and Esperanto language is a fine VA4. But...

...for those not familiar, there are three tiers of constructed language by importance. Tier 1 is Esperanto: it's the conlang that became a real language, that has active clubs, literature written in it, academic studies, etc. Very famous. Tier 2 are fictional languages: Quenya (aka Tolkien's Elvish), Klingon language, Dothraki language, etc. There's interest in them, but it's more clearly more of a hobby for fans of a fictional world. People learn them, but they're not really attempting to be a day-to-day communication tool. Tier 3 is everything else. These other conlangs are just incredibly minor - they're on the level of, say, specific guilds in an MMO or specific Wikimedia chapters. Don't be fooled by the fact that some of them hand out grandiose titles to themselves like "Secretary General" and have national organizations - these organizations are usually one linguistics professor and their circle of friends, that's it. Major book publications describing conlangs that presumably most speakers should have have only have a single review on Goodreads and the like, suggesting very small print runs. From the lead of the Constructed language article itself:


 * Conlang speakers are rare. For example, the Hungarian census of 2011 found 8,397 speakers of Esperanto, and the census of 2001 found 10 of Romanid, two each of Interlingua and Ido and one each of Idiom Neutral and Mundolinco.

I think that interest in the idea / structure of conlangs is adequately covered by the constructed language article itself, and we don't need the articles on specific languages (other than Esperanto, of course).

Remove Ido
From the lede:
 * As of the year 2000, there were approximately 100–200 Ido speakers in the world.

Support
 * 1) As nominator. SnowFire (talk) 04:38, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 2)  J947  † edits 07:08, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) per nom.  starship  .paint  (RUN) 06:04, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 4) Conlangs are fun but not vital outside esperanto. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  12:09, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 5) Per nom. Aszx5000 (talk) 16:46, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Oppose Discuss
 * 1) Native speakers and historical reasons. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 14:43, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Leaning support but also somewhat on edge due to this being possibly the only conlang other than Esperanto with active native speakers. Totalibe (talk) 01:19, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Remove Interlingua
From the lede:
 * [Interlingua] is actively spoken by only a few hundred.

Support Oppose
 * 1) As nominator. SnowFire (talk) 04:38, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Totalibe (talk) 01:19, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) per nom.  starship  .paint  (RUN) 06:04, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 4) per nom and my comment above. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  12:10, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 5) Doesn’t seem vital at this level. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 01:02, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 6) Per nom. Aszx5000 (talk) 15:02, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Discuss

Remove Interlingue
From the article:
 * In recent years official meetings of Interlingue speakers have resumed: one in Ulm in 2013, another in Munich in 2014 with three participants, and a third in Ulm the next year with five.

Support Oppose
 * 1) As nominator. SnowFire (talk) 04:38, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 2)  J947  † edits 07:06, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) Totalibe (talk) 01:19, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 4) per nom.  starship  .paint  (RUN) 06:04, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 5) per nom and my comment above. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  12:11, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 6) Under 2k monthly page views. Definitely not vital. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 12:27, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 7) Per nom. Aszx5000 (talk) 15:02, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Discuss
 * Courtesy ping of User:Mithridates, who has gotten the article to GA, if you have any thoughts. SnowFire (talk) 07:53, 20 November 2023 (UTC)


 * If I were to manage this list I would probably remove Lojban, keep the rest, and actually add one: Interslavic. I would have supported removing others (such as Novial) if they were in there, but the rest definitely fill out the most prominent auxlangs both of the past and present. Volapük for example should definitely be kept for historical value alone, same for Ido and Interlingue. Removing them all would look fairly odd IMO: it would effectively be the list of *the* constructed language. (The equivalent bizarrerie would be a small collection of articles on keyboards pruned to a single one - Qwerty - because they are "used by small groups of aficionados" or what have you) Mithridates (talk) 14:07, 20 November 2023 (UTC) on my Dvorak keyboard
 * Here's an invite to the Interslavic Discord by the way in case you're curious. Their massive explosion in activity over the past decade has been fascinating to watch. (Since you are mentioning activity as the sole criterion as far as I can tell) Mithridates (talk) 14:16, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for chiming in! Unsure if you realized this and disagreed with it, or if you didn't know, but to be clear, that is exactly what is done for keyboard layouts.  At Vital_articles/Level/5/Technology, Typewriter is a VA4 (as is Computer keyboard), QWERTY is a VA5, and Dvorak / more obscure keyboard layouts are not vital articles.  And yeah, I do see it as a similar situation, but that just reflects reality, right?  QWERTY is the most important keyboard layout, and Esperanto is the most important conlang / auxlang.  That's how it is, sometimes.
 * As for Discord activity - the problem is that the vast majority of popular Discord channels are not even notable enough for Wikipedia articles. Equivalents that make it (e.g. specific subreddits like r/science) are orders of magnitude more popular and also not vital articles.  SnowFire (talk) 16:17, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure they weren't proposing the Discord itself as a vital article (or even as an article in general). Totalibe (talk) 01:19, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Remove Klingon language
From the article:
 * in 2021, there are perhaps 50-60 (speakers).

That said, if any conlang is kept, I would suggest this one, as even with full speakers rare, there is at least some casual interest in vocabulary if nothing else (e.g. Bat'leth, Stovokor).

Support
 * 1) As nominator. SnowFire (talk) 04:38, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Support Weakest constructed language on the list, even does not have own Wikipedia project. Meanwhile you all want to remove all other which are used by wikipedi communities.Dawid2009 (talk) 19:17, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I’m pretty sure we did, but it got moved to Fandom. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 12:34, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Per nom. Don't think that the fictional Klingon language exists today in the public imagination. Notable, but not vital. Aszx5000 (talk) 15:01, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Oppose Discuss
 * 1) Oppose Essentially serves as the image of fictional languages in the public imagination, and maintains enduring public and linguistic interest (for example) Totalibe (talk) 23:29, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Per Totalibe. QuicoleJR (talk) 23:33, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) Only fictional conlang we list, and it makes sense to list it before all others since Star Trek is at Level 4. Also got on Duolingo, so I would put it before Interlingua, Interlingue, or Lojban. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 12:34, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 4) Oppose per above. Respublik (talk) 18:05, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Remove Lojban
No attempts at any estimates of the number of speakers in the article other than "5+" (that's quite a range) but the sources are overwhelmingly primary, and the Lojban edition of Wikipedia seems to show precisely one trivial edit in the past week that wasn't stuff like global renames or MediaWiki message deliveries as of the time I checked it, which doesn't seem like a positive sign ( RecentChanges). The one good reference, a New York Times blog, is an interview with someone who when asked about Lojban says she doesn't know the language or speak it.

Support Oppose
 * 1) As nominator. SnowFire (talk) 04:38, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Per nom and above discussion. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:58, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 3)  J947  † edits 07:05, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 4) Poor sourcing notwithstanding (more of an issue with the article itself), we only need one engineered language and the community is much smaller than Toki Pona's. Totalibe (talk) 01:19, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 5) per nom.  starship  .paint  (RUN) 06:04, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 6) Yeah, I can get behind this one. Although it's like the most well known example of a logical language, not vital enough.
 * 7) OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 12:41, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 8) Per nom. Aszx5000 (talk) 15:02, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Discuss

Remove Toki Pona
This request says "approximately 1600 speakers", although is from a Toki Pona source and is probably optimistic. Usual reminder goes here that even if taken at the highest estimate of 5,000, natural languages like Kabyle language (3 million speakers?) or Papiamento (300,000 speakers?) aren't currently listed as vital articles (although perhaps they should be).

Support Oppose
 * 1) As nominator. SnowFire (talk) 04:38, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Per nom. Charcoal feather (talk) 19:55, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) It's not fun to say but at VA5 there's a great bias of the unusual and relatively obscure over the usual and prominent. With absolutely zero offence intended, it would take incredible popularity for a language invented in 2001 to deserve a spot on this list of 0.8% of the site's articles.  J947  † edits 05:21, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 4) per nom.  starship  .paint  (RUN) 06:04, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 5) As a Toki Pona speaker, I dislike this but you're right - maybe VIT6, but not 5.  21:28, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 6) Per nom. Aszx5000 (talk) 15:00, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I would say that this is the second most important nonfictional conlang, after only Esperanto. Pinging because she seems to be a subject-matter expert. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:57, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I dunno, I've thought for a while that it's silly to call Toki Pona a vital article, as much as I love the language. But I don't really understand how y'all decide what counts as vital. If it were up to me, most of the list would be topics in agriculture, architecture, and engineering. -- Tamzin  &#91;cetacean needed&#93; (they&#124;xe&#124;she) 18:35, 20 November 2023 (UTC)


 * 1) mi wile ala e ni; OP specifically uses an example that "Major book publications describing conlangs that presumably most speakers should have have only have a single review on Goodreads". Toki Pona: The Language of Good, the first book teaching Toki Pona for the creator has a total of 362 ratings and 50 reviews. On Amazon it has 519 global ratings, not to mention stats on other Toki Pona publications as seen in related items etc. Multiple active communities exist online with several thousand members each. Totalibe (talk) 23:29, 20 November 2023 (UTC) No longer opposing for now Totalibe (talk) 23:51, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Most vital non-fictional modern conlang. I’m not sure if we need one, though. However, it does have the second-highest number of monthly page views of the specific conlangs at this level, only to Esperanto. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 16:27, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Discuss
 * Note: Article is a GA, but the GA nominator has been inactive since 2020, so not doing a ping here. (And as a side note, I'm not 100% sure of how closely it meets GA standards anyway - article was repeatedly nominated until the 4th GA reviewer gave a pass, but with a rather cursory review and an apology that the reviewer is not very knowledgeable about languages, despite inexplicably taking the review anyway.)  SnowFire (talk) 07:58, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * @SnowFire: Yeah I've thought about doing some work to get it up to actual GA and then run it through GAR, but haven't had the time. Lots of sketchy sourcing. One problem is that a lot of academic sources are about earlier versions of the language, which makes it hard to write about the current version. -- Tamzin  &#91;cetacean needed&#93; (they&#124;xe&#124;she) 17:21, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I took a closer look at the article and yeah, needs work - I'd be happy to work with you taking it to GAR (and maybe FA?) 21:47, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Moving to neutral per discussion with Tamzin. I am still not sure it is not vital, but I am also not sure that it is. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:36, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * To be clear, it wasn't the Toki Pona book I was referring to with that comment. And I actually agree that Toki Pona has more interest than some of the legacy conlangs, although balanced against less historical relevance, but the standard to meet isn't "better than other conlangs" but rather "meets VA5 standards".  In general, I'm not a fan of hectoring people on VA5 votes, but...  this one is very open-and-shut IMO.  Even if we just grant the level of interest you claim unconditionally...  that kind of level of interest is not even on the same planet is what we would consider a VA5 level.  For a book, take a look at Vital_articles/Level/5/Arts, which is not very well maintained IMO (definitely some suspicious inclusions) but in general includes stuff like The Autobiography of Malcolm X, the kind of works random students read about in high school classes.  Is the Toki Pona: The Language of Good at that level?  You say that it has 519 ratings on Amazon.  I checked List of The New York Times number-one books of 2014 for comparable 2014 books, and Gone Girl (novel) was what I randomly picked - turned it was a 2012 novel but had cross-promotion with a movie.  It has 162,168 ratings on Amazon.  It's not a VA5, nor is the author.  Okay, fine, let's restrict it to non-fiction: Unbroken (book) has 75,556 ratings, What If? has 29,899 ratings (although xkcd itself is a VA5, in fairness), Capital in the Twenty-First Century has a mere 5,378 ratings.  None are VA5s, all have 10x-300x the ratings.  Per the source written by Toki Pona advocates linked above, they only estimated 1400 speakers, but even given the top-end range of 5,000 speakers, that is still just nothing for online communities compared to the truly big ones, which also are not VA5s in general.  Like, any major musician who doesn't have at least 5,000 fans isn't a major musician.
 * Finally, please consider systemic bias here. Highly online communities punch above their weight, non-English speaking communities beneath it.  There was a famous move request that argued that the island of Java with 150 million people living on it was the primary topic, despite there being lots of online computer programmers who considered Java-the-programming-language the primary topic.  That move request succeeded, and it was right.  5,000 Toki Pona speakers who have used the language in the past decade should not outweigh 3 million Kabyle speakers who have spoken the language for a millennium+.  SnowFire (talk) 01:27, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't know why were using the example of the book rather than the language itself as the proposal is to remove that rather than the book (which there isn't even an article on), I was just specifically responding to the mentions of books in the nomination (in fact Unua Libro, the Esperanto counterpart, isn't on the vital list). Another of the examples, Unbroken, is kind of a similar case in that it is a biography which presumably makes the person its about more directly vital (I'm not familiar with him but I could see him being added). FYI I would support Capital in the Twenty-First Century and Gone Girl being added, although there may be disagreement on wherever to add the film or book for the latter, or even to take up both slots.

Remove Volapük
From the article:
 * In 2000 there were an estimated 20 Volapük speakers in the world.

This one is more interesting as it claims it was once more influential, though, with allegedly a million speakers back around ~1900. So perhaps it deserves to stay due to historical importance? But.. first off, I suspect that million speaker count is a high estimate. Second, even if isn't, this probably still isn't a VA5 unless there's a push to substantially increase the quota of VAs in languages (which, well, maybe?). Franco-Provençal had a million+ speakers in 1900, too, but is a living language that still has speakers today and also had speakers in the 12th century. It's not a VA5. For an extinct example, Old Prussian language probably had a lot of speakers back in the day, probably more influential, and also not a VA5.

Support
 * 1) As nominator. SnowFire (talk) 04:38, 20 November 2023 (UTC)


 * This comment here leads me to believe that maybe a more thorough setting of standards might be needed instead of just going after "low-hanging fruit" until the number 600 is reached. I would see more reason to have Old Prussian if there is e.g. a single space left for the sake of completeness since that's the third major Baltic language and Franco-Provençal for all its merits would be another Romance language in a list with quite a few of them, but that's a subjective opinion of mine and others would have a differing one. So what is the more important standard for being a VA5 when one has to be chosen over another? Activity, historical importance, fully representing the variety of languages that the world has to offer, something else? Mithridates (talk) 14:23, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I would support a proposal to increase the quota given for languages, but even if language articles expanded from 600 to 700 say, I think it would be hard to support giving Volapük a place even then. I mentioned it above, but take Papiamento as an example: it's been a living language for centuries and is used in government and in official documents.  It's the majority and official language of several countries (if small ones).  It punches deeply below its weight, because it's not very prestigious and people writing literature will do it in English or Dutch for a wider audience, but it does produce plenty of writing, just the kind largely ignored on the Internet.  If we were to try to add some more languages to the VA list, I think 300,000+ current speakers and similar numbers of historical speakers over centuries would be where we'd start.  SnowFire (talk) 16:17, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Agreed on Papiamento (I'm a bit of a fan). I was thinking about the criteria for inclusion again yesterday (after the Dvorak discussion) and just what a vital article should be defined as. I'm not familiar with this list so these are just my thoughts, but it feels to me like breadth and uniqueness should play a role which is why I would include Papiamento over say a regional Romance language spoken somewhere in Western Europe even if the population is smaller.
 * For a really quick example, if you had Encyclopedia A with the following:
 * 10 Romance and 8 Germanic languges from Western Europe, all with a population of 500,000 or more
 * and Encyclopedia B with the following:
 * 8 Romance languages, 3 Baltic languages (including Old Prussian), 5 auxlangs, Papiamento, Unserdeutsch
 * I would consider the latter more complete with 'vital' articles in the sense that if the whole encyclopedia were just 18 articles I would choose the latter as the more complete one even if it resulted in the total population and activity of the langugaes therein as lower than Encyclopedia A. Mithridates (talk) 01:18, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Well put. I actually agree with your overall thoughts and agree that diversity is important.  I just don't think any auxlangs get close enough to qualify on such a diversity criteria.  SnowFire (talk) 06:54, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
 * One further thought: this is a list of articles that should be of high quality, and the individual auxlangs are all quite high quality as it is (I'm quite motivated to document the history of Interlingue and another user Frzzl is doing the same for the individual users of the 1920s and 1930s). Meanwhile the more general pages like international auxiliary language, regional auxiliary language (I forget the exact title, will check later) and all the rest are pretty low quality and coulduse the attention as articles needing work. So if pruning the list is of the essence then maybe two or three of those, or even just the one main article in addition to Esperanto? Mithridates (talk) 11:57, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Actually I can get behind the proposal of listing international auxiliary language instead of Interlingua, Ido, Interlingue, etc and I think this could be a good alternative here, although I still support keeping Volapük. BTW for regional mauxillary I think you mea Zonal language. Totalibe (talk) 01:19, 22 November 2023 (UTC)
 * This hasn't passed yet, and I just had a mini-heart attack when I saw this discussion in Mithridate's contribs - I'm not going to !vote for most of these, but I would like to concur adding IAL as a vital article. I've had nominating it in the back of my mind for a while, since I suspected the conlang articles would get dropped sooner or later. That would leave us with three conlang articles:
 * Constructed language, vital because it's just a major family of languages
 * Esperanto, for being the most important (pulls in >1mil pageviews a year)
 * International auxiliary language, I argue vital because it was one of the most important linguistic and generally intellectual movements in the Belle Époque and has a lasting legacy.
 * 21:15, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Oppose
 * 1) Oppose This has major historical importance in the history of IALs and focusing solely on current speaker counts is heavily flawed. I will also point out that the "Specific languages" subsection is only over quota by 6 (276/270) and that to be completely honest focusing efforts on strict (rather than a more soft) adherence to a specific round quota count for each section regardless of other factors at this scale isn't particularly helpful, which is something that has been mentioned before here on this talk page. Totalibe (talk) 23:29, 20 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Per Totalibe. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 16:18, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Discuss
 * Re Totalibe's comment: I don't want to go off-topic, but to be clear, I did not make these proposals out of "strict adherence to a specific round quota count." I made them because I don't believe any of these are vital articles.  If the quota was expanded, I would suggest "spending" it elsewhere than languages with 20 speakers.  SnowFire (talk) 06:54, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

Discussion
For whatever its worth, I realized that Bihari languages had been mistakenly placed under "specific languages" rather than "language families", so that reduces the specific languages to five over quota but increases language families to two other quota. For whatever its worth, all but one of the subsections for language are over quota regardless of wherever conlangs are removed or not. Totalibe (talk) 01:34, 22 November 2023 (UTC)

Remove
A rare stub. 14 interwikis, nothing in the content strikes me as making this vital (it is called famous in the lead, but there are zillion works of similar fame IMHO). 82 daily average page views are not impressive. The section is about on quota after some removals pending above, but I am sure we can find works more deserving to be vital.


 * Support
 * 1) As nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 09:27, 7 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Other
 * 1) Swap with Ambiguous image. I'm not even sure there's that much more we could write about My Wife and My Mother-in-Law – it's famous, but that it exists is pretty much all there is to know. It's the concept that's important here.  J 947  ‡ edits 09:44, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) Swap per above.  starship .paint  (RUN) 13:41, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) Swap per above. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 02:02, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) Swap per above. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:35, 17 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Discuss

Remove
Similar case to the above, art trivia stub notable for its cost and nothing else: "The painting held the world record for the highest price paid for a painting by a living artist when it was sold". It already is not in the first three on that niche list. 6 interwikis, 75 daily views, nothing vital here IMHO. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:48, 7 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) As nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:48, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:10, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) per nom.  starship  .paint  (RUN) 13:44, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) Not vital. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:40, 18 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Neutral


 * Discuss

Remove
Sculpture. "Although of only moderate importance from the point of view of art history, it is a great popular favourite with visitors and has become famous." 8 interwikis, 83 daily page views. I am not seeing anything here that makes it vital. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:51, 7 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) As nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:51, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:13, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) Support-- Laukku  TheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 10:42, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) per above.  starship  .paint  (RUN) 13:51, 8 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Neutral


 * Discuss

Remove
18 interwikis but just 42 daily views, nothing in the article suggests this is particularly special (vital). It is just a modern park decoration. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:57, 7 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) As nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:51, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) --Makkool (talk) 19:51, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) Support-- Laukku  TheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 10:42, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) per Makkool.  starship  .paint  (RUN) 14:15, 8 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Neutral


 * Discuss
 * I have to advocate for it a little bit, that it's a major landmark and tourist attraction in Helsinki - more than just a park decoration. There are more vital sculptures and monuments to represent Finnish art though, so I still support removing this. --Makkool (talk) 19:51, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Remove
4 interwikis, 35 daily page views, Disney attraction that is not vital - nothing in the article suggests it is anything but barely notable Disney trivia. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:57, 7 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) As nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:51, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) Support-- Laukku  TheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 10:42, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) vital,  vital, a statue of them together, not so.  starship  .paint  (RUN) 13:40, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) SupportTonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:23, 8 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Neutral


 * Discuss

Archived 2021 consensus to Remove Creation science, Intelligent design, Theistic evolution, Young Earth creationism
At 22:13, 19 July 2021 (UTC), User:Darker Dreams posted this discussion. It achieved consensus, but was archived without being enacted. In the original discussion, all but Intelligent design achieved consensus. Original discussants were User:Hyperbolick, User:Dimadick, User:Thi and User:C933103.


 * Support
 * 1) Partial Support as nom per original consensus (all but intelligent design).-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:06, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose
 * 1) Oppose removing Intelligent design, as two of us did before. Don't think there was ever consensus to remove. Hyperbolick (talk) 02:25, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * There were three opposes in the original discussion. You, Thi and C933103.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:17, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Discuss
 * 1)  I guess this should belong to Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5/Society. David Xuang (talk) 02:14, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I should have listed this in society rather than STEM. You are correct. Will move.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:12, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 1) I mistakenly listed this at STEM. Now listing here.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:13, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Add Asian people
We have white and black people among ~100 ethnic concepts at V5, but we missed this pretty common concept.--<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 13:57, 3 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) As nominator. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 13:57, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Support-- Laukku  TheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 14:34, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) Support per nom. Speaking of ethnicity, I’m surprised we don’t have Latin Americans at this level. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 17:39, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 4) per above.  starship  .paint  (RUN) 01:31, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 5) Aszx5000 (talk) 14:49, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 6) -TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:03, 1 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose

Side note: the concepts of, and  may be obsolete and perhaps distasteful to some, but we may want to vote on wheter they are vital or not as well. is V5 with one sublisting for ... Godwin's law aside, if we list Aryans, well... --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 13:57, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Discuss


 * @OhnoitsvileplumeXD Please suggest adding Latin Americans, I'd support it. are V4, at least. <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  02:08, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Add Celebrity
This is a spinoff from User:Piotrus' Sex symbol nomination above.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:03, 30 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) As nom. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:03, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Celebrities are what makes up a lot of the vital articles for People. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 14:57, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) Totalibe (talk) 23:12, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 4) I'd support at V4 too. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 02:40, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 5) Support <b style="color:yellowgreen;background:darkgreen;font-family:georgia;"> Carl</b><b style="color:darkgreen;background:yellowgreen;font-family:georgia;">wev </b> 15:37, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 6) Support-- Laukku  TheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 15:55, 7 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Neutral


 * Discussion

Add
Suggested as important missing concept above where we discuss adding Asian Americans. Pinging participants of that discussion:. Copying my side note below for further consideration. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 02:43, 31 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) As nominator. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 02:43, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Per nom. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 10:20, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) Per nom. Aszx5000 (talk) 12:24, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 4) per nom.  starship  .paint  (RUN) 01:39, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 5) per nom. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:04, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose

Side note: the concepts of, and  may be obsolete and perhaps distasteful to some, but we may want to vote on whether they are vital or not as well. is V5 with one listing for ... Godwin's law aside, if we list Aryans, well... --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 13:57, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Discuss

Remove Salting (union organizing)
This concept does not seem nearly as important as the other union-related entries on the list. It is not important enough to be listed.


 * Support
 * 1) As nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:29, 23 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Per nom. Aszx5000 (talk) 13:49, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) Very niche, just 1 interwiki. Plenty of more important concepts related to labor or social movements we should add instead (ex. I suggested nonviolence elsewhere on this page recently). --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 12:36, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 4) Support Agree with other comments. Small article not many interwikis. Niche and there are probably more important concepts in the same area not included. There's nothing stopping an overview of the topic being explained in othere articles, in particular trade union itself. <b style="color:yellowgreen;background:darkgreen;font-family:georgia;"> Carl</b><b style="color:darkgreen;background:yellowgreen;font-family:georgia;">wev </b> 07:12, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 5) Per nominator and other supporters.  The  Blue  Rider  Postal horn icon.svg 17:39, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 6) Support-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:20, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose


 * Neutral


 * Discuss

Add BRICS
Major economic international organization compromising all major players of the Second World and Third World that are attempting to challenge the current power dynamics in order to create a new world order. We should also consider New Development Bank.  The Blue  Rider   12:52, 3 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) As nominator.  The  Blue  Rider  Postal horn icon.svg 12:52, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) Extremely politically important. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:14, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) Important group of nations. As vital as . -TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:04, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) Sure. V5 group. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  03:37, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 5) Support, important before their recent notability. I was tentative at first but there are a  of these sorts of groups listed here, which BRICS surely eclipses.  J  947  ‡ edits 03:43, 9 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Discuss

Remove
This game has not had much influence other than being one of the video games considered the best, and even then several of the sources only have it as one of the best and not the best. The lead even calls the game a cult classic, implying a lack of widespread influence.


 * Support
 * 1) As nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:16, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Support Seems significant but not vital. Games or series of similar time and type which seem more important are Diablo or Baldur's Gate, neither of which are listed. <b style="color:yellowgreen;background:darkgreen;font-family:georgia;"> Carl</b><b style="color:darkgreen;background:yellowgreen;font-family:georgia;">wev </b> 17:27, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) Support per nominator.  The  Blue  Rider  Postal horn icon.svg 19:53, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 4) as the article says, not a commercial success.  starship  .paint  (RUN) 16:21, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 5) Aszx5000 (talk) 16:59, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 6)  Support I've never heard of it, and I've played games my entire life Kevinishere15 (talk) 23:29, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

The 2019 hit Disco Elysium is very obviously inspired by Torment.-- Laukku  TheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 17:43, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose
 * Discuss


 * Disco Elysium is not currently listed either. Also, even if it was a vital article, inspiring something else that is vital does not make something vital. Inventing a genre, yes. Simply inspiring a popular work, no. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:50, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Well, a game having derivate works or having inspired other games is certainty a valid argument for vitality. Nevertheless, this game isn't vital.  The Blue  Rider  Postal horn icon.svg 19:53, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying it does not help, I am simply saying that it is not enough by itself. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:56, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * As someone interested in video games, I've heard of P:T but not of the Disco game. Just saying. <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:46, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Add Met Gala
31 interwikis and once a year this article has a month with hundreds of thousands of pageviews because this is a grand annual spectacle that is important to the fashion industry and its four capitals of New York City, Paris, London and Milan. It has been in the Top 25 Report five times.


 * Support
 * 1) as nom-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:09, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) This counters the gender sysbias. I am pretty sure we are way over represented in sports and video games and military and not enough in stuff like fashion and cosmetics. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 06:45, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) Support per above.  J  947  ‡ edits 09:56, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) Support per amount of citings and cultural relevance. Respublik (talk) 05:26, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 5) per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 06:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Discuss

Add Disability rights movement and Anti-racism
These anti-discrimination movements are not yet listed. We list various strands of (such as  and ),, and. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 14:27, 30 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) As nom Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 14:27, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Vital at V5. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  11:45, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) Makes sense. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:32, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) As this section (both parent and subsection) is well under quota entries can be added without discussion (I had edited it before but didn't think to add either of these). Totalibe (talk) 23:05, 2 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Neutral


 * Discussion
 * "This section contains 186 articles out of a quota of 200.". --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:47, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Hasbro and Mattel
We list 58 articles on toys and 184 articles on games other than video games. The companies which are responsible for many of them are perhaps worthy of inclusion.

Add
Known for, , , etc.


 * Support
 * 1) Weak support as nominator. I qualify my support because Hasbro and Mattel aren't that big compared to other companies we list based on financial metrics such as revenue. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 10:11, 27 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Discuss

Add
Known for, , , etc.


 * Support
 * 1) Weak support as nominator. I qualify my support because Hasbro and Mattel aren't that big compared to other companies we list based on financial metrics such as revenue. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 10:11, 27 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Discuss

Various US television programme removals
As it stands the US television program subsection is over 100% above quota so to try to begin rectifying this I will suggest the following removals:


 * The Amazing Race (American TV series) - Critically acclaimed reality show, but I'm not sure how groundbreaking or influential it is beyond that.
 * NBC Sunday Night Football - Simply the the official broadcast of AFL games on Sunday, this is very similar to the already listed Monday Night Football except for the fact that its thus far been running for a much shorter length of time. I don't think we really need an article listed for each country's most popular sports broadcast, for the US given its size and influence I can accept one but any more than that is an overkill. Also note the low amount of interwikis for its lack of international relevance.
 * Dark Shadows - ran for a much shorter length of time than the other soap operas listed and most of its lasting relevance seems to have been rather indirectly driven by spin-offs. Not really clear on how much of a direct influence it has on later shows other than developing a cult following (which is by definition, smaller than a mainstream following)
 * Father Knows Best - Rather overshadowed by other 50s sitcoms, Leave it to Beaver and I Love Lucy, which are also listed.
 * The Carol Burnett Show - Out of several variety shows listed, this doesn't really seem to stand out. Highest Nielsen rank is #13 for 1969-70.
 * The Mod Squad - One of the less vital shows listed for the 1960s, with fairly low ratings listed and only a few interwikis. It was an early example of an attempt to address social issues in a crime drama but it's doubtful that later shows wouldn't have tried had this one not aired.
 * The Bob Newhart Show - Only 2 Emmy nominations, and all that really seems to be stated for long-term impact is making a few retrospective lists.
 * Family Ties - Popular during its time, but seems lacking in long-term influence and very relegated to the 80s culturally.
 * St. Elsewhere - I'll just say it's never a great sign when the lede describes its following as "small", and that it peaked at #47 on annual ratings.
 * NYPD Blue - In terms of police procedurals, I think this is very much overshadowed these days by series such as Law & Order, NCIS and CSI.
 * In Living Color - was influential during its time and helped launch a number of careers, but its popularity in its own right seems fairly short-lived
 * 7th Heaven (TV series) - Maybe relatively popular but given its poor critical reception and the fact it never even broke top 100 in annual rankings, far awar from vital. Mainly seems to be important only to American Evangelical culture.

This is all I'm going to nominate here but I will say that even though I have listed several entries here, this will still need a lot more work to cut down. Possibly a different approach involving a shortlist of things to keep would help? Totalibe (talk) 23:09, 11 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) Support as nom Totalibe (talk) 23:09, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Thank you for the initiative. Support per nominator.  The  Blue  Rider  Postal horn icon.svg 21:16, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) Support all. Never heard of any, even in passing, outside I think NYPD Blue and yes, it has ben overshadowed by more prominent examples of that genre, which seems true for each and every example m entioned here. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 00:39, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 4) Support All except NYPD Blue and The Amazing Race (American TV series) — Preceding unsigned comment added by TonyTheTiger (talk • contribs) 02:12, 13 November 2023 (UTC) -TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:03, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Also except NBC Sunday Night Football. This has been the most watched TV show in the United states the last 5 years, 9 of the last 10 years and 10 of the last 12 years.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:03, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) support removal Lorax (talk) 03:40, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Support removing most of them, oppose removing Amazing Race and NYPD Blue. QuicoleJR (talk) 03:12, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) Support all. No lasting vitality here. Aszx5000 (talk) 16:47, 30 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 4) Support removing almost all, neutral on Amazing Race Kevinishere15 (talk) 03:31, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 5) Support all removals except that of The Amazing Race.  J  947  ‡ edits 04:21, 21 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose
 * 1) Oppose NYPD Blue and The Amazing Race (American TV series). The later has won Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Reality Competition Program 10x. I don't watch a lot of reality TV and don't watch this show, but I respect 10 Emmy wins enough to think it must be vital. As far as NYPD Blue being overshadowed by subsequent shows, I don't agree. They were built on its shoulders.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:12, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Also oppose NBC Sunday Night Football as explained above.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:03, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose removing NYPD Blue and The Amazing Race (American TV series), everything else is fine to remove. Utopes (talk / cont) 20:05, 13 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Oppose removing Amazing Race, everything else can be removed.  starship .paint  (RUN) 05:53, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) Oppose removal of the Amazing Race per emmy's won, the number of seasons aired and somewhat historical cultural impact, support for everything else. Respublik (talk) 18:02, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) Weakly and begrudgingly oppose removing The Amazing Race. As  is level 4, listing an example at level 5 makes sense.  J  947  ‡ edits 04:21, 21 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Discuss

Remove
We really should not have four NYC newspapers on the VA list, and this one seems to have the weakest argument. The awards are considerably less than some other papers that we have removed.


 * Support
 * 1) As nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 15:21, 28 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose
 * 1) I think the significance of this newspaper to the counterculture is enough to make it vital at this level. I would probably remove another, non-NYC, paper first. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:19, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) Strong oppose. Village Voice isn't just your run-of-the-mill NYC newspaper that covers local affairs. It was an arbiter of taste in both music and movies for decades and the Village Voice Film Poll used to be a highly respected source for critical film rankings. Aurangzebra (talk) 00:01, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) Strong oppose The village voice is probably the most important alternative newspaper in the world.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:45, 29 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Neutral


 * Discuss

Musical instruments
We are two over quota for Musical instruments (82/80 articles)
 * - a larger version of the level 4 vital article Bassoon. Article says technique is similar to its smaller cousin, with a few notable differences.
 * - article says any one of a number of similar types of double-headed drum widely used, with regional variations, throughout the Indian subcontinent. Not so sure what is so special about this non-specific drum other than being used in and around India.  starship  .paint  (RUN) 02:52, 5 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) as nom.  starship  .paint  (RUN) 02:52, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Support per quota and they can be swapped earlier if someone cares to explain why. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:27, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:41, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 4) Support --Makkool (talk) 13:12, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose
 * Discuss

Remove

 * Support
 * 1) We are one over quota for Modern visual arts (301/300 articles) / General (26/25 articles). I think this is the least important of the design articles.  starship  .paint  (RUN) 02:52, 5 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Discuss
 * How about reoving Ligature (writing) instead (more intewikis but seems like a pretty niche concept, subarticle to typography which is sub to graphical design...)? Or removing them both and adding something else? Like Circuit diagram and Pattern (sewing), two topics linked from the lead of design, and neither is vital yet. Arguably tey should be more than the two topics mentioned here. Swap swap? --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:27, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * - I don't mind swapping Ligature for Circuit diagram, but we can't double swap to include Pattern (sewing), as we will still be above quota.  starship .paint  (RUN) 13:30, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * @Starship.paint Ah I see. It's just hard to figure out whether cirtuit or sewing pattern design is more vital. Anything else we could swap/remove? <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 08:11, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * - nothing stands out to me, though my eye is kind of uncultured in this regard. I'm not sure that I would indeed include sewing pattern design over anything there.  starship .paint  (RUN) 02:46, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * @Starship.paint is V4, and frankly, it needs a bunch of ssubarticles - it is much more vital to human history than video games (or board games...). The fact that we have none (it's under Vital_articles/Level/5/Technology) is IMHO very indicative of the bias we have. We list 100+ video games because they are cool and we play them, we practically ignore sewing because this is what our grandmothers do (or let's face it, this is the classic case of male vs female bias in topics). <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  03:14, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * - then we can simply include it in Technology, there is space there, there is no need to swap for a current general design article.  starship .paint  (RUN) 03:25, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I proposed relevant additions below - feel free to comment there and suggest another section (although this raises the issue of less then ideal categorization...). As for removal, what is less vital: flower design vs ligature? How do we argue for apples vs oranges here? :) Interwiki (20:52)? Page views? <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 07:28, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * This discussion is far too motivated by quotas. This troubles me.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:46, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Yup. Quotae are guidelines and not rules, especially when we've only just filled out the list and there are many bad inclusions and many many bad misses. Quota enforcement for the sake of quota enforcement is something to do in many years' time, not now, but to be fair I am sure that many of these are bad inclusions if they're being singled out for removal at this point in time. At the moment, the only particularly strict quota is the 50K.  J 947  ‡ edits 08:30, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * - first up, I'm not randomly or blindly picking topics to remove just to adhere to the quota. I'm looking for the bad inclusions that J947 mentioned. As for the strict overall quota of 50,000, we are over it by 200, just updated the count. Every removal I am proposing here gets us closer back to 50,000, then we can change quotas for subcategories as necessary. Once we are over 50,000, we have to make removals sooner or later, so why not now, prune the bad inclusions?  starship  .paint  (RUN) 03:43, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Yeah, sure, I'm just saying these removals need not be based on the precise quota – "quota enforcement" rings wrong to me when these sections are basically at the right number. Below I've written a number of points, loosely connected to the point and to each other in some sort of vague logic. It's never going to make a whole lot of sense outside of my own mind, so don't worry about trying to follow my argument here; draw your own conclusions.50,200 is . It's the equivalent of being out at VA3 by a grand total of 4 articles (which it has been, in the not-so-distant past, and it is a whole heap more stable than VA5). I guess my point is that we've only just reached our target of 50,000, and immediately pressing about strict quota enforcement in such a manner is unusual because e.g. 200 as the quota for performing arts is just an arbitrary number. It's been picked out of a hat at this point.Generally speaking, it makes more sense to add or remove not based on quota but on how they compare to others of their kind. I'm sure you'd agree that some quota changes are warranted; we're going to realise we've picked wildly out-of-proportion numbers – no offense to anyone, it's just inevitable; we're not omniscient, sadly. The normal way in which quota changes are done is that they are proposed after most of the movement of articles to reach that new quota is done. Therefore, these sections should not be kept at a precise multiple of five or ten, as we'll never see the quotas change.  J 947  ‡ edits 05:14, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Add
A key area of modern design, mentioned in the lead of but not vital yet. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:18, 8 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) As nom. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  03:18, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) per nom. Part of science education also.  starship  .paint  (RUN) 03:43, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) Per nom. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 02:07, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:15, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 5) Considering that is at VA4. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 10:24, 27 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Discuss

Add An American Dilemma
This was a very influential book on racism that was even cited by the U.S. Supreme Court in. It is rated Top-Importance by four WikiProjects, including WikiProject History.


 * Support
 * 1) As nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:23, 2 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose
 * 1) Just 2 interwikis and 22 pageviews daily. I see this as too American centric and would rather cite a work that had more global impact. For example, is v5 and is much more famous (33 intwrwikis, a bit under 400 daily views), and so would be most works by Weber. The proposed book is not in that league. For example, I'd rather see we add, which ISA voted to be the most important sociological book ever (8 interwikis and 68 pageviews), or something else from that list (ex. #2 is , also 8 interwikis, 63 dailies).  Neither is VA5 but IMHO both should be added before the proposed book, which to me seems like V6.-<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  09:27, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) per Piotrus.  starship  .paint  (RUN) 14:11, 8 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Neutral


 * Discuss

Remove
If my suggested additions above pass, this will be at quota, and frankly, 'Eastern folklore' is underrepresented and we need to free spots for it (sysbias etc.). And the 'Superhero media' section is the one that needs to be culled down (and I say it as a fan of the genre). 19 entries out of which only two are not Western is a few too many, whether you compare it to 'Animation and comics' which gets just 17, said 'Eastern folklore' at 12, or something like modern sf novels which get a similar amount of entries in a different part of the vital list. Anyway, Green Goblin is my #1 suggestion to cut. He is just a Spider-Man antagonist, with no movie or TV series to his name, effectively unknown outside the Marvel/DC fandom. 34 interwikis and ~<900 daily views is comparable to many other comic articles we do not list (ex. is not VA, has 54 interikis and similar daily views). Nothing in the article suggests he is significant to popculture outside the superhero genre, and that genre does not deserve 19 fictional characters --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 13:28, 7 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) As nom. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:51, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) Per nom Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 05:14, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) Support-- Laukku  TheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 10:42, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) Yeah, he's less prominent than Thor, I would swap for that.  starship .paint  (RUN) 11:49, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thor is discussed here for those who want to click through. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 12:16, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 1) Totalibe (talk) 10:16, 20 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Neutral


 * Discuss

Add The Canon of Medicine
Avicenna's medical encyclopedia, which became a standard medical text at many medieval universities and remained in use as late as 1650 (that is, more than half a century). A vital and influential text. --Makkool (talk) 19:42, 7 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) As nom. --Makkool (talk) 19:42, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) From the lead: "The Canon of Medicine remained a medical authority for centuries. It set the standards for medicine in Medieval Europe and the Islamic world and was used as a standard medical textbook through the 18th century in Europe". 39 interwikis. Seems good for V5. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 12:21, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) Support per both above.  J  947  ‡ edits 00:09, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) QuicoleJR (talk) 14:12, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 5) Totalibe (talk) 10:16, 20 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Neutral


 * Discuss

Add
Countering sysbias in fictional characters, Nasreddin has 70 interwikis and 300+ daily views. He is a satirical Sufi figure believed to have lived during the Middle Ages in Turkey. He is known for his witty anecdotes and clever solutions to tricky problems and features in thousands of classic Arab stories. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 14:04, 9 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) As nom. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 14:04, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) Per nominator.  The  Blue  Rider  Postal horn icon.svg 15:20, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) Support-- Laukku  TheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 17:41, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) nom Aurangzebra (talk) 04:21, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 5) Totalibe (talk) 10:16, 20 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Neutral


 * Discuss

Swap and  for Sumerian literature and Indonesian literature
That section is exact on quota, and those two (28 and 14 interwikis; 43 and 29 views) are covered by parent and to some degree,. I think we should try to diversify our coverage to deal with systemic bias issues. Indonesian literature has 11 interwikis and 56 views, and Indonesia is a large country. Vietnamese literature has 16 interwikis, 36 views and is a country with influential if regional culture. Hungarian literature has 24 interwikis and 25 views. Brazilian literature has 17 iwikis and 39 views. Ukrainian literature has 21 iwikis and 37 views. All of those would be worth adding IMHO. Or going to classics, Sumerian literature (18 interwikis, 141 views) "constitutes the earliest known corpus of recorded literature". Sanskrit literature has 37 interwikis and 270 views and probably should be added too, although it is partially covered by I guess? --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 13:14, 10 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) As nom. Sem-arbitraily chosing Sumerian and Indonesian as my picks to replace the two chosen for removal. Feel free to suggest better swaps (I chose Indonesian > Brazilian as the latter is somewhat covered by Portuguese literature). --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 13:14, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Swap both. Clearly Jewish literature is overrepresented if these subcomponents are vital and yet, as the nomination shows, important cultures are unrepresented. I'm okay with removing 2/3 of, Hebrew literature and Yiddish literature.  starship .paint  (RUN) 14:41, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) Support both --Makkool (talk) 13:19, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) Support additions and removing Israeli literature, oppose removing Hebrew and Yiddish literature. These are all important bodies of literature, and there is room for all of them. QuicoleJR (talk) 15:29, 27 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose
 * 1) Israel is a recent state, Hebrew is an ancient language, would much rather remove  than  since the latter is more encompassing.  The  Blue  Rider  Postal horn icon.svg 15:35, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
 * @The Blue Rider I am fine removing Isreali too as your argument makes sense. Just to clarify, do you have any thoughts on Yddish? And are you fine leaving both Jewish and Hebrew at V5? <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 09:13, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm neutral on Yiddish and yes, I'm fine with Jewish and Hebrew at V5.  The Blue  Rider  Postal horn icon.svg 09:28, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Support Blue Rider's proposal instead. Totalibe (talk) 00:21, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 * @Starship.paint @Totalibe Ping folks for more ideas what do, as it seems we have rough consensus to do something along the lines discussed but not clear enough to actually do anything. <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:58, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I think I would support swapping Yiddish unless the quota is increased. Totalibe (talk) 15:40, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
 * - actually we all agree to keep Hebrew and remove Israeli.  starship .paint  (RUN) 01:34, 1 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Discuss
 * I seriously wonder if we shouldn't increase the quota here, and not just by +5 but by +10-20 or such. I think there are more than 55 literatures by country/ethnic group vital at that level. Compare to our quotas for individual video games, or some random geographical or biological subcategories which contain stuff that most people have never heard of... --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 13:14, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

Bottom 10% VA5/Arts articles by pageviews
Least viewed first, using pageviews from 2020-01-01 to 2023-10-25:

Same notes apply as in the bottom 10% Technology articles I posted in the respective talk page.-- Laukku  TheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 20:12, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Quota enforcement - remove

 * Support
 * 1) We are one over quota for Cultural venues (131/130 articles) and this is the second least viewed level 5 Art article. 12 interwikis, does not seem vital.  starship  .paint  (RUN) 02:13, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Support-- Laukku  TheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 17:54, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) Just an average nice museum. Not world-famous. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:20, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 4) feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 09:21, 27 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Discuss

Quota enforcement for musical works
We are four over quota for Specific musical works (404/400 articles)
 * - this is the 6th least viewed level 5 Art article. Only 1 interwiki. Does not seem vital.
 * - this is the 24th least viewed level 5 Art article. No interwikis. Does not seem vital.
 * - only 1 interwiki. Does not seem vital.
 * - only 3 interwikis. Does not seem vital.  starship .paint  (RUN) 02:36, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
 * - only 2 interwikis. Does not seem vital.  starship .paint  (RUN) 12:31, 5 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) as nom.  starship  .paint  (RUN) 02:36, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Support Fitwilliam Sonatas and Nuper rosarum flores The latter article claims it's "important in the history of Western classical music" but fails to explain why. Schubert is famous for his song/lieds, currently neutral on having an overview article.-- Laukku  TheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 10:33, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) They can always be swapped again when someone makes a good argument. For now, per quota enforcement, this makes sense. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  11:21, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 4) Support all Totalibe (talk) 10:16, 20 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose

Wikipedia confusingly has two articles for different versions of Bach's Magnificat, I already took the liberty to remove the one proposed here and add the more famous one. It's one of Bach's most famous works (ranking as about 30th out of 486 in Category:Compositions by Johann Sebastian Bach and its subcategories), probably deserving to be vital. Feel free to revert and discuss if you disagree with my boldness.-- Laukku  TheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 10:33, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Discuss
 * - good catch, now please see above for the replacement I have nominated to remove.  starship .paint  (RUN) 12:31, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Quota enforcement for performing arts
We are two over quota for Performing arts (202/200 articles)
 * - this is the 16th least viewed level 5 Art article. Only 1 interwiki. Very short article. Does not seem vital.
 * - only 2 interwikis. Seems to overlap many other dances per Sequence dance.  starship .paint  (RUN) 02:36, 5 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) as nom.  starship  .paint  (RUN) 02:36, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Support both-- Laukku  TheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 17:54, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) Support per quota and they can be swapped earlier if someone cares to explain why. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:22, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 4) Support Tivoli Circuit, neutral on Sequence dance since it seems like it is a genre and not an actual dance. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:15, 22 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 5) Support Tivoli Circuit Totalibe (talk) 10:16, 20 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Discuss

Quota enforcement for works of visual art
We are two over quota for Specific works of visual art (302/300 articles), but The Birds of America will be shifted here, so we need to remove three. These are among the least viewed.
 * - once the most expensive photograph, but seems like nothing much beyond that. 8 interwikis only.
 * - a photograph of a pepper. 3 interwikis only.
 * - painting with 11 interwikis. Article fails to establish vitality.  starship .paint  (RUN) 06:58, 5 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) as nom.  starship  .paint  (RUN) 06:58, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Support all-- Laukku  TheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 17:54, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) Support per quota and they can be swapped earlier if someone cares to explain why. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:22, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 4) Support all --Makkool (talk) 13:15, 27 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose
 * 1) Oppose Pepper No. 30 because is level 4.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:32, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose The Pond—Moonlight I am not sure we are not undervaluing photography. There are only three of these and two are held by and .-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:32, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Oppose Pepper No. 30, which seems important, is in a lot of museums, and its creator is VA4. Haven't looked at the others yet. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:20, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Update: I would like to also oppose The Pond-Moonlight, as I find it important enough for inclusion, mostly per TonyTheTiger. It even featured in a BBC documentary! Neutral on Charles I at this time. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:23, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Now that the subsection quotas do not exist, do any of you want to reconsider your supports? QuicoleJR (talk) 15:19, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
 * What they said. <sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 02:10, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 1) No for me. These are still worth removing even though we don't need to follow quota restrictions. --Makkool (talk) 15:31, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) No for me as well, we are still over 50,000, and still worth removing.  starship .paint  (RUN) 01:37, 28 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Discuss

why per you the 4–2 did not pass? Respublik (talk) 07:46, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * ditto. I feel I was in the minority.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 09:44, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Add Visa Inc. and Mastercard
Two of the world's largest publicly-traded companies, facilitating payments and money transfers worldwide. Surprising omissions considering that we list Western Union at this level.


 * Support
 * 1) As nominator. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 02:30, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 04:28, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) Both.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:59, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) Both. Known worldwide. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 06:54, 26 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Mixed


 * Discuss

Add Siemens
176 years of continuous operation, and is one of the largest technology companies in Europe.


 * Support
 * 1) As nominator. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 02:03, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) agree Aurangzebra (talk) 08:23, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) Support Respublik (talk) 17:10, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) Per nom Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 03:31, 1 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Discuss

Add
The humble picnic is a widespread meal that most certainly deserves a spot in VT5. Historically, was a status of wealth and nowadays millions of families and friends are gathered outdoors because of it.  The Blue  Rider   14:26, 19 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) As nominator.  The  Blue  Rider  Postal horn icon.svg 14:26, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) Obviously. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:43, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) Sure, VA5 concept. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  02:31, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 02:51, 25 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose

Pinging Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus as requested.  The Blue  Rider   19:30, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Discuss

Add
is V4. Mephistopheles has 41 interwikis, ~1,400 daily views and "has since become a stock character appearing in other works of arts and popular culture." There is also the terrible Mephistopheles in the arts and popular culture article. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 12:24, 7 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) As nom. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 11:51, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) per nom.  starship  .paint  (RUN) 11:43, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) Totalibe (talk) 10:16, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 03:36, 25 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Neutral


 * Discuss

Add Record chart
Charts are an important topic for popular music. Should be vital at least on V5. --Makkool (talk) 13:42, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Support
 * 1) As nom. --Makkool (talk) 13:42, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 22:33, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 02:03, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) Per nom Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 12:00, 26 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Discuss

Add Undertale
Inarguably the most influential indie RPG of this century so far. Undertale has had a significant impact on gaming culture, and it's had an unquestionable influence on video game storytelling, specifically indie game storytelling, for close to a decade now. It's been referenced in pop culture across mediums (examples including references in South Park and Pop Team Epic), its characters and music have since appeared in some of the biggest game franchises of all time (most notably Super Smash Bros.), and its music was even played in front of Pope Francis. Multiple articles and surveys from outlets including Polygon, IGN, and TV Asahi have named it among the greatest video games of all time, and it has been nominated for 22 awards. The song Megalovania in particular has risen even farther in influence, and is often regarded as one of the greatest video game songs of all time. Cerrathegreat (talk) 21:20, 7 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) Support as nom. Cerrathegreat (talk) 21:20, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) "This section contains 101 articles out of a quota of 105." so we have room, so why not. That said I think we need to reduce the quota for video games... --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 12:40, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) Honestly, I would want this on the list even if we halved the quota. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:28, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 18:43, 13 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Discussion

Add
How organizations can influence politicians and policy is surely vital.


 * Support
 * 1) As nom. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 05:35, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) It is rated High-Importance by WikiProject Politics, and it is a clearly vital concept. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:40, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 04:30, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) I'd support at V4 too. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  03:14, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 5) Support-- Laukku  TheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 08:44, 22 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Discuss

Add Christmas card

 * Support
 * 1) Support as nom <b style="color:yellowgreen;background:darkgreen;font-family:georgia;"> Carl</b><b style="color:darkgreen;background:yellowgreen;font-family:georgia;">wev </b> 16:25, 7 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Oppose
 * 1) I'm sorry, but I think Christmas is already overrepresented at Vital_articles/Level/5/Society_and_social_sciences/Culture.  starship  .paint  (RUN) 16:16, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Per Starship. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 10:21, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) Per Starship. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:04, 28 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Discussion

Add Christmas decoration

 * Support
 * 1) Support as nom <b style="color:yellowgreen;background:darkgreen;font-family:georgia;"> Carl</b><b style="color:darkgreen;background:yellowgreen;font-family:georgia;">wev </b> 16:25, 7 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Oppose
 * 1) I'm sorry, but I think Christmas is already overrepresented at Vital_articles/Level/5/Society_and_social_sciences/Culture.  starship  .paint  (RUN) 16:16, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Per Starship. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 10:21, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) Per Starship. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:05, 28 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Discussion

Add
As noted above, yes, education section is way over quota, but that's something to discuss later (I'll start discussion below shortly). For now, we have a pretty basic concept in education that should be vital. Whether we want to expand quota or do something else (prune few dozen entries), this should be vital. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:13, 31 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) As nominator.--<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:32, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) --Makkool (talk) 18:54, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 15:54, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) Per nom Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 05:38, 26 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Discuss
 * Thank you for supporting this. Can I interet you in the quota discussion immediately below? --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 06:23, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Responded below. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 06:39, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Add Human factors and ergonomics
Ergonomics is a vital topic in the modern world. --Makkool (talk) 13:51, 17 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) As nom. --Makkool (talk) 13:51, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) Ergonomics (a vital concept, yes) redirects there. See talk page for proposed rename/split discussion. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 02:43, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3)  J  947  ‡ edits 02:49, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 06:09, 2 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Discuss

Add
"is the period of social and economic change that transforms a human group from an agrarian society into an industrial society." Should be considered vital on V5. --Makkool (talk) 13:51, 17 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) As nom. --Makkool (talk) 13:51, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) I can't believe this is not V5, heck, this is a V4 concept. One of the basic concepts related to the modern era. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 02:44, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) Easy support.  The  Blue  Rider  Postal horn icon.svg 09:03, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) Per nom. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 09:06, 23 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 5) Totalibe (talk) 23:45, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 6) I'd support this at V4.  Vileplume  ( talk ) 01:40, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose


 * Discuss
 * - try to use VA link in the future. It is useful. Check what I did with the haeding here. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 02:44, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Add
An obviously morally repugnant philosophy that is yet prominent in several countries. I propose it be added to this section and not another section because it seems logical to categorize it consistent with "regular" Nazism.


 * Support
 * 1)  p  b  p  16:19, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) Surprisingly or not still a prominent ideology, with the surge of populism worldwide due to bad material conditions these extreme ideologies will only become more relevant.  The  Blue  Rider  Postal horn icon.svg 16:23, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) This disgusting ideology has sadly become prominent in some places and some groups. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:27, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) Vital =/= nice. In either case, this reminds me that of some similar-ish stuff mentioned at still open above that we may want to consider as vital too. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  03:24, 20 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Discussion

Add Kyoto Protocol
The Kyoto Protocol, a cornerstone in the fight against climate change, united 192 countries. It represents a historic milestone, standing as the first global initiative to combat climate change. This accord not only laid the foundation for decisive environmental action but also set the stage for the consequential.  The Blue  Rider   17:59, 18 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) As nominator.  The  Blue  Rider  Postal horn icon.svg 17:59, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) Sure, V5. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  03:26, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) -- Respublik (talk) 17:17, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) Per nom Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 14:07, 4 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Discuss

Add Cafeteria
A very common type of place where food is served, with enduring popularity because they tend to be more affordable.


 * Support
 * 1) As nominator. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 14:37, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) Per nom Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 05:47, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) Common enough facility to be listed at V5. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 06:45, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) definitely Aurangzebra (talk) 23:51, 26 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Discuss

Remove
The toys category needs some cleanup - perhaps a small quota reduction too. Quite a few entries are, well, like this one - stubby, with no claim of importance, barely notable. Just one interwiki, 174 daily views are more than I expected but still not enough for V5, pending something to show this is significant for anything - which, again, the article fails to make any mention of. Frankly, this is so bad I am tagging this one with notability and considering an AfD for that. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 13:08, 8 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) As nom. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 13:08, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) Anything with an orange notability tag is probably not vital. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:32, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) Definitely notable and popular. Probably not vital.  J  947  ‡ edits 05:54, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) Support-- Laukku  TheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 10:19, 24 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose
 * Discussion

Add Qualia
A popular term in philosophy of mind. --Makkool (talk) 18:13, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Support
 * 1) As nom --Makkool (talk) 18:13, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) Widely used and known concept, it also has applicability to other areas besides philosophy such as psychology and psychiatry, namely hallucinations.  The  Blue  Rider  Postal horn icon.svg 02:20, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) Per nom Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 05:41, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 23:48, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose


 * Discuss

Add
Due to its connection to social programs provided by the government, which assigns benefits based on agricultural and non-agricultural residency status (often referred to as rural and urban), the hukou system is sometimes likened to a form of caste system. It has been the source of much inequality over the decades since the establishment of the People's Republic of China in 1949, as urban residents received benefits that ranged from retirement pension to education to health care, while rural citizens were often left to fend for themselves. Considering that we list both and  at V4, we should at least list Hukou at V5 (if not V4 – I'd argue the inclusion of the caste system in India but not the hukou system in China is a reflection of systemic bias).


 * Support
 * 1) As nominator. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 15:13, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
 * V5, if it was an American thing, it would be V4 by now... --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 02:40, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 1) Per nom Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 06:04, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) Totalibe (talk) 23:45, 28 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Discuss

Add
See discusison above, but TL;DR: sewing is V4 but has no indentifiable subsarticles, this is a major example of design and very vital for millenia. If it would put us over quota, how about removing one of 100+ video games, so sewing can get a single vital subarticle? (Bias, bias, bias... we should probably move dozen or two video game quota to sewing topics alone). --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:18, 8 December 2023 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) As nom. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  03:18, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 2) Only if this is sent to the Technology subcategory, where Sewing is.  starship  .paint  (RUN) 03:46, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * 3) Per nom. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 02:07, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) Support --Makkool (talk) 20:08, 8 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose

Per 's comment: should this be moved to subpage for technology (or linked from it)? --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 07:29, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Discuss

Remove
The least-viewed last year out of the US museums we list. The Indianapolis Museum of Art is the ninth oldest and eighth largest encyclopedic art museum in the United States. Not seeing the vitality here.


 * Support
 * 1) As nominator. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 18:20, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) Support --Makkool (talk) 23:01, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) I also do not see the vitality. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:52, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 00:02, 29 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Discuss

Add
Inspired by a thread above. Key setting in classic sci-fi and speculative fiction. 67 interwikis. We already have. Probably add as a subsection to speculative fiction. Aurangzebra (talk) 08:06, 25 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) As nom Aurangzebra (talk) 08:06, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) Surprised it wasn't there already Kevinishere15 (talk) 00:13, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) Should be V5. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 10:15, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) Support-- Laukku  TheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 13:54, 27 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Discuss

Add
One of the major concepts within, and arguably the parent concept of.


 * Support
 * 1) As nominator. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 03:16, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) agree Aurangzebra (talk) 03:33, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) Per nom Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 06:05, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) Sure. V5 concept at least. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 06:50, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 5) Totalibe (talk) 23:45, 28 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Discuss

Add Credit
The counterpart to, and the parent topic of.


 * Support
 * 1) As nominator. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 16:22, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) Obvious oversight --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 07:06, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) Support-- Laukku  TheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 07:59, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) Per nom Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 13:04, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 5) Per nom. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:26, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 6) Per nom. Not sure why my earlier !vote was removed. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:46, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 7) per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 02:16, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 8) Per nominator. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 01:45, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * 9)  Vileplume  ( talk ) 20:01, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose


 * Discuss

Remove
is VA4, sure, but I do not think that this is a vital subtopic, and bed already has several other subtopics on the list. Only eight interwikis. The piece of wood at the top of the bed behind the pillow is not vital.


 * Support
 * 1) As nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:31, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) makes sense Aurangzebra (talk) 19:47, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) Support-- Laukku  TheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 10:34, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) 𝒻eminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 02:51, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 5) Right, this is trivial. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 01:52, 4 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Oppose


 * Neutral


 * Discuss

Swap: Remove Wesfarmers, add 7-Eleven
A retail chain with global operations is more important than a retail company which predominantly operates in the world's least-populated continent.


 * Support
 * 1) As nominator. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 09:12, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) This is Antarctica erasure! But yes, completely agree. Usually I'm all for global diversity in categories but considering there are almost 700 7-Eleven's in Australia, I agree Aurangzebra (talk) 09:25, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
 * If we're talking about geographic diversity, 7-Eleven is Japanese-owned, and we don't currently list any Asian brick-and-mortar retailer. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 12:32, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
 * oh did not know that - even better! Aurangzebra (talk) 17:55, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 1) Agreed. Brand next to nobody heard of for a much more global competitor.--<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 03:44, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) Per nom. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 00:40, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) Per nominator. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 01:45, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose


 * Discuss

Add
From National Toy Hall of Fame. 30 interwikis, 187 interwikis, classic toy. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 13:57, 8 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Support
 * 1) As nom. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 13:08, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 2) Per nominator.  The Blue  Rider  Postal horn icon.svg 01:10, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 3) feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 15:01, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
 * 4) Per nom Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 06:05, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Oppose


 * Discussion