Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Lists/Archive 13

"List of..."
Hi all. I read somewhere a few months back that there was a push (I think from the Wikimedia foundation, but could be wrong about that), to simplify list titles by getting rid of the "List of". Anyone here at this project know anything about it? The reason I ask is I do a little bit of work over at NPP, and every once in a while we'll get a new article like, Villages in Budaun, Uttar Pradesh. Now, a year ago, I would have simply moved it to List of Villages in Budaun, Uttar Pradesh, but if there's a movement on to go with the shorter versions, I won't. Conversely, if there is a consensus to move to the shorter version, whenever I come upon a new article with "List of" in the title I can simply move it. I'll also let the other folks over at NPP know. Thanks in advance. Onel 5969  TT me 17:38, 12 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Nope, we’re not discontinuing that title convention. postdlf (talk) 00:50, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry, missed this last week. Thanks .  Onel 5969  TT me 22:11, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

List of SS personnel
For information.--Hildeoc (talk) 19:28, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

External links update
After discussions spread over the last couple of years, we have finally updated External links with some new advice about how to format external links in some stand-alone lists. This format is not mandatory, but it may be helpful in some cases. Please feel free to try it out in pages that you think are appropriate, and leave feedback on the guideline's talk page. Thanks, WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:13, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

RfC on inclusion criteria for lists of political endorsements
FYI, I have just opened an RfC relevant to this WikiProject here: Village pump (proposals). &mdash; Rhododendrites  talk \\ 14:35, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Request for information on WP1.0 web tool
Hello and greetings from the maintainers of the WP 1.0 Bot! As you may or may not know, we are currently involved in an overhaul of the bot, in order to make it more modern and maintainable. As part of this process, we will be rewriting the web tool that is part of the project. You might have noticed this tool if you click through the links on the project assessment summary tables.

We'd like to collect information on how the current tool is used by....you! How do you yourself and the other maintainers of your project use the web tool? Which of its features do you need? How frequently do you use these features? And what features is the tool missing that would be useful to you? We have collected all of these questions at this Google form where you can leave your response. Walkerma (talk) 04:24, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Renaming discussion for "List of male performers in gay porn films" article
I have suggested that the article List of male performers in gay porn films be changed to List of male performers in gay pornographic films. Porn is slang and Wikipedia generally uses the term "pornography" for categories and articles, as it does with the main gay pornography article. Adding notice here to alert editors. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 03:04, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

List of Chinese inventions
I have nominated List of Chinese inventions 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. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 22:34, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Three related Articles for Deletion
There are three AfDs on topics that editors here may be interested in: Articles for deletion/Methodist Churches in Leicester, Articles for deletion/List of Baptist churches in Leicester, and Articles for deletion/Congregational Churches in Leicester. — MarkH21talk 20:46, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Interesting situation at List_of_My_Hero_Academia_characters
There was a vast removal of content relating to character details, simply see the page history and talk page.. Further comments to facilitate a more thorough editor consensus would be appreciated. Tutelary (talk) 20:10, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:List of Anglo-Catholic churches
You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:List of Anglo-Catholic churches. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:38, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

Discussion at Template talk:Set index article
You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:Set index article. ‑‑Trialpears (talk) 19:34, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

Merger discussion for Outdoor sculpture in Washington, D.C.
An article which may be of interest to members of this project&mdash;Outdoor sculpture in Washington, D.C.&mdash;has been proposed for merging with another article. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. Ham II (talk) 21:27, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

List of heritage places in City of Canning listed at Requested moves
A requested move discussion has been initiated for List of heritage places in City of Canning to be moved to List of heritage places in the City of Canning. This page is of interest to this WikiProject and interested members may want to participate in the discussion here. —RMCD bot 17:37, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
 * To opt out of RM notifications on this page, transclude, or set up Article alerts for this WikiProject.

List of top international rankings by country
This article apparently went through a couple of AfDs, the last one being back in 2010, and was mostly kept by default as a "no consensus". While I can see some encyclopedic value to an article like this, this one does seem to be in a bit of a mess. Some things like the formating of tables, etc. can be fixed somewhat easily, but lots of the entries appear rather random and are not supported by citations; moreover, some of them might not be current by a number of years. I'm not saying that it absolutely needs to go, but it would be helpful if some kind of standard formating and criteria for inclusion could be established so that random entries are not being added to individual subsection in a what looks to be nothing more than a haphazard manner without much regard given to the overall formatting, etc of the article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:37, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Lists of Polish gminas
Please see Administrators' noticeboard where help with a lists problem is needed. Johnuniq (talk) 06:10, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Listeria
As many of you know, Listeria can generate list articles wholly from data on Wikidata.

While we use it on non-article-space pages for tracking and planning, we do not, yet, use it for article-space lists.

The Portuguese Wikipedia does, and has just promoted its first Listeria-generated article to featured status: pt:Lista de mortos e desaparecidos políticos na ditadura militar brasileira ("List of the killed and disappeared for political reasons during the Brazilian military dictatorship"). Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:11, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

List of Chinese inventions
I have nominated List of Chinese inventions 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. Gun Powder Ma (talk) 18:42, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Nominated Tony Award for Best Featured Actor in a Play for demotion
I have nominated Tony Award for Best Featured Actor in a Play for demotion at Featured list removal candidates/Tony Award for Best Featured Actor in a Play/archive1. This notice serves as service of such. Therapyisgood (talk) 08:56, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Demotion of Tony Award for Best Featured Actress in a Play
Formal notice that Tony Award for Best Featured Actress in a Play is up for demotion at Featured list removal candidates/Tony Award for Best Featured Actress in a Play/archive1. Therapyisgood (talk) 09:20, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

List of earthquakes in the British Isles
I have been struggling for some time (intermittently) to improve the list of earthquakes in the British Isles. The problems that I have with the current article are: I have attempted in the past to tighten things up and change the list to be more meaningful, but I have consistently been reverted. I thought that I would ask here, because perhaps it's just me, perhaps it isn't the indiscriminate list that is appears to me to be. I would appreciate any comments, thanks. Mikenorton (talk) 11:28, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * It is very long (56k), it includes more earthquakes than any other country list, despite being an area of low seismicity
 * It has no real selection criteria apart from someone feeling an earthquake and it being reported somewhere

Does the current text of WP:BIDIRECTIONAL have broad consensus
Pls see Wikipedia talk:Categories, lists, and navigation templates#WP:BIDIRECTIONAL navbox requirements. -- Moxy (talk) 19:02, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

What belongs in List of lists of lists?
List of lists of lists is the ultimate, or root list for all of Wikipedia. However in many cases there is more than two levels of lists beneath it. For example, Lists of lists of people by belief and Lists of people by nationality. In these cases should the sublists be included on LoLoL if they are about a major topic? For example, should we include List of Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, etc on the main page? What about subcategories like List of American Jews? Also, how about geography? I know Lists of townlands of County Cork should not be on there, but what about broader topics that relate to one larger country or continent?— Naddruf (talk ~ contribs) 18:55, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

Members of the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (R)
I’d like to ask for advice please. Someone has created separate articles for each letter of the alphabet for members of the KNAW. There are two problems. Firstly most of the names don’t have blue links, although very likely many of them could in the future I suppose. Secondly the articles are all entirely sourced to the website of the KNAW itself. There is no doubt that this is reliable, but it isn’t secondary, and I’m not even sure about the copyright implications of mass-copying a database onto Wikipedia. What should be done with these list articles? Mccapra (talk) 06:44, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

AfDs on country lists
There are currently AfDs open on Index of China-related articles and Index of Romania-related articles. Mccapra (talk) 21:49, 18 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Now that both have been deleted by consensus we should expect an RfC on the mass deletion of all country lists. Mccapra (talk) 10:19, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Lists of schools of U.S. Catholic archdioceses
Hi! Please see the deletion discussion regarding Articles for deletion/List of schools of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Chicago which may affect lists of schools of Catholic dioceses in the U.S.

Thanks, WhisperToMe (talk) 04:20, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Suggested improvement to Template:WikiProject Lists
Please see the discussion at. —⁠andrybak (talk) 22:45, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Profession-based lists
Hi all, I've been trying for a long time to wrap my head around the role of profession-based lists like List of physicists and List of chemists. Before I start, I'm really not trying to be annoying or cause trouble, I am sincerely extremely confused by the state of these lists and I don't know how to help because I can't find any relevant discussions. As far as I can tell these lists have no specific criteria for what can be included and what can't, beyond ostensibly every entrant needing to have a page. But there are constant errors in both directions. First, we can find lots of redlinks and unlinked names on these lists, where I guess people are judged to be notable enough for the list but not for their own page. And second, there seems to be a broad lack of consensus on whether having a page automatically justifies inclusion in these lists; I have seen people get reverted with no talk page discussion for adding a page to these lists that "wasn't notable", even though they were adding a page that exists on Wikipedia and has not had its notability as a page challenged. The list of chemists makes things even more confusing with the announcement that "It should include those who have been important to the development or practice of chemistry" whose "research or application has made significant contributions in the area of basic or applied chemistry" -- is this distinct from WP:GNG or WP:NACADEMIC, and if so, how is it judged? If a chemist's page survived a deletion discussion because of WP:NACADEMIC point 7, does that mean that the person didn't necessarily make a significant contribution to chemistry and that chemist can have a Wikipedia page but they can't go on the List of Chemists? These are thorny questions, so should there be a talk page discussion to get consensus on every contentious entry in addition to Wikipedia's general notability criteria? Finally, what is the scale of these lists supposed to be? I was just looking at a profession where there were about 400 items on the list, and about 2700 pages in that profession's Category. Would I be helping by adding 2300 more names to the list, or is there some method by which just 400 of the 2700 pages were selected? Can somebody please point me to any previous discussions or higher level consensus precedents that determine which pages go on these lists and which don't? Thanks! - Astrophobe  (talk) 07:16, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
 * It occurs to me that the restriction on the list of chemists probably arose from discussions around somebody like, say, Isaac Newton, who does not appear on the List of chemists despite making various discoveries that are crucial parts of modern chemistry. That makes total sense, for the same reason that Aristotle does not appear on the List of sociologists. While Aristotle is obviously notable and obviously had important things to say about social relations, I can easily imagine that there is a (possibly silent) consensus that he is not notable as a sociologist. Fair enough. But that would seem to rule out almost no modern chemists, because if a recent researcher is notable and they are a chemistry professor then whatever advance they made or position they held that made them notable under WP:GNG or WP:NACADEMIC almost certainly counts as a notable contribution to chemistry. Except in the rare case of a chemist who has a wikipedia page because they are, say, a notorious murderer, and not for reasons related to chemistry, in which case they're clearly out of the list. And yet, even this idea isn't consistently applied, because I hardly think that Margaret Thatcher appears on the List of chemists due to her notable work at BX Plastics! No matter how hard I try I simply can't make heads nor tails of these darn lists. - Astrophobe  (talk) 07:26, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Category:Rulers of the Kingdom of Kongo has been nominated for merging to
Category:Rulers of the Kingdom of Kongo has been nominated for merging to. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Place Clichy (talk) 08:50, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Anchors. Tools/best practices for efficient list creation and maintenance?
I was wanting to link to a row in List_of_acts_of_the_116th_United_States_Congress, but I see the rows have no anchors. I also can't find any discussion of list creation tools (but for one), or a mention of them at List Assessment, let alone a requirement that featured lists be sortable or have anchors where appropriate. Adding an anchor just for the row I was interested in felt super-inefficient.

Encouraging editors to start from scratch seems primitive. I suppose one could look at featured lists for examples of best practices feature-rich lists.

--50.201.195.170 (talk) 00:19, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

List of Ultimate teams
Was wondering if some others more perhaps familiar with list articles would mind taking a look at this article. Given the subject (there’s probably not a lot of RS coverage of the sport of ultimate), it seems unlikely that many if not most of the entries will ever have stand-alone articles written about them which makes it kind of hazard to develop any real WP:CSC. So, the list seems to be ever expanding so that it now has more of a WP:LISTCRUFT feel to it than not (at least in my opinion). There’s also a pretty excessive use of flag icons which seems really unnecessary per WP:TOOMANY, particularly given the fact that article seems to be sectioned by country. I could see a list article of Wikipedia notable entries or maybe even clearly identifiable professional teams in recognized professional leagues, but it seems that there should be some way of verifying this so as to stop people from adding local, semi-pro, or just recreational league teams. — Marchjuly (talk) 15:09, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

CAT:NN
CAT:NN has a crazy backlog, including over 360 lists some of which have been waiting almost 12 years: Can you please help? Thanks, Boleyn (talk) 15:14, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Move request – List of underground newspapers
Your feedback would be appreciated at List of underground newspapers. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 04:00, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

the tenure is more than 10yrs
Kamraj air is falling short of 10yrs in tenure, we need to remove that from the list Jilaniak (talk) 09:47, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 * tenure is from the French "to hold". It has nothing to do with 10yrs. -- D kriegls  ( talk to me! ) 06:50, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

More than 10years in office is not followed at 42nd entrant
This list includes chief ministers who have served for more than 10 years in office.

but the 42nd entrant kamraj sir served only 9years 172days only

So he is not eligible and fulfilling the main 10years in office rule

we need to remove the entrant Jilaniak (talk) 01:17, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

New template: Dynamic list editnotice
As anyone who's ever edited a lot around dynamic lists is aware, they are uniquely a magnet for e.g. redlinked pages of subjects very clearly not notable. I've created an editnotice (i.e. notice that appears in the edit window when you are editing a page, NOT when you're just reading it), Dynamic list editnotice, that I envision might be used at pages like List of Dartmouth College alumni, where it would display like this:

See the template documentation for customization options. This would be as a complement to the non-editnotice Dynamic list that already appears at such pages, just in the body. What do you all think? &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 10:04, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I noticed after I posted this that there are actually a few (quite hidden) templates that exist for specialized instance of dynamic lists, such as Template:Alumni edit notice, which is very widely used on all of four pages. I may turn it into a wrapper if there are no objections. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 23:35, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Edit war on List of My Hero Academia characters
Most of the descriptions below each characters' names have been removed, and the page has been protected indefinitely for "repeated insertions of unsourced content", despite similar content being on every character list I could find. I think this is needed of more opinions than just me and the other party member. 72.219.72.215 (talk) 13:19, 6 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I’d like to request for more input again, as the edit war has restarted. Unnamed anon (talk) 15:00, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

List of TEDx conferences
Anyone have any ideas about what to do with this list? At present, it's largely a directory of non-notable, self-organized conferences sourced only to TED.com, Facebook, and YouTube. Some of the individual conferences with their own articles might be notable, but the vast majority do not seem to be. I'd stubbify it myself but as that would likely be a massive change I wanted to seek input from others first. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 14:56, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , seem like a very well-formatted illustration of WP:NOTDIRECTORY; it completely breaks WP:ELPOINTS. Add questions related to notability and sourcing, I'd say it's either WP:TNT or AfD.  // Timothy ::  talk  15:34, 29 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Yeah, ; the only reason I didn't bring it straight to AfD was that TEDxBermuda, TEDxLagos, TEDxLima, TEDxSanta Cruz, TEDxWarsaw, and TEDxWellington have their own pages. Most don't have very many independent refs of their own, but some do. So I was thinking I would just cut like 95 percent of List of TEDx conferences to include only these pages, and then evaluate each individually. But since that would be a very significant change, I wanted to seek input from others first. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 15:43, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Top importance designation?
I was perusing the list of top-importance articles and thought you'd want to reevaluate just a few. I think both 2018 in baseball and List of tallest buildings in India wound up with "top" designation because someone added the WikiProject Lists to the Talk pages and copied the code from the line above (where "top" was appropriate, such as WikiProject Baseball and WikiProject Skyscrapers). If this happened to these two, the same error could have happened to other articles. And there's only 32 in that category, so it's not a big job. Since I'm not a regular participant of this wikiproject, I thought I'd leave a message rather than re-evaluating/changing the designations myself. Normal Op (talk) 18:05, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Importance ratings are notoriously unreliable. Feel free to change them yourself—it'll almost surely be an improvement. &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 18:14, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
 * LOL, Okay. I didn't want to step on anyone's toes if there was a designated (or self-designated) person going around classifying these. Normal Op (talk) 19:52, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Feedback requested at Portuguese vocabulary
Your feedback would be appreciated at Talk:Portuguese vocabulary. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 01:36, 8 September 2020 (UTC)