Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5/History and geography/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

Subsection quota

OBSOLETE
With the removal of sub-categories quotas this proposal has become obsolete. The Blue Rider 20:34, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


After the quota change in Northern Europe, the quota for the city section is technically only 1995. Where should we redistribute the quota? My first choice would be Central Asia. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 11:53, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Northern Europe cities

Link. This (Nordics + Baltics) is a section that strikes me as being overrepresented: there is a city listed for every 0.96 million people. Compare similar European countries: Austria has one for every 1.49 million; Switzerland has one for every 1.45 million; Belgium has one for every 1.16 million; Greece has one for every 1.52 million; Portugal has one for every 1.72 million. Not massively overrepresented, but it feels like there are a few questionable inclusions here.

No changes to Iceland, Estonia, Norway, Finland, Sweden, or Lithuania are proposed yet – I had envisioned a few more changes than just the two proposed originally. Prepare for an information dump. Akureyri isn't important enough unfortunately, so Iceland will always have Reykjavik as its sole representative. Estonia by rights should only have 2 cities at a maximum, but Tartu's influence as a university city and Narva's extremely interesting history meant I didn't really think we could remove either of them. As for Norway, I'm still considering proposing the removal of Stavanger depending on the support these proposals receive, and instead of removing Longyearbyen I've proposed to remove Spitsbergen above. All the Finnish cities simply seem a league above: Finland's population seems to be concentrated in cities, and all these cities have their own distinct character, but Espoo is likely to be removed soon (I might propose to add it back). Sweden has only 6 cities despite having almost twice the population of Norway, Finland, and Sweden – that's because it has fewer big cities. I can't put my finger on any glaring changes in that department. Lithuania's three major cities are included. J947 ‡ edits 03:11, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Denmark: remove Esbjerg and Randers

PASS
Esbjerg passed with 5-0 and Randers 4-1. The Blue Rider 20:36, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Including the Faroes and Greenland, we currently list 8 cities for Denmark, a country of a little over 5.9 million. Excluding them, we include 6, being Copenhagen  4, Aarhus  5, Aalborg  5, Odense  5, Esbjerg, and Randers. It's my impression that the latter two, as well as having the least population of the lot at 60–70,000, are the least important and should be removed.

In Esbjerg's favour, it's the most important western Danish city, so my support for its removal is significantly less than that for Randers'. Randers has greater historical importance, however.

Support
  1. Support both as nom. J947 ‡ edits 03:11, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
  2. Support per my view that we need to reduce quota on geo entries anyway. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:49, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
  3. Support per both above. starship.paint (RUN) 00:54, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
  4. Support' per nom,-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:19, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
Oppose
Mixed
  1. Support Esbjerg, oppose Randers as this list’s only inland city. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 19:08, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Latvia: remove Daugavpils and Jelgava

Removed Jelgava 4-0, not removed Daugavpils 2-2. starship.paint (RUN) 06:37, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Latvia only merits 2 cities at this level when currently we list 4 (these two, Liepāja  5, and Riga  4). No cities other than the capital reach 100,000 in population, but port city Liepāja does seem just important enough to be listed for me (the historical population chart on its article tells a story). These two, particularly Jelgava, are more run of the mill.

Support
  1. Support both as nom. J947 ‡ edits 03:11, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
  2. Support per my view that we need to reduce quota on geo entries anyway. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:49, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
Mixed
  1. Support Jelgava, oppose Daugavpils as the country’s second largest city. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 12:09, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
  2. Support Jelgava, oppose Daugavpils per Vileplume. QuicoleJR (talk) 12:49, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Quota decrease from 35 to 30

PASSED
Quota decreased 4-1 -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 00:07, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

As the section header says. More of a minor consequence of these proposals, as these sub-section quotae aren't very important, but it might as well go up for discussion.

Support
  1. Support as nom. J947 ‡ edits 03:11, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
  2. starship.paint (RUN) 04:08, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
  3. Totalibe (talk) 21:32, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
  4. Support per my view that we need to reduce quota on geo entries anyway. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:49, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Oceania seems to have a horrendously high quota of 45, so if anything, we should take 5 from their quota. Oceania barely has 45 million people! Either way, I’d support redistributing those 5 to Africa, Southern Europe, Asia, or North America. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 01:44, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
    Most of the reason for that is covering national capitals, so if you support reducing Oceania you should also support not automatically listing capitals. Also, Northern Europe isn't exactly very populous either. It's being defined here as Nordic countries + the Baltic states, which based on their respective articles, only seem to have a total population of around 33 million themselves, on a quota of 35. Totalibe (talk) 19:57, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
    While I believe that Oceania is less historically important than Northern Europe, I now see that Northern Europe has a lower quota per capita, especially when Uzbekistan itself has a higher population than it and Central Asia has an extremely low quota, with one for every 3.8m people. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 20:43, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

General discussion

Place yer thoughts here. J947 ‡ edits 03:11, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Add Southeastern United States

NO CONSENSUS
The Blue Rider 20:38, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


We always list Southwestern United States and would make sense to include this. Interstellarity (talk) 17:52, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. Interstellarity (talk) 17:52, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
  1. Would support a swap with something like East Central United States or one of the other geographic regions that, while official designations, are not commonly used terms pbp 18:45, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. With Southern United States  4 being listed, this isn't much more than a point of confusion to me. It is the same states swapping out Texas and Oklahoma for Missouri. It doesn't seem like much more than an alternate definition of the one we already list.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:15, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Balance of History by city

Currently at Wikipedia:Vital_articles/Level/5/History#History_by_city_(42_articles). No idea what the quota here is. From what I see, possible problems:

  • the usual overrepresentation of US topics: US leads the list with five entries: New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Philadelphia and San Francisco
  • Ireland seems also overrepresented, with Belfast and Dublin. Compare to UK, which just has London.
  • India has Delhi, Mumbai and Kolkata
  • Italy has Rome and Naples
  • China is underrepresnted, with just Beijing and Shanghai
  • Russia has two cities: Moscow and Saint Petersburg.
  • no other country has two cities

Whether we need to add or remove stuff depends on the quota, but if we are keeping the current 42 article quota, there are some balance issues to consider. Removing at least one city from Ireland and giving it to UK, for example. China should at least equal US, IMHO, which could be easily achieved by cutting US down to three cities. Japan likely needs another city. Germany and France too. Portugal is missing from the list (add history of Lisbon?). Etc, etc. Feel free to propose removals/additions/swaps here - I'll do it in few days and ping anyone who commented here if nobody does. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:42, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

42 is definitely too many. QuicoleJR (talk) 01:44, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
Do we need to keep this as a separate list at all? Maybe, it would be better to distribute its items among #History by country and subdivision (422 articles) sections, and then it would be easier to achieve regional diversity, and also we could cross-compare individual cities and some of the regions. Kammerer55 (talk) 04:53, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
Right. Also, to build on your comment elsewhere, which of those cities are V4? Any that are not probably don't deserve a history of at V5 (or we should consider making them V4, conversly). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:00, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
Actually, there are >400 cities on level 4: Wikipedia:Vital articles/Level/4/Geography#Cities_(450_articles), and it seems the listed 42 are all included there. Kammerer55 (talk) 06:42, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
If we look at this list on its own however, then the US is indeed overrepresented, especially since all US cities are only a few hundred years long (as already mentioned). (Also, note that History of Washington, D.C. is listed in another section.) Since these articles are about "Histories" of cities, then the most useful comparison criteria would probably be: 1) the age of the city (how many important historical periods it encompasses); 2) the significance of the events that have happened over there for the world history (or at least for the history of the continent). In the US section: Chicago, LA and SF should definitely be removed. In Europe: Athens, Berlin, London, Paris and Rome seem to be more historically significant than Amsterdam and Vienna, and those are more significant than Belfast, Dublin, Naples and Warsaw. However, most of these cities are probably more significant than most of the 50 histories of individual US states (!) all of which are present on the list, so it might be good to clean up that section first. Kammerer55 (talk) 05:04, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

The fair number is probably about 25 and TBH, IDK if we need any American city except New York. Chicago, LA and San Fran are all about 200 years old, the latter two being minor outposts before the Gold Rush. pbp 04:17, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Remove History of Dublin and History of Belfast

Removed both 5-0. starship.paint (RUN) 02:50, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Support
  1. Support as nom. Let's get the ball rolling with the removals of two cities a tier or two below the 30 most important cities by history. J947 ‡ edits 05:01, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. Support. Most European capital histories are not listed. Dublin and Belfast are probably among least historically significant, since nothing of worldwide (or at least regional significance) have happened over there. --Kammerer55 (talk) 05:07, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. Support. Per my and other comments above. That's local history and nothing more, I fear. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:02, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
  4. Support per nom. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 14:16, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
  5. Support Totalibe (talk) 18:56, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove History of Chicago, History of San Francisco and History of Los Angeles

MIXED
San Francisco, Los Angeles removed 5–1; no consensus on Chicago 3–4. J947 ‡ edits 01:53, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Support
  1. Support as nom, following J947's example. (I am not nominating Histories of New York, Philadelphia and Washington, since I think those are still much more important than the nominated articles.) --Kammerer55 (talk) 05:16, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. Support. Franly, I'd only consider keeping NYC. NYC is one of the most famous if not the most famous city in the world. Washington may squeek through for being a capital of one of the world's most important countries. Philly, however... what makes its history vital to the world? I'd vote to remove it as well and will likely propose it if nobody beats me to it. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:05, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. Support As I said above, we probably don't need any U.S. cities' history but New York. These are comparatively recent cities in the grand scheme of world history. pbp 16:02, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
  4. Support San Francisco and Los Angeles. Although LA is today the second largest city in the US, its growth is rather too recent for an article on the history to be listed here. San Francisco is even further down the list population-wise. Totalibe (talk) 18:56, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
  5. Support San Francisco and Los Angeles per above. starship.paint (RUN) 05:57, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Oppose removing History of Chicago. Chicago's growth occured further back in the 19th century, giving it an advantage over the other two, and is today the third largest U.S. city. From the article "By 1870, Chicago had grown to become the nation's second-largest city and one of the largest cities in the world". I'd actually remove History of Washington, D.C. before this, as its a much smaller city. Totalibe (talk) 18:56, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
  2. Oppose Chicago-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:57, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
  3. Oppose Chicago in favour of removing Illinois. starship.paint (RUN) 05:57, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
  4. Oppose all, I suppose. If we list the histories of all the states, mostly only VA5 themselves, then we might as well list the histories of VA3.5 cities. J947 ‡ edits 06:50, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
Discussion

We could remove History of Illinois instead of History of Chicago. J947 ‡ edits 23:55, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Worth voting on separately, sure. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 00:07, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Merge #History by city section with #History by country and subdivision

Merged 4-0. starship.paint (RUN) 02:57, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

If we merge the sections, then it might be easier to achieve proper regional balance, and we could also compare cities with regions. Also, historically many countries started from cities and some of them were city-states, so it's not clear why we should separate countries and cities in the History-section. --Kammerer55 (talk) 06:10, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. Support. Note: I am not the nom - nom forgot to support, I expect they'll fix it shortly. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:06, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. Support as nom. --Kammerer55 (talk) 06:10, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. Once we've gone through and cut this section down a bit, as people seem to desire, yes. Before then the current organisation is helpful for deciding what to remove! J947 ‡ edits 08:09, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
    The point was that if it's in one section with countries and regions, then we might deem some regions less important than cities, and remove those instead of cities, or add histories of some other cities which seem also historically important, but in a more regionally-balanced way. Kammerer55 (talk) 08:16, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
    Yes and that's why I support. J947 ‡ edits 08:47, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
  4. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:12, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Balance of History of Asia

Glancing at Wikipedia:Vital_articles/Level/5/History#Asia_(70_articles), which has a 'history of country X', reasonably, with some more controversial subarticles; not sure what the quote here is. PRChina has 7 subartices, Taiwan 2, India 8, Japan 3, Malaysia 3, Mongolia 1, Pakistan 2. Most subarticles seem to be 'histor of major province', which right now I am AGFing as major. Weird articles that may merit swap or removal, however, are, IMHO: Kuomintang in Burma under Taiwan, all three Japanese entries which seem very random: Gokishichidō, Provinces of Japan and History of the Ryukyu Islands (provinces of Japan is perhaps miscategorized, as it seems related to geography of Japan? Or its historical administrative division, covering period 'from the 600s to 1868' according to the article), Straits Settlements under Malaysia which also breaks the common theme of 'history of province' (but that theme is not something that other conintent sections always respect) and History of modern Mongolia, which is the only periodical subhistory article in that section. Below I am suggesting minor fixes, under the assumption that the quota (70) articles is roughly correct.

I have hard time figuring out what to do with Japanese subarticles here. History of the Ryukyu Islands seems like very minor, niche topic that should be removed, likely swapped for something more relevant to Japanese history - suggestions are welcome, keeping in mind that this section tends to list 'history of subregion' with very, very few exceptions. FYI, Japanese archipelago is not vital (should it be?). Japanese islands are V4, but their histories of don't exist. History of Hokkaido is just a redirect (Hokkaido is V4). History of Shikoku does not exist (Shikoku is V4). History of Kyushu again is a red link, Kyushu is V4. History of Honshu is a redirect, Honshu is V4. So a swap to history of the four islands cannot be done currently, since we don't, AFAIK, reserve space for articles that do not exist (yet). Perhaps someone more familiar with Japan can suggest four biggest prefectures or other regions, if they have history subarticles? Alternatively, could give Japan some more 'history by city' slots (see section a bit above, right now only History of Tokyo is at V5). And it's not like we don't have a bunch of other history of Japan articles, just spread through random other sections. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:19, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

The classification of history under current states causes some anachronism to emerge. I'm not sure how the current structure came out, but I would hazard that History of the Ryukyu Islands is included not because of its importance to 'Japanese history', but because of its importance separate to that. Ryuku was an independent(ish) kingdom until the modern period. CMD (talk) 06:23, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Swap Kuomintang in Burma for History of the Kuomintang

PASSED
Removed 4–0; added 3–0 (I'm taking 3–0 as passing on old discussions as 3–1 passes). J947 ‡ edits 02:03, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Context: listed under History of the Republic of China, together with History of Taiwan. Kuomintang is V5 under society. Burmese Kuomintang is less vital than history of the movement. Feel free to argue for a more relevant history-of-Taiwan article, or outright removal to give the spot to something else. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:19, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. As nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:19, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. Support removal, it's really oddly specific given everything else in the list. There are many higher level articles that may cover this topic that are not included. Not sure what the balance is for replacements, but no objection to the Kuomintang or History of Taiwan articles as both are higher level. CMD (talk) 12:37, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. Swap makes sense, as the KMT's history is important to world history. Curbon7 (talk) 21:37, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
  4. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 05:56, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discussion
  1. History of Taiwan (1945–present)? Totalibe (talk) 12:23, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
    My issue here is that we don't genrally list such periodical histories, and this kind of stuff is reasonably well covered by parent History of Taiwan. Perhaps as a rule of thumb, such periodical histiory can be ruled to belong to V6? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:41, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove History of modern Mongolia

PASSED
Removed 4–0. J947 ‡ edits 02:03, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


The only periodical subarticle in Asian section and overall, we don't list such historical subarticles for countries here. And overall Mongolia may not warrant a subarticle, I'd rather give this slot to Japan or China or India or such. Sure, Mongolia has a long history, but modern Mongolia is an insignificant country with a pop. of 3m or so, sorry. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:19, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. As nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:19, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. Not only that, this only covers 1990-present. I'd suggest swapping for Postwar Japan. Totalibe (talk) 12:23, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. Post-war Mongolia is simply not relevant in broader history. Curbon7 (talk) 21:35, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
  4. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 05:56, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Balance of History by country and subdivision

Wikipedia:Vital_articles/Level/5/History#History_by_country_and_subdivision_(422_articles), no comment on quota. For now just some general observations (note minor changes suggested to Asia and cities above).

  • this section is almost entirely based on the format of 'history of country/history of its subregions'. Exceptions are the most problematic, IMHO, but also we have some balance issues (TL;DR, heavy US bias).
  • Europe (100 articles)
    • History of Poland (1945–1989) is one of the very rare periodical (not geographical) subarticles and likely needs to be moved or removed
    • overall, Polish section is problematic, with not a single history of region article, rather, just a bunch of historical and present regions, seems very chaotic. I'll ping some editors interested in Polish history here for comments: User:Dawid2009, User:Marcelus, User:Volunteer Marek. At 6 spots Poland is also likely overrepresented here (France and Germany have 5 entries, Italy 3, Spain 2)
    • UK with 11 entries seems overrepresented, although it also encompasses three Irish articles, including 'history of Ireland'. Ireland should be split to its own section (and arguably cut down to a single article, IMHO).
    • Swiss neutrality is likely vital but why is it in this section? Very much an odd entry given the section 'history of subregion' structure
  • North America (154 articles) - sorry to say, the proportions here seem weird. History of Europe (or Asia) seems much more important than that of Americas (that said, let's remember a lot of history articles are in other sections; some of the bloat here may be solved by moving stuff elsewhere, but bottom line, is history of each US state vital? I have serious doubts here, particulary when we compare those numbers to China or India which get under 10 entries in their correspoding section.
    • Canada (16 articles) - riight, so Canada gets more entries than any European country, or France+Germany+Italy combined. Nobody sees anything wrong here? (Canada gets 13 provinces subarticles, general history of, and Hudson's Bay Company + Halifax Explosion). Frankly, that's likely ~10 too many, most if not all of those 13 subarticles need to go. And Halifax Explosion is cool but hardly vital, IMHO.
    • United States (110 articles) is of course the big elephant in the room here. It is the only country with a detailed periodical subdivision (History by time period (10 articles)), it has 4 general articles including niche stuff like Geological history of North America, 26 colonial history articles, History by states and territories (55 articles), and even History by demographic group (15 articles). Some of this stuff is arguably vital if in the wrong section, like Slavery in the United States, but overall, well, this is ridclous, balance wise. China has <10 entries, so does India, I mean, US gets more articles here than Europe combined.
    • Caribbean (20 articles) - likely cutting room in the 'Territories (7 articles)' part. Is history of those regions vital? (History of Anguilla, History of Bermuda, History of the British Virgin Islands, History of the Cayman Islands, History of Curaçao, History of Saint Martin (island), History of the Turks and Caicos Islands). IMHO it's enough to make sure the islands are vital (and even there I'd be so sure, I meam, if let's say Turks and Caicos Islands diseappeared from world's history - would anyting change?).
    • Central America (8 articles) - ok, possibly could use a subarticle or two
  • South America (12 articles)
    • not a single subarticle. Seems quite unfair compared to all the other regions. A dozen or two spots moved from North America here would like be a good ideas.
  • Africa (58 articles)
  • Oceania (28 articles)
  • Asia (70 entries) analyzed in a section a bit above.

In summary, some more minor fixes may be needed (I'll revisit Poland), but also, we need to discuss how to handle the major US+Canada (and a bit of Australia/UK) bloat here. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:46, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

We could start by removing most of 50 histories of US states. Maybe, we can use a general rule of thumb: if <something> is absent from VA4, then its history probably should not go to VA5. Currently, we have only 8 US states on level 4, so probably a similar number should be considered for staying at VA5. Kammerer55 (talk) 05:44, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
@Kammerer55 A very reasonable rule of thumb. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:58, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
Yes, cut down U.S. histories accordingly. starship.paint (RUN) 16:35, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Remove Phosphate mining in Banaba and Nauru

PASSED
The Blue Rider 14:03, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Does not seem vital. Niche economic history. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:46, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. As nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:46, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. Totalibe (talk) 12:23, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 14:20, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
  4. Not vital.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:22, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discussion

It's more important to Nauru than Hammer DeRoburt (VA5 politician). J947 ‡ edits 02:57, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Possibly, but it's whataboutism as well :P But the thing is, Nauru is not important (vital) to the world. I'd say that listing Nauru itself is enough, and even that is not clear (are all independent states vital? If so, why just modern? There's plenty of historical ones we don't list...). Recentism is a form of vital. And arguably nothing else related to such minor entities is vital. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:05, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
Oh, see #Add Toaripi Lauti, I'm fully in agreement with you on this (which is why I'm not opposing). But I can't see the status quo of listing 4 articles on every country changing; the aim is to at least get our priorities right with those 4. J947 ‡ edits 03:11, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
@J947 I never heard of such a rule. Was this voted on? It seems ridcolous. There are modern-day countries (microstates, etc.) which do not deserve that many articles, and such a rule creates just pointless padding and forcing a balancing act where someone or something vital for world history has to make room for something that is not vital for that level (but vital for some micro-entity). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:54, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
PS. Hammer DeRoburt has ~25 interwikis, mining article just 4. Sure, this is an imperfect metric. But I'd support removing him as well - he is important to Nauru, but not vital to the world's history or politics. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:06, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
Broad-topic articles like this are really rare across Wikipedias. There are hundreds of thousands of notable ones we could turn blue on en.wp alone, many of which would immediately make VA5. But I digress. J947 ‡ edits 03:11, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
@J947 Feel free to continue this digression on my talk page, I find it interesting. I know a ton of stuff is still missing from en wiki, including some broad topics, but if you can think of anything systemic, I'd love to know. Occasionally I can even help by assigning my students to write or translate stuff :) Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:56, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

cleanup ideas for Wikipedia:Vital articles/Level/5/History

Copied by Interstellarity from user talk page.
Leaving some comments here:

  • from History by continent and region (47 articles) - Ruthenia is an odball. Should likely be moved to the history by period. Ditto for History of China and its subarticles, History of Korea, India, and Maritime history (that should go to hisory by topic, obviously).
  • I suggest moving everything from 'History by country and subdivision (422 articles)' that is not a history of country or history of subdivision thee as well. That means everythign from History of Poland, and entries on Idel-Ural State, Hudson's Bay Company, Halifax Explosion, entries from US General and Colonial history, Cape Colony, Boer republics, Phosphate mining in Banaba and Nauru, Kuomintang in Burma, Gokishichidō, Provinces of Japan and Straits Settlements.
  • US 'History by demographic group (15 articles)' should be merged with 'History by ethnicity (10 articles)'

Feel free to copy my comment to Vital talk page. Note I nominated some of those for outright removal and will do more removal proposal soon. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:33, 29 November 2023 (UTC) PS. Some entries on locations might be better moved to Wikipedia:Vital articles/Level/5/Geography/Countries. For example Ruthenia might be next to Banat at 'Europe and Russia (400 articles)/General'. Ditto for Galicia (Eastern Europe), Silesia, Pomerania. Kresy and Recovered Territories too, but they may simply not be V5. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:38, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

PPS. And we likely need to add to V5 History of Silesia, History of Galicia (Eastern Europe), History of Pomerania... they are not just for Poland, but Germany/Austria/Russia/Czech/Slovakia in various propotions. We do not have any article on history of Polish main regions for now, they probably would be vital (History of Masovia, History of Lesser Poland, History of Greater Poland - just redirects). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:42, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

History cleanup - suggest following removals

Remove Archivist

PASSED
Removed 4–0.Respublik (talk) 15:26, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Archive is V4, fine. But in general, jobs often significantly duplicate articles on professions, some don't exist (ex. archeologist is just a redirect). We have historian at V5, fine, we often hear about historians. But how often do we hear about archivists? I'd argue that not often enough to justify them having an entry here. (Quick: can you name a single famous archivist?)--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:11, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. Support as nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:28, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. Support removal. Also would support swapping with Time capsule or even Primary source. --Kammerer55 (talk) 08:25, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. Support per nom. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 14:52, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
  4. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 14:19, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
  1. Kammerer55 I think primary source is V5 already. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:28, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
    Yes, you are right, my bad. --Kammerer55 (talk) 10:06, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Swap 9 articles on video game console generations with History of video game consoles

Swapped 7-0. starship.paint (RUN) 03:25, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

So we have "History by topic (350 articles)". Out of which we have "History of games and sport (44 articles)". And there, 9 articles on video console generations... sigh: # First generation of video game consoles, # Second generation of video game consoles, # Third generation of video game consoles, # Fourth generation of video game consoles, # Fifth generation of video game consoles, # Sixth generation of video game consoles, # Seventh generation of video game consoles, # Eighth generation of video game consoles and # Ninth generation of video game consoles. That's ridcolous. Particularly since we have parent article on History of video game consoles which is not V5. A swap here seems obvious. Note there's also a separate article on Home video game console generations which IMHO needs to be merged to the preceeding one, and anyone who cares to vote here might perchance care to comment at the merge discussion here? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:11, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. Support as nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:28, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. --Kammerer55 (talk) 08:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. Support We can't keep listing all console generations forever as new ones will come, a more general article will be more future-proof.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 11:58, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  4. Support I was planning on making this proposal myself. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:08, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  5. Support Takes up way too many slots. Totalibe (talk) 18:56, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
  6. Support TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:00, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
  7. Makes sense, nice consolidation. Curbon7 (talk) 21:38, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Video game crash of 1983

Not removed, 2 for removal and 3 opposed. starship.paint (RUN) 03:27, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Niche history of a single industry. Sure, this is a big industry now, but it wasn't so in 1983. Untill someone gets History of video games to V4, I think this subarticle is V6 territory. It also seems to me, subjectively, less important than other subarticles (Golden age of arcade video games, History of online games, and the video game console one discussed above) - as in, I've heard of the other three concepts but not of this one. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:11, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. Support as nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:28, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. --Kammerer55 (talk) 08:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. This had a significant impact on the early development of the industry, such as by allowing for Japanese dominance of the console market, and incidentally, by ending the golden age of arcade video games. Totalibe (talk) 18:56, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
  2. Per Totalibe, although it may make more sense for history of video games to be a level higher than it. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 20:29, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
  3. Per Totalibe, plus I would support history of video games at VA4. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:46, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove History of rodeo

Removed 5-0. starship.paint (RUN) 03:27, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Rodeo  4 is V4, so there's that. But. No interwikis. Minor presence at Olympics. I don't feel this is in the same league as most other sports, which are also usually much more international. I am not sure rodeo should be V4, frankly. I'd suggest swap with History of circus but that doesn't exist (yet). Circus  4 is V4. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:11, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. Support as nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:28, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. --Kammerer55 (talk) 08:36, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. Support I doubt Rodeo is of sufficient importance to have its history listed; the sport gets less pageviews than most if not all of the other sports which have their history included.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 15:39, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  4. Support Very niche. Totalibe (talk) 18:56, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
  5. Support niche.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:02, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove History of webcomics

Removed 6-0 starship.paint (RUN) 03:27, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Webcomics are new enough many folks haven't even heard of the concept. History of comics is just V5. This seems like V6 topic. Just one interwiki. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:11, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. Support as nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:28, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. --Kammerer55 (talk) 08:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 14:52, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
  4. Not that well-distinguished enough from comics overall, and fairly niche as a subset of that. Totalibe (talk) 18:56, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
  5. J947 ‡ edits 08:27, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
  6. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 01:07, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove History of the nude in art

PASSED
The Blue Rider 21:22, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Effectively a subarticle and partial duplication of the broader History of erotic depictions, which is just V5. This seems like V6. It is also too specific, we don't list and likely would not have room at V5 for history of concepts in arts. Btw, Portrait is V4 but Portrait painting is not vital. Perhaps a swap? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:11, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. Support as nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:28, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. --Kammerer55 (talk) 08:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 05:55, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion

We don't list Nude (art), it should be listed rather than its history.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 11:58, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

@LaukkuTheGreit Do consider nominating it. It seems like something to discuss, together with the portrait painting IMHO. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:37, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
Sounds reasonable to add. starship.paint (RUN) 05:55, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove History of Harvard University

Removed 5-0. starship.paint (RUN) 03:27, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Sure, one of the most famous universities (V4), but I don't feel its history is V5. It stands quite jarring in 'History of everyday life (11 articles)'. I am not sure if we list any other histories of companies, maybe we should but arguably there are more important ones. History of Ford Motor Company is not vital, neither is History of Microsoft. Is Harvard University the only company with its history at V5? This cannot be right, either we need more companies or none. Mind you, I'd be fine considering instead adding histories of all companies and organizations listed at V4, but it should be all or nothing, IMHO. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:20, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. Support as nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:28, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. Strong support. --Kammerer55 (talk) 08:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. If anything, what should be V5 is History of universities or History of higher education, which for now don't exist or is a redirect. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 14:48, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
  4. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 14:19, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
  5. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:04, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove History of the hippie movement and History of the punk subculture

PASSED
Removed 4–0. Respublik (talk) 15:30, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Based on the logic that parent History of modern Western subcultures is just V5 and unless we get it to V4, those subarticles seem like V6. Reinforcing this, articles on hippie and punk subcultures are also just V5. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:20, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. Support as nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:28, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. --Kammerer55 (talk) 08:38, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. For the the hippie movement we already have Counterculture of the 1960s. Totalibe (talk) 18:56, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
  4. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 14:19, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove four articles on four waves of feminism

Not removed, 2 for removal and 4 opposed. starship.paint (RUN) 03:33, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Based on the logic that parent History of feminism is just V5 and unless we get it to V4, those subarticles (First-wave feminism, Second-wave feminism, Third-wave feminism, Fourth-wave feminism) seem like V6. Mind you, they have quite a few interwikis, and maybe we should discuss promoting the main article here to V4 instead? That said, right now it looks somewhat jarring that in the 'History of society and the social sciences (35 articles)', feminism is the entry with most subarticles, second just to History of economy (5 articles). History of education for example has none. The balance is off. And history of economy is V4. Further, history of sociology and psychology, both V4, have no subarticles. Naaah... --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:20, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. as nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:35, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. Strong support. Only first-wave feminism seems somewhat notable, but it is already covered by Women's suffrage of level 4. --Kammerer55 (talk) 08:15, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Oppose I don't agree with parent topics having to be on a higher level. That said, Feminism is VA3 and important enough IMO to have its waves listed. They were different evolutions of feminism, with respective cultural impacts.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 11:58, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. Oppose These are important and widely-used concepts to distinguish between different historical forms of feminism, it feels a lot less trivial and space-consuming than nine game console generations just since the 1970s. Totalibe (talk) 18:56, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
  3. Oppose because I'm OK with the history of feminism having multiple articles at this level pbp 18:16, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
  4. Strong oppose per Totalibe. The Blue Rider 19:40, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove History of rail transport before 1700

Article was deleted and has been removed from the list. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:49, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

First, History of rail transport is not at V4 yet, second, this is rather trivial, since as anyone knows, rail did not really took off until 18th-19th centuries. This article is just a dubious list of trivia that may merit AfD, not a vital listing, IMHO. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:35, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. as nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 07:35, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. --Kammerer55 (talk) 08:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. J947 ‡ edits 09:58, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  4. Totalibe (talk) 18:56, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion

Minor note: I've listed that article on WP:AFD. Mildy curious who added it here. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove 2008 Universal Studios fire

Removed 5-0. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 09:57, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Nobody died. Some cultural artifacts were lost, but it's not even clear which ones, and it is a relativley trivial incident. Only 6 interwikis. Maybe consider swaping with Notre-Dame fire? But I don't think that one is vital at V5 either. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:37, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. as nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:37, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. Support--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 11:58, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. Support Not a major historical event. Totalibe (talk) 18:56, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
  4. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 14:19, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
  5. Support-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:06, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Aftermath of the January 6 United States Capitol attack

Removed 5-1. starship.paint (RUN) 03:34, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Too recent. January 6 United States Capitol attack is just V5 and this is its subarticle, and the main article covers key points of the aftermath already. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:37, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. as nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:37, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. --Kammerer55 (talk) 10:15, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. Support Recentism, the main article already has a large section on the aftermath.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 11:58, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  4. Per nom. Totalibe (talk) 18:56, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
  5. per nom-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:07, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. An outline of democratic failure in the world's democratic superpower is what I'd call vital. J947 ‡ edits 09:57, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
    What's so important in the aftermath particularly that is not covered by the main topic? That Trump was impeached (but not removed) second time, a week before he would leave anyway? This is too US-centric. --Kammerer55 (talk) 10:15, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
    @Kammerer55 What Kammmerer said. The attack itself is likely vital, if very recent. But until it makes V4, subarticle for such a recent development seems not needed. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:35, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Flint water crisis

Removed 3-2. starship.paint (RUN) 03:40, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

A dozen fatalities. What makes this sad but relatively trivial local incident vital? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:37, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. as nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:37, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. My understanding is that this is well-known but incredibly overblown. It's the sort of thing we should desire not to list IMO. J947 ‡ edits 09:56, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. Support Recentism, of such small scale it will likely fade to obscurity.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 11:58, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. There are likely to be even more fatalities from this over time due to the long-term effects of lead exposure (especially with several thousand children exposed), not to mention it lasted nearly five years. For comaprison, there were only a few dozen "direct" deaths from the Chernobyl disaster. Totalibe (talk) 18:56, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
    The difference with Chernobyl is that Chernobyl cordoned off a sizeable proportion of Ukraine and a nuclear power plant meltdown has more wide-ranging impacts than water poisoning. Both Chernobyl and Flint have a reputation that outmatches their influence, but both reputation and influence are much much higher for Chernobyl. (And Chernobyl's inclusion at VA4 seems somewhat out of place at a glance.) J947 ‡ edits 08:04, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
  2. Effects are ongoing.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:08, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Swap Exploration of Jupiter with Exploration of the Moon or Discovery and exploration of the Solar System

Swapped for both, 4-0. starship.paint (RUN) 03:37, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Setting aside why this is under history (as it is an ongoing science), this is just a rather random choice related to the space exploration (V3). I suggest replacing it with either Exploration of the Moon or Discovery and exploration of the Solar System (or perhaps, both topics). Side note: should Exploration of Mars be moved to some other section (about current science)? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. As nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. Support removing Exploration of Jupiter and adding both alternatives. --Kammerer55 (talk) 13:33, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. Support removal and both additions--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 15:39, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  4. Support removal and both additions Totalibe (talk) 18:56, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Year 2000 problem

FAILED
The Blue Rider 21:26, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


This was an amusing news headline and minor engineering issue back then. It was rather trivial and I can hardly see it as vital. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. As nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. Compared to other events listed in its section, Year 2000 problem  5 is much weaker. It probably caused some scare, but did not affect industry much. The article itself is not clear regarding how much the issue was overblown. Maybe, it's still more significant than some of the historical items listed at Level 5 / Technology, but I doubt it. Also, the broader History of computing  5 is just at level 5 as well. --Kammerer55 (talk) 08:25, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. As an alternative to removal, I will suggest moving it to the Technology section, as I'd argue it was more significant as a once-common computer error than as a mass historical event. Totalibe (talk) 18:56, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
  2. per Totalibe-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:10, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
  3. per Totalibe, move. starship.paint (RUN) 06:38, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
Discussion

For the record, Britannica has an article on it. Also, according to it: "An estimated $300 billion was spent (almost half in the United States) to upgrade computers and application programs to be Y2K-compliant." On the other hand, even if it was costly at the time the long-term effects of the cost may indeed be negligible.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 12:47, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Treaty of Paris between Italy and the Allied Powers

PASSED
The Blue Rider 21:30, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Nothing in this article suggests this was particularly significant. Just 14 interwikis. It was the legal end of the Italian colonial empire, but that article is V5 too, and we have a bunch of decolonization articles and history of Italy ones that cover related topics in more detail (most at V5 too). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:03, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. As nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. --Kammerer55 (talk) 13:35, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 06:39, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Great Train Wreck of 1918

PASSED
The Blue Rider 14:06, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


"It is considered the worst rail accident in U.S. history", but it is mostly forgotten today. The article does not suggest this had any impact on culture, or even US itself. Just 5 interwikis. Seems like niche American history event. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:03, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. As nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. Support--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 15:39, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 14:19, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
  4. If we were to list a train wreck, which I don't think we do (aside from this one) and am not sure we should, this wouldn't be it. J947 ‡ edits 02:13, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. I think we should continue to highlight the worst rail accident in U.S. history.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:15, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Handover of Macau

PASSED
This one hurts to close :( The Blue Rider 14:20, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Not as vital as Handover of Hong Kong. Macau is not Hong Kong, it did not and does not generate news or historical interest, I fear. 16 interwikis. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:03, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. As nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 14:19, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
  3. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:16, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
  4. Agree with The Blue Rider, but would rather list Portuguese Macau than this discrete event. J947 ‡ edits 02:17, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Misleading rational. Macau is way more historically important than Hong Kong. It was for a very long time the only port city and colony available in China to foreign; the Brits, Portuguese, French, Danish, etc, used it extensively. It's handover is significant because during half a millennium was under Portuguese rule and for the first time the CCP had full control over its territory. If we delist this we should add Portuguese Macau. The Blue Rider 18:30, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
    Also, its handover put the end of the Portuguese Empire, since it the last colony. The handover also had significant impacts on the culture (language, architecture, religion, etc) , economy (gambling in Macau), political (one country, two systems) of not only Portugal and Macau but to China as well. The Blue Rider 18:37, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
  2. Per The Blue Rider. QuicoleJR (talk) 00:58, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Expulsion of the Chagossians

NO CONSENSUS
The Blue Rider 14:08, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Pretty minor event. Nobody died, few hundred people were affected. Just 3 interwikis. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:03, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. As nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Oppose The numbers are more in the thousands than hundreds, and that aside, this was ultimately still the forced expulsion of the entire population of a cultural/ethnic group from their native territory. Totalibe (talk) 18:56, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
    @Totalibe I am uneasy with this being at the same level as Cambodian genocide  5, Circassian genocide  5, Bangladesh genocide  5, East Timor genocide  5 or Romani Holocaust  5. How about a swap then, for non-vital yet Genocide of Serbs in the Independent State of Croatia? Or Chetnik war crimes in World War II? Or Guatemalan genocide? Or Isaaq genocide? Or Gukurahundi? Or Ikiza? Semi-random links from {{Genocide sidebar}}, WWII-Cold War period, where almost all have 5-digits death tolls. Here, again, we don't have a single reported fatality. Somethign is wrong with our priorities is we list this but not the other articles, or IMHO if we classify all of them at the same vitality level. For me, Expulsion of the Chagossians seems like V6 event. One more example, this one from Polish history I am quite familiar with: Operation Vistula - not vital. Forced resettlement of over 100k people. Another obvious swap candiate, no? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:42, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
Discussion

Note this event is pretty much why we list British Indian Ocean Territory at VA4. J947 ‡ edits 02:22, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove USS Liberty (AGTR-5)

PASSED
Removed 4–0.Respublik (talk) 15:40, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Minor trivia related to the 1967 Six-Day War. It's not even an article about an incident but about a particular ship, and arguably many more ships were more vital for the world history - and we don't list them. We could swap this for the USS Liberty incident but still, this was a minor incident. And Titanic is V5 too - and this is not at the same level. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:03, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. As nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. --Kammerer55 (talk) 14:20, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 14:19, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
  4. Relatively minor incident, except amongst neo-Nazis. Friendly-fire incidents are not terribly rare in naval history. Curbon7 (talk) 21:48, 9 December 2023 (UTC) Curbon7 (talk) 21:43, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove 1932 New South Wales constitutional crisis

PASSED
Removed 6–0.Respublik (talk) 15:40, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

"the first real constitutional crisis in Australia" is not important for the world history, as evidenced by zero interwikis. Niche incident from Australian legal history that is V6 at best. Nothing in the article suggests it was imporant - even to Australia itself. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:03, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. As nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. --Kammerer55 (talk) 14:21, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. I'd suggest swapping for Stolen Generations. Totalibe (talk) 18:56, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
  4. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 14:19, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
  5. Far from the level of, say, the 1975 Australian constitutional crisis, which is also VA5. Curbon7 (talk) 21:50, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
  6. pbp 18:26, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Food safety incidents in China - or swap for Food safety

PASSED
Removed 4–1; Food safety added 5–0. J947 ‡ edits 02:21, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Pretty specific topic. I have trouble seeing how this collection of minor (not all individually notable events) is vital at V5. How about we make Food safety vital first? It is not. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:03, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. As nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. Support swapping with Food safety. Curbon7 (talk) 03:55, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
  3. Per nom, swap. starship.paint (RUN) 05:52, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
  4. Support swap per nom. Hanif Al Husaini (talk) 14:57, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Weak oppose (or swap with Food safety in China), and food safety should definitely be listed too. J947 ‡ edits 22:27, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Typhoon Nari (2001)

PASSED
Removed 4–0.Respublik (talk) 15:40, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Nothing in this short article suggests this was particularly significant. 104 deaths. It does not even make it to the List of the deadliest tropical cyclones where fatalities are usually at four digits. Seems like another weird random addition (by whom, I wonder?). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:03, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. As nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. J947 ‡ edits 22:29, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 14:19, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
  4. --Thi (talk) 20:34, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove 2019–20 Australian bushfire season

PASSED
The Blue Rider 14:11, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Pretty recent - and that's about it. Nothing special, particularly in the current climate change where similar events are sadly more and more common. Just 30+ fatalities, and the same section lists earlier Black Saturday bushfires which had almost 200 deaths. That should be enough for Australian bushfires, I think - its local history that's hardly significant at V5 IMHO. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:03, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. As nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 14:19, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
  3. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:46, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
  4. Not one of the most vital wildfires. The Blue Rider 14:11, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Weak oppose. J947 ‡ edits 22:28, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
    @J947 Because? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:29, 30 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. Oppose, pretty vital per CO2 released and impact calculations. Respublik (talk) 15:40, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove 2005–2006 Fijian political crisis

PASSED
Removed 4–0.Respublik (talk) 15:40, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Setting aside the relevance of Fiji to the world history, the article does not suggest importance, even local. Nobody died, lead talks about "strong words being exchanged" leading to some political developemnts - and then 2006 Fijian coup d'état, which is V5. I am unsure if even that coup should be V5, but its prelude certainly is not important enough to be here. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:03, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. As nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 14:19, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
  3. Coup is already listed. Curbon7 (talk) 21:51, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
  4. --Thi (talk) 20:34, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove 2005 Cronulla riots

PASSED
The Blue Rider 14:13, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Riots in Australia. Nobody died, 200+ people arrested, not particlary enduring in culture or known internationally (7 interwikis). Niche local history. Ferguson unrest or George Floyd protests are V5 too, for example - this was not at the same level. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:03, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. As nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 14:19, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
  3. Weak support. There're probably better options to cover race riots. J947 ‡ edits 02:26, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
  4. Per nominator. The Blue Rider 20:45, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove 1982 invasion of the Falkland Islands

PASSED
The Blue Rider 14:33, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


This is listed alongside Falklands War and it seems highly redundant as the opening act to a fairly short war fought in an area with a low population. Even though I wouldn't support adding it, ARA General Belgrano would make more sense than this.

Support
  1. Nom Totalibe (talk) 17:10, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
  2. Per nominator. The Blue Rider 17:59, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
  3. per nom-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:00, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
  4. Falklands War is enough. QuicoleJR (talk) 02:23, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
  5. Support per nom. J947 ‡ edits 03:24, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
  6. Pile on per nom. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:27, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove small New England cities

I don't consider any of these small cities particularly notable. I question whether they deserve a spot since cities (2,025/2,000), Americas (384/360) and North America (229/210 articles) remain over quota. I think there may be consensus that these are among the bottom 19 North America cities or bottom 24 Americas cities.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:44, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

  1. Lowell, Massachusetts (115,554, 71 interwikis)
  2. Cambridge, Massachusetts (118,403, 87 interwikis)
  3. New Haven, Connecticut (135,081, 91 interwikis)
FWIW, if you look at county instead of city proper, things look a little different. Lowell and Cambridge part of Middlesex County, pop. 1,617,105 (21st-largest county in USA, would be 40th-largest metropolitan area if stand-alone). New Haven was part of New Haven County, pop. 864,835 (would be 69th-largest metropolitan area if stand-alone) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Purplebackpack89 (talk • contribs) 01:40, November 26, 2023 (UTC)-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:23, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
PASSED
Removed 6-1 -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 00:07, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Lowell

Support
  1. As nom.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:44, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. Not particularly famous or well known, and US is over quota. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:22, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 04:08, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
  4. Totalibe (talk) 08:32, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
  5. I don’t see it being more vital than Springfield, which isn’t listed. Interstellarity (talk) 17:48, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
  6. Boston only needs one suburb. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 12:21, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Was at one point the 18th-largest city in the country. Also important for historic link to the textile industry. pbp 01:26, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
Discussion

Neutral on this one. There are better candidates for removal in New England anyway. J947 ‡ edits 07:31, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
FAILED
With no support other than neutrals who don't care either way, it is unlikely that this will be removed. Interstellarity (talk) 17:41, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Cambridge

Oppose
  1. Site of one of America's preeminent universities. Was at one point the 31st-largest city in the country. Old city by American standards, nearly 400 years old. pbp 01:26, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. Having two elite+historical universities provides an enduring claim to the city's importance. starship.paint (RUN) 04:08, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. Per above Totalibe (talk) 08:32, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
  4. Oppose per above as a vital subtopic of Boston. J947 ‡ edits 07:33, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
  5. Per comments above. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 12:21, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Discussion
  1. Neutral as nom.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:44, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. Unlike the two other cities, it is a bit more famous IMHO, perhaps because the university is so famous the town became well known. Interestingly I don't think this is true for Yale-New Haven below. Could be just my subjective bias, but I think Oxtord and Cambridge can be vital as archotypical university cities. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:22, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
    I don't think Oxford, Massachusetts, is vital. J947 ‡ edits 03:40, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
    @Piotrus: - you seem to have confused Cambridge, England (not vital, perhaps it should be?), and Cambridge, Massachusetts? Oxford, England is level 5 vital. starship.paint (RUN) 04:46, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
    Indeed. Leaning remove now. Or swap. UK's Cambridge is IMHO better know of the two. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 10:18, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove New Haven

FAILED
The Blue Rider 00:18, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Support
  1. Yale is famous and vital, but it does not lend its vitality to the city it is located in. Overall, not very famous and US is over quota. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:22, 26 November 2023 (UTC) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:22, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 04:08, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. Totalibe (talk) 08:32, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
  4. Per my comment below. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 12:21, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Site of one of America's preeminent universities. Was one of the 50 largest cities in the country for over a century, and the largest city in Connecticut for even longer. Old city by American standards, nearly 400 years old. pbp 01:26, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. Per pbp. QuicoleJR (talk) 11:17, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
  3. Location of Yale and also location of one of the largest race riots during the Long, Hot Summer of 1967. Aurangzebra 7:48, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
  4. Per pbp. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 16:01, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
Discussion
Neutral as nom.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:44, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
I think Connecticut probably only warrants two cities, which would necessitate including just one of New Haven, Connecticut  5 / Bridgeport, Connecticut  5 / Stamford, Connecticut, but it's very difficult to decide which. J947 ‡ edits 07:45, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
While I don’t support listing every U.S. state capital, I do support listing every state’s largest city, and Connecticut’s largest city is Bridgeport. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 12:12, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
I would rather have New Haven than Bridgeport. I'm not convinced population is enough justify the latter's inclusion. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 16:01, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove small Western U.S. cities

I don't consider either of these small cities particularly notable. I question whether they deserve a spot since cities (2,025/2,000), Americas (384/360) and North America (229/210 articles) remain over quota. I think there should be consensus that these are among the bottom 19 North America cities or bottom 24 Americas cities.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:24, 25 November 2023 (UTC)

  1. Fairbanks, Alaska (95,655, 85 interwikis)
  2. Palm Springs, California (44,575, 66 interwikis)

Remove Fairbanks

PASSED
The Blue Rider 00:21, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Support
  1. As nom.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:24, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. US is over quota, and nothing strikes me here as vital. Just a regular city. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:25, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
    Apart from the fact that it's in the middle of Alaska? J947 ‡ edits 03:40, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 04:41, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
  4. Totalibe (talk) 08:32, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
  5. Anchorage is enough to be listed at this level. Juneau might be a good candidate for removal, but I might support a case of retention due to it being the state’s capital. Interstellarity (talk) 17:45, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
  6. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 11:11, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. I've thought about this long and hard and in that time I'm surprised this removal has received such overwhelming support. Its lack of history is a clear and major downside but its size for its location (inland and a long way north) is remarkable. It's only really matched in this regard by Yakutsk and Norilsk in Russia. We're traditionally pretty generous on Arctic cities and the like, and for me Fairbanks is more vital to clearly more vital than Anadyr, or Tromsø, or Iqaluit – all of which we list. J947 ‡ edits 03:40, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
    fyi I think Anadyr should be removed Totalibe (talk) 21:39, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
    That’s exactly what I was thinking! The Russian Far East probably needs five cities at most. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 23:09, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
  2. Per pbp. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 08:48, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
Discussion
PASSED
Removed 6-0 -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 00:07, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Support Remove Palm Springs
  1. As nom.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:24, 25 November 2023 (UTC)
  2. US is over quota, and nothing strikes me here as vital. Just a regular city. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 03:25, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
  3. Per above, and we have many other Californian cities already. starship.paint (RUN) 04:36, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
  4. Totalibe (talk) 08:32, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
  5. Interstellarity (talk) 17:45, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
    Happy to be proven otherwise, but surely this city is an out-of-place inclusion? J947 ‡ edits 07:28, 27 November 2023 (UTC)
    Unsure given pbp's comment. J947 ‡ edits 07:55, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
  6. Not even the largest city in a relatively small region (<1% of California’s population). OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 11:11, 18 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion

@J947: The inclusion of Palm Springs is similar to that of Atlantic City: a resort area, and the anchor of a populous region (300,000+ in the Coachella Valley) pbp 17:30, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove History of the Northwest Territories, History of Nunavut, and History of Yukon

All three passed - Nunavut 5-0, Yukon 4-0 and Northwest Territories 4-1. The Blue Rider 00:25, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


These territories don't have very much significance in Canada compared to the provinces. Interstellarity (talk) 01:52, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. Interstellarity (talk) 01:52, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
  2. Northwest Territories  5.Nunavut  5 and Yukon  5 are just V5. They don't merit 'history of' at the same level, this is V6 stuff. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:28, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
  3. Support removal of History of Nunavut. Neutral on other two. Chipmunkdavis has a point below about the NWT and Yukon's history might be vital because of the Klondike Gold Rush and the Alcan. pbp 13:40, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
  4. Support Nunavut, weakly support Yukon and the Northwest Territories. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 15:05, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
  5. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:03, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Oppose for History of the Northwest Territories. These articles are a bit of a mess regarding content and scoping, but the Northwest Territories was once most of Canada. The history here encompasses the development of the Canadian interior, and later the development of the Canadian Arctic. CMD (talk) 02:07, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
Neutral
Discussion

I think it is also worth considering some removals for the Canadian provinces as well. Articles such as History of Prince Edward Island, History of Newfoundland and Labrador, and History of New Brunswick are articles I would support removing. Articles such as History of Nova Scotia, History of Saskatchewan, and History of Manitoba are articles I would weakly support removal, but am open to changing my mind on why they shouldn't be removed. Interstellarity (talk) 01:52, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Actually Newfoundland is one I would definitely vote to keep. It has a very distinct historical and cultural identity, with a very high Irish population, and wasn't even part of Canada until 1949. Totalibe (talk) 21:32, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove History of Anguilla

PASSED
Removed 6-0. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 06:45, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Not a significant part of the Caribbean to be covering. Interstellarity (talk) 01:57, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. Interstellarity (talk) 01:57, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
  2. I don't think minor entities like Anguilla  5 are vital at this level anyway, and certainly their history should not be, if they are V5 - they don't need 'history of' here. I am pretty sure we could find a V4 article that needs history of swapped in isntead. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:43, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
  3. This territory is not important enough to have its history at this level. QuicoleJR (talk) 15:47, 16 December 2023 (UTC)
  4. Totalibe (talk) 23:46, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
  5. pbp 04:40, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
  6. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:04, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add 1900s

PASSED
Added 4-0. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 07:24, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Only decade in the 20th century not listed. Interstellarity (talk) 01:11, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

Support
  1. Interstellarity (talk) 01:11, 19 December 2023 (UTC)
  2. --Makkool (talk) 19:02, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
  3. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:08, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
  4. Totalibe (talk) 17:17, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Swap 2014 Vrbětice ammunition warehouse explosions for Carnation Revolution

PASSED
Swapped 7-0. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 07:21, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


I had not heard of these explosions before seeing the page listed here, it seems like a relatively minor industrial incident (albeit one that cost two lives) and didn't have a great deal of international significance until the implication of Russia years later, and it still seems like a fairly small part of the deteroiating relations between Russia and Europe after Euromaidan. The Carnation Revolution brough the political regime that controlled Portugal for forty years to an end, led directly to the establishment of the current Portugese state and was the only revolution to occur in Western Europe since the end of WW2.

Support
  1. As nom Totalibe (talk) 23:46, 28 December 2023 (UTC)
  2. Support: excellent proposal. J947 ‡ edits 02:20, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
  3. Portugal! Carnation Revolution is perhaps the most consequential event in modern Portuguese history. The Blue Rider 04:27, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
  4. One is definitely more important than the other. QuicoleJR (talk) 15:44, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
  5. Support per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 07:21, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
  6. Sure. The 2014 event is barely notable (just two deaths); 9 interwikis. I'd not support it even at V6. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:40, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
  7. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:09, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
Oppose
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Remove Geological history of North America

PASSED
Removed 5-0. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 07:19, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


This simply is not vital. This section does not need to have this many articles, and this one seems like an easy cut. We do not list the similar geological history of Europe.

Support
  1. As nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 23:27, 31 December 2023 (UTC)
  2. --Makkool (talk) 19:01, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
  3. Per nominator. The Blue Rider 18:34, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
  4. One of many articles from the US section that need to go to deal with sysbias issues. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:41, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
  5. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:10, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Add History of the potato

PASSED
Added 4-2. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 07:16, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Potato  3 is listed at VA3, and they have been important to human history for thousands of years. This could arguably make VA4. It is listed as High-Importance by the Agriculture and Food & Drink WikiProjects.

Support
  1. As nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:10, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
  2. I think I suggested it in some comment... count me in. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:42, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
  3. Weak support. J947 ‡ edits 00:01, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
  4. The spread of crops is an important part of human history. Totalibe (talk) 23:30, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. I think the potato article already covers enough of its history. Contrary to social movements or countries in which their history holds a special place in the heart of many, the history of a crop is not particularly significant to people, the crop itself is. The Blue Rider 01:23, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
  2. Are there other history of foodstuffs at VA? Wikipedia:Vital_articles/Level/5/History#History_of_everyday_life has little content to support this type of inclusion. I could see this setting a precedent for a dozen unnecessary foodstuff histories.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:18, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
Neutral
  1. I'd get food history to V4 first. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 19:55, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Swap Rise of nationalism in the Ottoman Empire with Dissolution of the Ottoman Empire  5

PASSED
Swapped 5-0. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 06:48, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Nationalism's rise within the Ottoman Empire was a key factor for its dissolution, but the latter is much more encompassing. It included the formation of Islamic fundamentalism  5, for example. As the empire fragmented post-World War I, vacuums emerged, resulting in the rise of nations in the Balkans and Middle East. The dissolution caused the loss of a unifying Islamic authority and this led to power struggles and tensions that still impact today's world. The Blue Rider 18:34, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Support
  1. As nominator. The Blue Rider 18:34, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
  2. The second one is more important, plus the parent topic Rise of nationalism in Europe  5 is only at VA5. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:17, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
  3. Agreed with what is said above. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:43, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
  4. Support per nom. J947 ‡ edits 00:02, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
  5. Totalibe (talk) 23:30, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

cleanup ideas for Wikipedia:Vital articles/Level/5/History

Copied by Interstellarity from user talk page.
Leaving some comments here:

  • from History by continent and region (47 articles) - Ruthenia is an odball. Should likely be moved to the history by period. Ditto for History of China and its subarticles, History of Korea, India, and Maritime history (that should go to hisory by topic, obviously).
  • I suggest moving everything from 'History by country and subdivision (422 articles)' that is not a history of country or history of subdivision thee as well. That means everythign from History of Poland, and entries on Idel-Ural State, Hudson's Bay Company, Halifax Explosion, entries from US General and Colonial history, Cape Colony, Boer republics, Phosphate mining in Banaba and Nauru, Kuomintang in Burma, Gokishichidō, Provinces of Japan and Straits Settlements.
  • US 'History by demographic group (15 articles)' should be merged with 'History by ethnicity (10 articles)'

Feel free to copy my comment to Vital talk page. Note I nominated some of those for outright removal and will do more removal proposal soon. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:33, 29 November 2023 (UTC) PS. Some entries on locations might be better moved to Wikipedia:Vital articles/Level/5/Geography/Countries. For example Ruthenia might be next to Banat at 'Europe and Russia (400 articles)/General'. Ditto for Galicia (Eastern Europe), Silesia, Pomerania. Kresy and Recovered Territories too, but they may simply not be V5. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:38, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

PPS. And we likely need to add to V5 History of Silesia, History of Galicia (Eastern Europe), History of Pomerania... they are not just for Poland, but Germany/Austria/Russia/Czech/Slovakia in various propotions. We do not have any article on history of Polish main regions for now, they probably would be vital (History of Masovia, History of Lesser Poland, History of Greater Poland - just redirects). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:42, 29 November 2023 (UTC)

Bottom 10% VA5/History articles by pageviews

This was the final such VA5 list I had lying around, I was a bit too lazy to post it until now. Least viewed first, using pageviews from 2020-01-01 to 2023-11-02:

Extended content
  • Mauryan invasion of Kalinga
  • Battle of forts Jackson and St. Philip
  • Foreign concessions in China
  • First Chimurenga
  • History of the United States (1917–1945)
  • History of the United States (1865–1917)
  • History of rail transport before 1700
  • 2014 Vrbětice ammunition warehouse explosions
  • House of Teururai
  • Agriculture of the Inca Empire
  • 2005–2006 Fijian political crisis
  • Oromo Invasions
  • Ba–Shu culture
  • Nagasaki foreign settlement
  • Jihad of Usman dan Fodio
  • Geological history of North America
  • 2010s global surveillance disclosures
  • Mixtec culture
  • Science in the ancient world
  • Mamluk–Portuguese conflicts
  • Cuddie Springs
  • Moynaq
  • Historical metrology
  • History of Central Africa
  • Great Retreat (Russia)
  • Siege of Pavia (773–774)
  • History of geophysics
  • Military dictatorship of Chile
  • Upheaval of the Five Barbarians
  • Timeline of military aviation
  • Subneolithic
  • History of scholarship
  • Typhoon Nari (2001)
  • History of cycling infrastructure
  • Early history of Tonga
  • Timeline of geology
  • History of artificial life
  • History of Åland
  • Jewish ghettos established by Nazi Germany
  • Treaty of Paris between Italy and the Allied Powers
  • List of conflicts in territory of the former Soviet Union
  • 1935 Shinchiku-Taichū earthquake
  • History of Bashkortostan
  • History of mineralogy
  • Ukrainian national revival
  • Hetao
  • 2005–2006 Thai political crisis
  • History of modern Mongolia
  • 1932 New South Wales constitutional crisis
  • An Lushan rebellion
  • 2014 NPCSC Decision on Hong Kong
  • Rural history
  • History of Southern Africa
  • History of monorail
  • History of Kinshasa
  • Principality of Moscow
  • History of webcomics
  • History of Saint Martin (island)
  • History of rowing sports
  • Chiang Hung
  • African American history
  • Wadai War
  • History of geomagnetism
  • History of East Africa
  • History of Nunavut
  • 1889 Apia cyclone
  • Battle of Flores (1592)
  • Las Vegas culture (archaeology)
  • Kobe foreign settlement
  • Bacatá
  • History of Franconia
  • Houthi insurgency
  • History of Wallonia
  • Historiography of science
  • History of Roman-era Tunisia
  • History of knowledge
  • 1919 Egyptian Revolution
  • History of Bogotá
  • History of combinatorics
  • Ya'rubids
  • Gokishichidō
  • Sukhothai (city)
  • History of opera
  • History of Anguilla
  • Goguryeo–Wei War
  • 2021–2023 global supply chain crisis
  • History of Rio de Janeiro
  • History of arithmetic
  • History of Vojvodina
  • Hawaiian rebellions (1887–1895)
  • Proto–Three Kingdoms period
  • History of the Baháʼí Faith
  • History of Niue
  • Kingdom of Rarotonga
  • Timeline of jet power
  • History of Guinea-Bissau
  • Togoland campaign
  • Lakhmid kingdom
  • Postal history
  • 2016 Turkish coup attempt
  • Consolidation of Sweden
  • Siege of Turin
  • Timeline of materials technology
  • History of hurling
  • Mutual Defense Pact of the Southeastern Provinces
  • Amphictyonic league
  • History of hang gliding
  • Nagaoka-kyō
  • Historical society
  • Armenian question
  • History of São Tomé and Príncipe
  • Yaśodharapura
  • History of the Northern Territory
  • History of Yunnan
  • History of Nairobi
  • Wukan protests
  • 1956 Poznań protests
  • History of Oriental Orthodoxy
  • History of emotions
  • Military history of Europe
  • Sultanate of Agadez
  • History of social democracy
  • History of creationism
  • 2011–2015 Myanmar political reforms
  • History of Somaliland
  • History of Provence
  • History of the British Virgin Islands
  • History of Abkhazia
  • Animation in the United States during the silent era
  • History of Tunisia under French rule
  • Kamerun campaign
  • History of Tuscany
  • History of subatomic physics
  • Anti-Bengali sentiment in India
  • Maritime history of Europe
  • Romanian revolution
  • History of South Dakota
  • History of Hesse
  • Decolonisation of Oceania
  • Timeline of zoology
  • History of chemical engineering
  • History of Yukon
  • Mirza (name)
  • Onondaga (village)
  • Talianki (archaeological site)
  • History of pathology
  • History of Queensland
  • History of Kiribati
  • Comparative history
  • History of crime fiction
  • History of the nude in art
  • Protests against responses to the COVID-19 pandemic
  • Military operations in North Africa during World War I
  • Song (state)
  • Science in classical antiquity
  • Diplomatics
  • History of medicine in the United States
  • Hawaiian Renaissance
  • Alternatives to Darwinian evolution
  • History of Manitoba
  • Arab conquest of Egypt
  • History of forensic photography
  • Kingdom of Bora Bora
  • Coptic history
  • History of figure skating
  • History of Poland during the Jagiellonian dynasty
  • Urban history
  • Budj Bim
  • History of the Marshall Islands
  • Franco-Tahitian War
  • History of Galicia
  • Libyan civil war (2011)
  • Liaoshen campaign
  • Five Hegemons
  • History of classical mechanics
  • Predicted impact of Brexit
  • History of Saskatchewan
  • History of water polo
  • History of Ontario
  • Avar–Byzantine wars
  • Franco-Hova Wars
  • History of Benin
  • Siyi
  • 2000s in science and technology
  • Venetian–Genoese wars
  • Tariff of 1816
  • 1952 Egyptian Revolution
  • History of the Federated States of Micronesia
  • 1963 South Vietnamese coup d'état
  • Empire of Great Fulo
  • Partition of Jin
  • History of Tatarstan
  • Christianization of Bulgaria
  • Kediri Kingdom
  • History of rodeo
  • Timeline of meteorology
  • History of Curaçao
  • Saybrook Colony
  • History of Illinois
  • Phosphate mining in Banaba and Nauru
  • Polynesian outlier
  • History of the Australian Capital Territory
  • History of the Republic of the Congo
  • Genetic history of Africa
  • Rebellion of the Seven States
  • European land exploration of Australia
  • Abadan Crisis
  • History of North Dakota
  • Pañcāla
  • Leased Territory of Guangzhouwan
  • Province of Maine
  • History of Phoenicia
  • History of cycling
  • History of the Assyrians
  • Lingnan
  • History of energy
  • History of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
  • History of military technology
  • Latin translations of the 12th century
  • World history (field)
  • Kingdom of Fiji
  • East Jersey
  • Oddiyana
  • History of Bangkok
  • History of New South Wales
  • Tambralinga
  • Gapsin Coup
  • Tongzhi Restoration
  • History of Martinique
  • Sardinian medieval kingdoms
  • History of Svalbard
  • Timeline of the electric motor
  • 709 crackdown
  • Bibracte
  • Jingkang incident
  • 2012 China anti-Japanese demonstrations
  • Battle of Oudenarde
  • Agriculture in Mesoamerica
  • Epipalaeolithic
  • History of Idaho
  • Republic of Ancona
  • History of Norfolk Island
  • Bolívar's campaign to liberate New Granada
  • Southward expansion of the Han dynasty
  • History of Dominica
  • History of the Northwest Territories
  • Sahelian kingdoms
  • History of Dagestan
  • Mongol invasion of Central Asia
  • History of Guernsey
  • History of Tuvalu
  • Butuan (historical polity)
  • Trowulan
  • Ecuadorian War of Independence
  • History of Nebraska
  • Duchy of Spoleto
  • Samoan crisis
  • West Jersey
  • History of Prince Edward Island
  • Indonesian National Awakening
  • History of Western Sahara
  • Spiegel affair
  • History of the Comoros
  • Route from the Varangians to the Greeks
  • Maravi
  • History of electronic engineering
  • History of the United States Virgin Islands
  • History of French Guiana
  • History of Palau
  • Four Commanderies of Han
  • Austro-Hungarian entry into World War I
  • Sijilmasa
  • History of the Republic of India (1947–present)
  • Eastern question
  • Sultanate of Gowa
  • Kingdom of Simien
  • Gao Empire
  • Public history
  • Electorate of Trier
  • History of Iowa
  • History of New Brunswick
  • Mau movement
  • Gorlice–Tarnów offensive
  • History of American Samoa
  • History of the Latter Day Saint movement
  • History of Wyoming
  • March of Tuscany
  • History of Sarawak
  • History of the Central African Republic
  • History of Alberta
  • History of Warsaw
  • Timeline of aviation
  • Régence
  • Arab–Khazar wars
  • History of graphic design
  • History of Mauritania
  • Fourth Fitna
  • Bolivian War of Independence
  • Diplomatic history
  • Peopling of the Americas
  • Yumen Pass
  • Saudeleur dynasty
  • Chinchorro culture
  • Graeco-Arabic translation movement
  • Medieval renaissances
  • Archaeogenetics
  • Battle of Mars-la-Tour
  • Military history of the Mali Empire
  • History of Solomon Islands
  • History of Victoria
  • Polish population transfers (1944–1946)
  • Somaliland campaign
  • History of Vanuatu
  • History of Antigua and Barbuda
  • History of the Cook Islands
  • South West Africa campaign
  • History of Guinea
  • British Western Pacific Territories
  • Minyue
  • Bulgarian–Ottoman wars
  • History of Nevada
  • Assassination of Uthman
  • History of Nagorno-Karabakh
  • History of Burundi
  • History of the Cayman Islands

A bit out of date, e.g. Cuddie Springs has already been removed.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 21:10, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Remove Bolton

PASSED
Removed 5-0. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 13:40, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Bolton is a town of ~200k that is largely subsumed into Greater Manchester, which makes its distinctiveness a lot more questionable than it would be otherwise. In terms of special historical importance, it was a centre for mills and textiles which boomed during the 19th century, but then again so was Manchester, the city which grew and absorbed it.

Support
  1. As nom Totalibe (talk) 16:00, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
  2. Per nom. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 16:56, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
  3. The population is not bad, but I just do not see how it is vital. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:53, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
  4. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 03:38, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
  5. Yep a tier below. J947 ‡ edits 22:41, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
Oppose
Discuss
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

National capitals removals

These don't seem to have much significance compared to other capitals. Interstellarity (talk) 12:37, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Yaren District

NO CONSENSUS
Kept 2-2. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 02:11, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Support
  1. Interstellarity (talk) 12:37, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
  2. J947 ‡ edits 01:26, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. Capital cities of independent states are an important lens through which people learn about the world and different countries. I'm not opposed to removing capitals of overseas territories etc but independent states should stay. Totalibe (talk) 21:39, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
  2. Per Totalibe. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 16:05, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
Neutral
  1. I only proposed the removal of Ngerulmud due to lack of permanent population, but this isn’t much better, at under 800. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 13:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hagåtña, Guam

PASSED
Removed 6-1. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 02:10, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Support
  1. Interstellarity (talk) 12:37, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
  2. Absolutely, with its population of under 1000. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 13:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
  3. Too small and not even the capital city of an independent country, just a territory. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:38, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
  4. Pop <1k. Not vital by any stretch of imagination. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:50, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
  5. Guam itself is small enough for the entire island to be its own metro area. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 05:50, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
  6. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:08, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. I think we need to keep either Hagåtña or Pago Pago (we've never had Saipan) and Hagåtña is the capital of the bigger territory. As with Annapolis, this is a city vs. metro area conundrum pbp 20:13, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
    We list Saipan under islands. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 00:09, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
Neutral
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Pago Pago

PASSED
Removed 5-0. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 02:09, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Support
  1. Interstellarity (talk) 12:37, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
  2. If we have a city in a U.S. territory other than PR, it’s Charlotte Amalie. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 13:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
  3. Pop 4.5k. Seriously, what is this doing here? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:49, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
  4. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 05:48, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
  5. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:04, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
Oppose
Neutral
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Vaduz

FAILED
Kept 2-6. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 13:54, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Support
  1. Interstellarity (talk) 12:37, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
  2. I just don't get the point that this is less more vital than Lucerne, etc. J947 ‡ edits 01:27, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
    User:J947, your response seems to support an addition not a removal.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 12:46, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
    Fixed, thanks. J947 ‡ edits 20:26, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose
  1. As the capital of a country of 40k. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 13:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
  2. Capital cities of independent states are an important lens through which people learn about the world and different countries. I'm not opposed to removing capitals of overseas territories etc but independent states should stay. Totalibe (talk) 21:39, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
  3. True national capital.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 12:47, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
  4. A capital thus it have inherent vitality, we should also add City of San Marino. The Blue Rider 11:42, 26 December 2023 (UTC)
  5. Between Vaduz (pop. 5,696) and Ngerulmud (pop. 0), I'd keep Vaduz. Liechtenstein is also significantly larger than Palau, both population-wise and (especially) economically. feminist🇭🇰🇺🇦 (talk) 12:36, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
  6. Per above. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 16:05, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
Neutral
Discussion
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Vital_articles/Level/5/History_and_geography/Archive_2&oldid=1206488412"