Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5/People/Archive 10#Remove Foreigner (band)

A few months ago, I did a cleanup/purge of television hosts, which was bloated in favor of Americans, Brits and Australians. Now I must do the same with comedians. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

{{archive top green|status=Passed |result=Enacted, 4-1, now sorted by geography _pbp 21:19, 14 December 2024 (UTC)}}

There are just too many artists who transcend those distinctions for them to be meaningful. Examples:

• Bob Newhart is listed under standup even though he had several television shows
• Chevy Chase, Chris Rock and Will Ferrell (and others) are listed under films even though they were also SNL cast members
• Rodney Dangerfield is listed under films despite having a long standup career

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Support, it's arbitrary and doesn't exist on Level 4. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Does feel rather arbitrary Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 14:56, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Oppose mainly because a section with 203 articles is large and unwieldy and generally inaccessible to editors and casual readers alike. This same problem exists in the music section (many of the artists listed under Rock such as {{VA link|The Beatles}} also have Pop specified as a genre and vice versa, many of the artists listed under Hip Hop/Rap can be listed either under Pop or R&B such as {{VA link|Drake}} who has all 3 listed as genres etc.) but I think people don't mind those subdivisions because the alternative would be a massive blob. The same problem on a smaller scale happens here. That being said, I do think the classification was done poorly e.g. I would put Rodney Dangerfield in the standup category. However, I find 80% of these classifications accurate as to the main cause of their vitality. We make judgment calls everywhere else on VA5, I don't see why we can't here. Aurangzebra (talk) 09:08, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
2. :# 203 comedians at VA5 is way too many; right size would be about half that
3. :# There are other ways to organize comedians other than standup/TV/movies, such as by nationality or time period.
4. :_pbp 14:03, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

;Discussion

• This got four supporting votes, so it's going to pass. What should follow? Maybe we should decide on some new categorisation? We shouldn't lump them all together, like Aurangzebra said. I'll suggest regions like in the film actors section: Africa, Americas (with US/Canada separated from Latin America), Asia, Europe and Oceania. Makkool (talk) 08:37, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
• :I support grouping by region. I can make the change in the coming days. _pbp 15:16, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

{{archive bottom}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 5-2. Makkool (talk) 07:36, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

IDK if this guy was ever an A-lister _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. nom. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 04:41, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
5. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:42, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Weak oppose, he has a lot more interwikis than anyone else on this list and anecdotally he's the only one I've heard of. Kevinishere15 (talk) 20:53, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Weak oppose per kevinishere. Internationally known as evidenced by interwikis and was a frequent reference in a bunch of TV shows and movies for his distinct look and brand of comedy. Aurangzebra (talk) 01:36, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

;Discussion

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 7-0 per WP:AVALANCHE. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Anybody ever heard of this guy? Due to being blacklisted, he was in obscurity. < 20 interwikis _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Doesn't seem to have left a lasting impact Iostn (talk) 07:46, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
4. per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
5. I question how some of these people even made it on to the list. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 04:41, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
6. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
7. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 01:36, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 6-0 per WP:AVALANCHE. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Anybody ever heard of this guy? < 20 interwikis _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
4. per nom Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 04:41, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
5. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
6. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 01:36, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 5-0 per WP:AVALANCHE. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Anybody ever heard of this guy? < 20 interwikis _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
5. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 01:36, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopr

| status = failed

| result = Not removed 2-4. Makkool (talk) 07:36, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Anybody ever heard of this guy? < 10 interwikis. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Seems to have been pretty important for his time Iostn (talk) 07:46, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
2. "considered to be one of the greatest stand-up comedians of his generation", reduces US bias Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Weak oppose per above. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:42, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
4. per above Aurangzebra (talk) 01:36, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 6-0 per WP:AVALANCHE. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Mike Nichols and Elaine May are both already listed (Nichols as a director, May as a comedian). The comedy pairing has TWO interwikis. May has 31, Nichols has 55. This is one of the instances where the individuals are more notable than the pairing. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Probably redundant Iostn (talk) 07:46, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
4. per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
5. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
6. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 01:36, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 6-0 per WP:AVALANCHE. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Anybody ever heard of this guy? < 15 interwikis. Only released a single album _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Iostn (talk) 07:46, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
4. per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
5. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
6. Surprisingly do know this guy because he was one of the warehouse guys on The Office but definitely not vital. Aurangzebra (talk) 01:36, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 6-0 per WP:AVALANCHE. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Just two interwikis. TWO. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Only really relevant in Australia Iostn (talk) 07:46, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
4. per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
5. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
6. Not sure how we are doing on Australian comedy representation but this is probably not the right person for it regardless Aurangzebra (talk) 01:36, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Anybody ever heard of this guy? < 20 interwikis _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 5-0 per WP:AVALANCHE. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Primarily had supporting roles _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
5. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 01:36, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 6-0 per WP:AVALANCHE. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Just two interwikis. TWO. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Also note that pageviews are very low Iostn (talk) 07:46, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
4. per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
5. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
6. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 01:36, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 5-0 per WP:AVALANCHE. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

"Take my wife, please" might be VA5 but he himself...IDK. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
5. One-liner comedy has definitely not stood the test of time. Aurangzebra (talk) 01:36, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 6-0 per WP:AVALANCHE. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Anybody ever heard of this guy? < 20 interwikis _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Only a little over 3000 page views Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 23:18, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
5. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
6. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 01:36, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

If we're removing Chevy Chase, IDK how he survives. 20 interwikis _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 6-0 per WP:AVALANCHE. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Anybody ever heard of this guy? < 10 interwikis _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Iostn (talk) 07:46, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
4. per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
5. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
6. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 01:36, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

< 20 interwikis _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopr

| status = failed

| result = Not removed 2-3. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

20 interwikis _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Lasting (and current) influence, as seen under "legacy and honours" Iostn (talk) 07:46, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
2. per above, reduces US bias Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Per above. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:43, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 5-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Amos 'n' Andy is VA5 but IDK if he is. < 10 interwikis _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Iostn (talk) 07:46, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
4. per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
5. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 5-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Amos 'n' Andy is VA5 but IDK if he is. < 10 interwikis _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Iostn (talk) 07:46, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
4. per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
5. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopr

| status = failed

| result = Not removed 2-3. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

< 10 interwikis _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Seems important re: Chinese comedy Iostn (talk) 07:46, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
2. per above, pioneer of stand-up in China Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Oppose per above. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:41, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

20 interwikis _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 5-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Fry and Laurie are themselves listed. The pairing only has 2 interwikis, and Laurie especially is known for independent work rather than the pairiing. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Redundant Iostn (talk) 07:46, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
4. per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
5. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

10 interwikis _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Not independently notable of Rowan & Martin's Laugh-In, already at VA5 _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Not independently notable of Rowan & Martin's Laugh-In, already at VA5 _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

< 10 interwikis _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopr

| status = failed

| result = Not removed 2-3. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Just three interwikis _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Highly influential in the UK, and by the looks of it the low number of interwikis is due to many Wikipedias having articles on them as individuals instead: Eric Morecambe and Ernie Wise both have more, and I don't think they would be individually vital on their own Iostn (talk) 07:46, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
2. :Wise has 10 interwikis and Morecambe 16, neither of which is much for a celeb _pbp 20:32, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per above, "the best loved British double-act" Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Weak oppose. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:40, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

<20 interwikis _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 5-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Mostly known as a supporting actor. His most famous appearances were on Seinfeld, which is VA5, as are Jerry Seinfeld and Julia Louis-Dreyfus. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
4. weak support Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 04:41, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
5. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

10 interwikis _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Exactly 20 interwikis _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

<20 interwikis _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 22:57, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. Makkool (talk) 13:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. Makkool (talk) 16:32, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

I know we have been on a remove celebrities streak recently (which I am fine with), but we can make room for Mo, who is arguably the biggest pop star in the world's fourth-largest country. See, for example, List of awards and nominations received by Agnez Mo

;Support

1. As nom. To non English language musicians. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 22:50, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Makes sense Iostn (talk) 22:15, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:32, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Kevinishere15 (talk) 18:42, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 6-0 per WP:AVALANCHE Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:55, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

NYT columnist. Seems to be best known for covering the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal, but the article does not mention her. 6 interwikis.

;Support

1. As nominator. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 05:50, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
2. That is a good point. Sahaib (talk) 07:08, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Swap with Matt Drudge Makkool (talk) 18:41, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Iostn (talk) 22:15, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
5. Support, Writers & Journalists is over quota and we should probably prioritize recent figures. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 22:31, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
6. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:32, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Discussion

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Swapped 5–0. Makkool (talk) 20:32, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Plenty of more notable Canadian actresses. Proposing a swap with Rachel McAdams so that a modern Canadian actress can be added, which, as far as I'm aware, we don't have yet.

;Support

1. As nom. B3251_(talk) 03:59, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
2. Support remove for now Makkool (talk) 11:31, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
3. --Thi (talk) 20:55, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
4. -TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:37, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
5. Support swap, let's go ahead and push this across the finish line. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 04:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4–0. Makkool (talk) 20:32, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Obscure Hungarian children's author, article does not make him seem vital enough. Writers is over quota as well.

;Support

1. As nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:10, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
2. Per nom. Magda Szabó, Antal Szerb, and Sándor Márai are better bets to join {{VA link|Imre Kertész}} and Jókai as far as Hungarian writers go. J947 ‡ ^edits 09:52, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
3. Changing my vote to support removal. Makkool (talk) 15:54, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Support, let's go ahead and push this one across the finish line. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 04:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

::His book Vuk is very popular and has been translated to many languages. It might be considered an enduring classic only in its origin country, but I would still keep this to lessen Western European and US bias. Makkool (talk) 18:19, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

;Neutral

;Discuss

• Might be worth noting that several Hungarian sources describe Fekete as the second most widely-read Hungarian author, after {{VA link|Mór Jókai}}.[https://www.magyarhirlap.hu/kultura/20230125-szazhuszonharom-eve-szuletett-fekete-istvan][https://funzine.hu/2021/01/25/kult/az-erdo-kronikasa-fekete-istvan-legszebb-sorai-a-potolhatatlan-termeszetrol/][https://magyarmegmaradasert.hu/kiletunk/kuturank/item/5401-z][https://divany.hu/vilagom/2019/10/01/fekete-istvan/] --Grnrchst (talk) 15:05, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopr

| status = failed

| result = Not removed 1-3. Makkool (talk) 16:24, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Doesn't seem any more vital to me than Rick Warren _pbp 19:45, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

; Support

1. _pbp 18:34, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

; Oppose

1. Senior pastor of one of the largest megachurches in the US, gets more attendance than Rick Warren's church. "One of the more prominent figures associated with prosperity theology", from the article. Makkool (talk) 11:23, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
2. :We have both Osteen and Oral Roberts representing prosperity gospel. If we keep Osteen, we should maybe consider removing Roberts _pbp 18:38, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
3. ::If prosperity gospel should be represented by only one person, then Roberts should definitely stay. He is a too foundational figure to be not listed. My view is Osteen would be the best to represent a contemporary televangelist. Makkool (talk) 11:49, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
4. Why only one.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:55, 2 December 2024 (UTC)
5. Per makkool. Kevinishere15 (talk) 18:43, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

; Discussion

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. Makkool (talk) 18:24, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

One writer addition for a change. The article calls her "one of Ukrainian literature's foremost writers"

;Support

1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 18:48, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
2. Seems important enough. 75 interwikis, High-Importance to WikiProject Russia and Top-Importance to WikiProject Ukraine. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:47, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
3. Iostn (talk) 20:00, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nominator. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:55, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 5-1. Makkool (talk) 13:13, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Founder of Verve Records and manager of {{VA link|Ella Fitzgerald}}.

;Support

1. SailorGardevoir (talk) 11:10, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
2. Interstellarity (talk) 13:01, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
3. "the most successful impresario in the history of jazz" Makkool (talk) 09:44, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
4. Sure, musicians are still within the +/- 2% cushion, and jazz doesn't always get enough play. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 22:31, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
5. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 21:27, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Discuss

1. I've been away for a few months, but I am going to step back here and question why a founder of a non-vital label is that important. At first I put this question in the oppose section. Then, I saw Berry Gordy is vital and Motown isn't. My question is whether we really need a behind the scenes guy rather than a jazz artist that might need a push over the hump.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:28, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
2. :I don't participate on the People list as much; I just saw one section still needs brainstorming and thought I'd help vote & close in the meantime.
3. :You raise a good point though. Maybe the best thing would be to propose another jazz musician here and/or some record labels under Companies? It might also convince some people if you mention this proposal in the new one. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 19:30, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
4. :Granz absolutely deserves a spot here. His Jazz at the Philharmonic recordings are iconic and some of his other recordings such as {{VA link|Art Tatum}}'s The Art Tatum - Ben Webster Quartet are considered part of the 'core collection' of essential recordings by The Penguin Guide to Jazz. That being said, I have noticed that jazz is missing a few musicians I would consider VA5. I haven't proposed any because I'm not really sure who I'd want to replace them with and I don't want to bloat musicians any further. But two of my top contenders would be:
5. :1) Johnny Hodges - Just as notable as {{VA link|Benny Carter}} and {{VA link|Ben Webster}} with more interwikis than either of them. Also got his fame from being in {{VA link|Duke Ellington}}'s orchestra with an extremely prolific solo career as well. Top-Importance on Wikiproject Jazz.
6. :2) Gene Krupa - We underrepresent instrumentalists on our musicians list in general, but we especially underrepresent drummers, some of whom are household names but because they aren't the front of the band, we tend to ignore them. We do list arguably the great jazz drummer of all time, {{VA link|Buddy Rich}}, but Krupa is iconic enough in his own right to warrant a spot here. Referred to as "the founding father of modern drumset playing". Top-importance in Wikiproject Jazz. Aurangzebra (talk) 22:01, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 5–0. Makkool (talk) 21:00, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

The Writers page is still well over the quota, so some cuts are needed. Only a few of his works have articles, and none of those articles have any interwikis. This author has no sourced claim to any major lasting influence, and he only won a few awards, which we don't list every winner of. I do not see any reason to keep him on the list.

;Support

1. As nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:10, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
2. Makkool (talk) 18:48, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
3. Deferring to nom on this one, section is over quota. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 22:31, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nominator. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:50, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
5. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:26, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Neutral

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

== Remove some sports journalists and commentators ==

{{archive top green|status=Passed |result=Removed, 5-0 _pbp 21:24, 14 December 2024 (UTC)}}

As previously said: Writers and journalists are over quota. These people have pretty low pageviews and interwikis, and none of the articles assert much vitality

• {{VA link|Peter Gammons}}
• {{VA link|Jim Nantz}}
• {{VA link|Peter FitzSimons}}
• {{VA link|Jacqui Oatley}}
• {{VA link|Jim Rome}}
• {{VA link|Bert Sugar}}
• {{VA link|Sid Waddell}}
• {{VA link|Ray Warren}}

;Support

1. As nominator. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 02:57, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
2. Just so long as you keep Grantland Rice at VA5 _pbp 06:43, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
3. I would be fine with no sports stuff, as I don't consider these things to be vital at all, so definitly agree. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:14, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
4. None of these seem vital. Kevinishere15 (talk) 19:03, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
5. Agree, I can see having a handful of sportscasters for some coverage, but we probably don't need 34. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 04:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Discuss

{{archive bottom}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopr

| status = failed

| result = Current vote is 1–3, with no votes supporting nominator's proposal. Last vote 21 days ago. Nomination made 7 months and 11 days ago.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:44, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Although we got a lot of reformers on here, their activities are at least tied to their religion. I don't think that's the cause for Ch'oe, especially since during the time he was active, he was a Confucianist, not a Buddhist. I prefer moving him to the politicians page, but since he was apparently a philosopher, I'll leave that option out as well. (We do have people in that page who were government officials.)

;To politicians

1. SailorGardevoir (talk) 22:06, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

;To philosophers

1. Support move to philosophers. I only skimmed the article, but sounds like he wrote rather than led a religious community, and his political programme seems more secular. It doesn't sound like he had much real political authority or success though (similar to Plato in Syracuse). -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 22:31, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Makkool (talk) 23:18, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Kevinishere15 (talk) 19:10, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

;Keep

;Discuss

• Whatever the outcome, the article definitely makes it sound like his Buddhism was just a late-life interest and incidental to his career. So he probably shouldn't be grouped under Buddhist religious figures. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 22:31, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4-1. B3251_(talk) 20:49, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

First black National Hockey League player. Although not the first person of color in the NHL, O'Ree is widely regarded as the "Jackie Robinson of hockey".

Would be added to Wikipedia:Vital articles/Level/5/People/Sports figures#Wingers.

;Support

1. As nom. B3251_(talk) 21:43, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
2. Sure, we still have a little cushion in sports figures, and I like hockey. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 22:31, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
3. -TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:36, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Makkool (talk) 23:18, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Oppose, Larry Kwong isn't listed who is at a similar level of notability. Sahaib (talk) 21:23, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

;Discuss

{{abottom}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4-0. Kevinishere15 (talk) 18:48, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Probably listed because he was leader of the Movement for the Restoration of the Ten Commandments of God, responsible for one of the largest ever mass suicides, but he doesn't seem to be that vital in his own right, outside of the group. I don't even know if the group itself would be vital.

;Support

1. As nom Iostn (talk) 10:27, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
2. --Thi (talk) 21:18, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 12:55, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Makkool (talk) 20:43, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = partially passed

| result = Removed 4–0. Not swapped 2-3, 1 neutral. Makkool (talk) 22:56, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Stephen McNallen is an influential figure in white supremacist Norse neopaganism, which is societally marginal and not even dominant among white supremacists. Sveinbjoern founded the Ásatrúarfélagið, which is the largest neopagan religious movement in the world in proportion to the number of followers in its country of origin, with over 1% of the Icelandic population being Asatru, which I think easily places him among the most influential Neopagan religious figures.

;Support

1. As nom Iostn (talk) 10:27, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
2. Support swap or removal Makkool (talk) 20:43, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Mixed

1. Support removal, oppose addition. Ásatrúarfélagið has under 6000 followers. Kevinishere15 (talk) 21:02, 24 September 2024 (UTC)
2. :That's over 1% of the Icelandic population, which makes it the only country in the world where a form of neopaganism is practiced by a significant proportion of the population. In addition, both of the other neopagan figures listed are Wiccan, and removing alone would leave the list without any form of reconstructionist religion, which is arguably one of the most significant recent religious phenomena. The Icelandic Asatru Association is also more broadly influential over {{VA link|Heathenry (new religious movement)}} as a whole, regardless of the low population of Iceland itself limiting its membership numbers. Iostn (talk) 19:17, 25 September 2024 (UTC)
3. Support removal, neutral on addition. I think all the points given are actually a stronger argument for adding {{VA link|Ásatrúarfélagið}} to Religion than its founder. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 01:36, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Swapped4–0. Makkool (talk) 22:56, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

An obscure figures compared to the movement he represented, which isn't listed. Add Black Hebrew Israelites to "new religious movements" under philosophy and religion.

;Support

1. As nom Iostn (talk) 10:27, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
2. Per nom Makkool (talk) 20:43, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
3. Per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 18:46, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Mostly ambivalent, but let's go ahead and push this one over the finish line. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 01:36, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopy

| status = stalled

| result = Not swapped, 3-0 for adding, 1-2 for removal, open > 6 months. Some votes based on resolving overlap in articles, not on list. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Other than four other Wikipedias, no one has bothered to write a page on the songwriter pairing itself. Kander and Ebb themselves at least have 18 and 15 interwikis respectively, however.

;Support

1. SailorGardevoir (talk) 01:05, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Support add, oppose removal

1. Weird vote, I know, and I've never even heard of these two. But they've already made it to VA5, and we're still within the cushion for Musicians, so I say make the overlap explicit on the list. If their articles should be consolidated, then that needs to be decided at the actual article level. Maybe seeing the redundancy clearly on the list will stimulate that (which is the ultimate goal of VA). -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 22:31, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Makkool (talk) 23:18, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopr

| status = partial fail

| result = Not swapped, 1-5 for removal, 3-3 for add, open > 6 months. Most voters questioned their notability as individuals or sought to resolve any overlap in the articles. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Same thing as above, although at least the article about this pair has at least nine interwikis. (Bob and Mike themselves have 36 and 34.) Admittedly, Kander and Ebb at least makes up for that for not treating the article on their pairing as the main one.

;Support

1. SailorGardevoir (talk) 01:24, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. They are known for their doubles career and not for their individual accomplishments. Aurangzebra (talk) 13:36, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
2. Per Aurangzebra-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:32, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Per above. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:51, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

;Support add, oppose removal

1. Same logic as above; redundancies like this should probably be resolved at the article level. And as long as there's room, making them explicit on the list may help stimulate that. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 22:31, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Makkool (talk) 23:18, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

He is sometimes viewed as the world’s first social democratic head of state and one of the only three “real” Presidents of Germany from 1918 to 1945. His legacy is complex and controversial, particularly concerning the crises that led to Hitler's rise to power.

;Support

1. As nominator. To politicians. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 06:12, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
2. Iostn (talk) 00:24, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
3. --Thi (talk) 20:44, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
4. I don't especially prioritize the Leaders section, but let's push this one across the finish line. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 04:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4-0 to Revolutionaries. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Known as “the father of Russian Marxism”, he was undeniably an immense influence on the Bolsheviks, who gave him the rare distinction of admiring him despite his misgivings towards them.

;Support

1. As nominator. To revolutionaries. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 06:12, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
2. Iostn (talk) 00:24, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
3. --Thi (talk) 20:50, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
4. Sure, let's push this one across the finish line. -- Zar2gar1 (talk)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = partial pass

| result = Swap 4-0 for Liddell with Hackenschmidt, removal of Penn stalled at 3-0, open > 4 months. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

MMA is overrepresented with 15 athletes despite being a considerably younger sport than wrestling. MMA is skewed toward the recent UFC; all fifteen entries were born in the last 61 years and competed in the last 31. 40% of them are American males; of those, Penn and Liddell appear to be the least notable; having the fewest overall wins, fewest title wins, and fewest interwikis.

George Hackenschmidt was the first world heavyweight wrestling champion, and also invented the bench press _pbp 13:47, 2 August 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 14:51, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
2. Support Liddell and Hackenschmidt per nom. Neutral on Penn because he seems decently important. QuicoleJR (talk) 12:21, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 01:55, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
4. Sure, let's push this proposal across the finish line. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 04:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

No info about any kind of influence he's had over philosophy, the section he is listed as vital under. He was also Minister for Youth, National Education and Research of France for two years, but that isn't exactly a super influential position that's enough to warrent inclusion, either. I imagine most of the interwikis are from his cabinet position, and pageviews are not that high either.

;Support

1. As nom Iostn (talk) 20:47, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 01:55, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
3. Support, article doesn't make him sound particularly impressive. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 04:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Makkool (talk) 13:10, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Among the most notable journalists who have worked during the Israel-Palestine conflict, this would help reduce sysbias in that section

;Support

1. As nom Iostn (talk) 18:21, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
2. Seems important enough. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:02, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
3. After some thought, sure, even though Writers & Journalists is still over-quota. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 04:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:54, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Not much claim vitality. He's a professor who founded a sci-fi convention.

;Support

1. As nominator. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 20:49, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
2. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 14:54, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
3. --Thi (talk) 21:15, 22 September 2024 (UTC)
4. Definitely remove, let's push this across the finish line. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 04:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Moved 4-0, to new headings under Misc -> Crime. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

As it stands the activist section seems to be the default place to dump entries like these, although I am pretty sure crime makes a lot more sense. I've finally attempted to go through and grab the various pirate/outlaw entries listed there and proposed places to fit them under the Crime section. "Piracy" currently does not exist as a subsection under crime, but you can consider creating that as part of this proposal.

Piracy

• {{VA link|Blackbeard}}
• {{VA link|Calico Jack}}
• {{VA link|Anne Bonny}}
• {{VA link|William Kidd}}
• {{VA link|Henry Morgan}}
• {{VA link|Bartholomew Roberts}}
• {{VA link|Zheng Yi Sao}}

Thievery, robbery and hijacking

• {{VA link|Claude Duval}}
• {{VA link|John Nevison}}
• {{VA link|Dick Turpin}}
• {{VA link|Xaver Hohenleiter}}
• {{VA link|Juraj Jánošík}}
• {{VA link|Louis Mandrin}}
• {{VA link|John Caesar}}
• {{VA link|Jesús Arriaga}}
• {{VA link|Joaquin Murrieta}}

Organized crime

• {{VA link|Tiburcio Vásquez}}
• {{VA link|Veerappan}}

;Support

1. As nom Iostn (talk) 17:26, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
2. Makkool (talk) 11:23, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 12:01, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
4. Support per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 18:46, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Discuss

1. Blackbeard is Level 4, so for him a proposal needs to be opened on the Level 4 talk page. Makkool (talk) 12:25, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
2. :Crime isn't even a section at V4 so I'm not proposing it be moved there Iostn (talk) 14:14, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
3. ::You're right! {{VA link|Pablo Escobar}} is in businesspeople. That's a tangle to sort. Makkool (talk) 14:52, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 5-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

"He is best known as the co-inventor of the detector component of the Geiger counter and for the Geiger–Marsden experiment which discovered the atomic nucleus".

;Support

1. As nominator. To physicists. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 22:07, 2 October 2024 (UTC)
2. Notable omission Aurangzebra (talk) 22:50, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
3. Iostn (talk) 20:19, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Support, even if the Scientist section is a bit heavy on Physicists. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 04:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
5. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:23, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 5-0 to Businesspeople. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

According to Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5/People/Archive 6, on May 23, this article had 3 support and 1 oppose. As I stated on February 6 when I nominated this, I think he is instrumental for leading the artificial intelligence charge and continue to believe {{VA link|Nvidia}} will be the first company to achieve a $5 trillion valuation.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:08, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

; Support

1. Nom -TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:08, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Support, and I'm actually pretty skeptical of the recent "AI moment". But we're still under-quota for businesspeople, he and Nvidia have clearly made a ton of money, and whatever happens with the current AI boom / bubble, financial historians will probably be talking about him a long time from now. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:30, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 23:18, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Of course. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 21:05, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
5. Supporting while I doubt the impact AI will have but under his leadership Nvidia has been doing great Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 08:21, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Mark Monmonier is a very influential modern cartographer and author of the book How to Lie with Maps. His career has focused on addressing map literacy among the general population.

;Support

1. As nom. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:49, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
2. I haven't checked, but I imagine cartography is under-represented. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 04:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 13:10, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Kevinishere15 (talk) 19:04, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Wrote Geographia Generalis, which is widely regarded as the division between classical and modern geography.

;Support

1. As nom. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:49, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
2. I haven't checked, but I imagine cartography is under-represented. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 04:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 13:10, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Kevinishere15 (talk) 19:04, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Major contributions to geography and cartography, one of the most influential geographers alive, [https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=vd-iK1cp0AIC&hl=en h-index of 93 ]

;Support

1. As nom. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:49, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
2. I haven't checked, but I imagine cartography is under-represented. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 04:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 13:10, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Kevinishere15 (talk) 19:04, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopr

| status = failed

| result = Not added 2-3. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

One of the major geographers/cartographers of the 20th century. His influence was largely focused on the transition from traditional to computer cartography. Full disclosure, this is one of the articles I originated.

;Support

1. As nom. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:49, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
2. I haven't checked, but I imagine cartography is under-represented. I don't like using interwikis as a major criteria either. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 04:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Not in any other languages. Sahaib (talk) 08:49, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Per Sahaib. Kevinishere15 (talk) 02:02, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
3. Per above. We might not need so many modern cartographers. Makkool (talk) 13:10, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopr

| status = failed

| result = Not added 2-3. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Like Jenks, Getis is one of the highly influential 20th/21st century geographers. One of the "space cadets," his most famous contribution was likely the "Getis–Ord statistics" that allow Hot Spot maps. Full disclousre, this is another article I originate.

;Support

1. As nom. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:49, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
2. I haven't checked, but I imagine cartography is under-represented. I don't like using interwikis as a major criteria either. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 04:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Not in any other languages. Sahaib (talk) 08:49, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Per Sahaib. Kevinishere15 (talk) 02:02, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
3. Per above. We might not need so many modern cartographers. Makkool (talk) 13:10, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

;Neutral

;Discuss

GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:49, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4–0. Makkool (talk) 20:08, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Australian film director, that doesn't seem especially vital. Only 2 languages, and low view count.

;Support

1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 00:01, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
2. _pbp 00:18, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
3. Per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 02:02, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
4. per nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:52, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Neutral

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Moved 4-1, opposing vote noted previous precedents for placing actors in Lv 5. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Beatty has directed five films (one of them co-directed) his acting credited are much more extensive.

;Support

1. As nom Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 18:54, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
2. _pbp 18:56, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 01:20, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Makkool (talk) 13:10, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. As an actor, he is not as notable as the discussed tightened standards would require, IMO.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:34, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Probably vital enough now to be listed. Sahaib (talk) 20:37, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

:To clarify for the peanut gallery, dude's been President of South Korea for two years and failed in a martial law attempt _pbp 00:57, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. As nominator. Sahaib (talk) 18:05, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
2. Yeah, this guy has had enough of an impact by now. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:08, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
3. Iostn (talk) 20:38, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Makes sense. Kevinishere15 (talk) 04:50, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Swapped 5-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Would go under Pop. Surprised these guys aren't already listed. 6 number one hits, 29/33 of their singles were US Top 40 hits, and they are the most successful musical duo of all time, ahead of {{VA link|The Carpenters}}, {{VA link|The Everly Brothers}}, and {{VA link|Simon & Garfunkel}}. All the usual accolades and more: one of the top 100 artists of all time according to VH1 and Billboard Hot 100, inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and Songwriters Hall of Fame, and 7 platinum albums.

I don't feel particularly strongly about removing Michael Bolton but I do like to balance my proposals with a possible removal and Bolton is arguably the weakest contender in the same era and genre. Bolton's whole shtick of pop ballad crooning hasn't aged particularly well (seems to just be a relic of the late '80s/early '90s) and Spotify listener stats seem to indicate that none of his tracks besides How Am I Supposed to Live Without You have stood the test of time. By contrast, Hall & Oates are the 213th most-played artist on Spotify right now [https://kworb.net/spotify/listeners.html]. I won't deny he achieved commercial success during his time but there are many other artists who were even more commercially successful than him that we don't list presumably because their work hasn't achieved lasting recognition and continued success through time (e.g. Nickelback in rock). Besides 2 Grammys and a handful of American Music Awards, he hasn't achieved any critical success and his lede mentions that he has faced criticism for being derivative and also for plagiarizing work. Aurangzebra (talk) 23:21, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. as nom Aurangzebra (talk) 23:22, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
2. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 03:16, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 13:10, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
4. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:37, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
5. Per nom. CopiousAmountofCannons (talk) 11:15, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 5-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

This guy is so much of a self-promoter that I wouldn't put it past him that he wrote his name here. He is a prominent figure in gaming today, though primarily due to his litigious behavior and internet drama. Even if his records are true, I don't think we should be elevating this stuff.

;Support

1. As nominator. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 06:36, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
2. Does not seem vital. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:55, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 21:23, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
4. I'm generally skeptical of listing roles like gamers, influencers. etc. so let's push this one across the finish line. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 01:36, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
5. no no no get this off the list asap -1ctinus📝🗨 15:18, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

Even if the first cull above passes, sportswriting and broadcasting is still overrepresented, especially from the U.S., Canada and Britain. _pbp 20:23, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 5-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Do we really need two martial arts announcers from the Buffer family on this list? Only 10 interwikis vs. 22 for Michael Buffer _pbp 20:20, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 20:20, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 05:13, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
3. Per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 23:17, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Don't particularly like interwikis as an argument, but sportswriting / sportscasting can be cut. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 01:36, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
5. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:38, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Just three interwikis _pbp 20:20, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 20:20, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 05:14, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
3. Per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 23:19, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Don't particularly like interwikis as an argument, but sportswriting / sportscasting can be cut. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 01:36, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Both removed, 5-0 for Marsh, 4-0 for Hewitt. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Neither is known outside Canada. Hewitt seems to be the more notable of the two due to his role in establishing hockey leagues _pbp 20:20, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

;Remove Hewitt

;Remove Marsh

1. _pbp 20:20, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

;Remove both

1. per nom and Hewitt's Legacy section doesn't provide any VA5-level rationale for his significance (besides some cool trivia about how he may have the first person to introduce nets on goalposts in hockey Aurangzebra (talk) 05:18, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
2. Kevinishere15 (talk) 23:19, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
3. Let's keep cutting sportswriting / sportscasting. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 01:36, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Makkool (talk) 13:10, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 5-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Article reads like a puff piece _pbp 20:20, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 20:20, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
2. Cool bio but not VA5-worthy. Aurangzebra (talk) 05:20, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
3. Per above. Kevinishere15 (talk) 23:19, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Let's keep cutting sportswriting / sportscasting. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 01:36, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
5. Makkool (talk) 13:10, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopr

| status = failed

| result = Not removed 2-3. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

We already have Erin Andrews and Stuart Scott from the ESPN universe. _pbp 20:20, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. _pbp 20:20, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
2. Weak support, if we're going to keep any sportscasters, the comments below give some decent reasons to keep this one. I still think sportscasters are over-represented enough though to keep this proposal in contention. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 01:36, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. I think I generally agree with you on the rest of these (want to quickly review their articles before I commit to a Support) but I have to Oppose on this. Bill Simmons is not just huge in the sports world (I would wager that your average American sports fan knows who he is due to his outsized social presence) but he is even more vital in the podcasting world. He was arguably a podcasting pioneer, starting a wildly popular podcast on ESPN in 2007 before Serial (podcast) made the whole ecosystem blow up and he sold his podcast network The Ringer (website) for 200 million to Spotify. Many argue that the entirety of the value of the network is derived from Bill Simmons himself and not the content. I feel like anyone that can sell a network for 200 million in podcasting off just their own celebrity deserves a spot here. Also, while validating my claims, I learned that his subreddit r/billsimmons is in the top 2% of subreddits by size. These are musician/actor/athlete numbers, not sports writer. Aurangzebra (talk) 21:21, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
2. :{{ping|Aurangzebra}} Were you able to peruse the other sportswriter bios? _pbp 01:34, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
3. ::Got distracted by another thread but done. Aurangzebra (talk) 05:20, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Per Aurangzebra. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:03, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
5. Weak oppose per above. Kevinishere15 (talk) 23:18, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

Somewhere above, either in the first cull or the second, somebody said to remove ALL sports journalists. I ran the interwikis on the 21 sportswriters who will be retained following the two culls (including Simmons, who has been nominated for removal but is likely to be retained), and all but Mike Buffer, Murray Walker and Vin Scully have more than 20 IWs; nine of the remaining 21 have IWs in the single digits. In comparison:

1. The Olympic Games has 179
2. Formula One has 111
3. WWE has 82
4. ESPN has 53

It just looks like sports journalists don't have as much recognition as the sports and athletes they cover. And, on top of that, we have the American/British bias we have in many fields. _pbp 22:34, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

:I am not a big fan of using interwikis as a primary metric for vitality. Using it to bolster your claims? Sure. But as the primary source, it is just too finicky. Of course, sports personalities are going to have very few interwikis. Sports and art and music are universal things that anyone can appreciate whether they live in Afghanistan or Zimbabwe. Sports commentary and journalism is inherently limited to your home country - you are likely delivering your commentary in your home language and there is no reason for anyone to translate it. I can probably count on one hand how many sports journalists I know who aren't American. But I don't think this makes it any less important e.g. despite Henry Chadwick (writer) being considered the father of {{VA link|baseball}}, he is limited to 8 interwikis. And this makes sense; I wouldn't expect his work to be translated into other languages because baseball simply wasn't a phenomenon outside the United States during his time. Now that it is, I think someone considered the father of such a global sport deserves a spot here. If we went solely by interwikis, we would be removing vast swathes of important people, especially those who had major impact in some specific region or unpopular but still notable niche (e.g. businesspeople from the early 20th century or earlier, athletes in lesser-known sports, peripheral figures in entertainment industries such as songwriters or producers, non-public-facing academics particularly those outside of the US/UK, regional pop musicians outside the US/UK, the list goes on and on). If anything, our list should help us identify articles that need to up their interwiki count, not the other way around. Aurangzebra (talk) 02:11, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 5-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

We have an extremely prevalent bias towards classic rock and this section for people is overquota, so I think a few cuts are in order. As far as vital articles is concerned, I don't think these guys could possibly be considered anything more than a one-hit wonder. They're not listed at list of best-selling music artists, they have less interwikis than any other classic rock act like them at this level (38), and they have no long-lasting legacy. Only one song of theirs has arguably been important to any degree, and that's "More Than a Feeling", which has only 15 interwikis and a relatively low ranking on Rolling Stone's 500 Greatest Songs of All Time (literally, in 2004, it was dead last at #500). Any other song of theirs has less than five interwikis, save for "Amanda" (8 still isn't very good, though). Furthermore, they have no songs included in the list of best-selling singles, and their only album listed at list of best-selling albums has relatively low numbers compared to anything else, nearing the bottom of the list.

So to summarize, I see no evidence that the band has left a long lasting impact, they have no widespread commercial success, little to no international significance based on interwikis. Any and all success they've had seems to be based on one song (or album, debatably), and it's not a big enough song to carry their placement here alone. I don't see any reason we should list them here.

;Support

1. As nom. λ NegativeMP1 00:00, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
2. Per nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:06, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
3. Support. At least in the US, they do still get airtime on the classic rock stations for several songs. Also, it could just be an urban legend, but I was told growing up that their sound production was pretty influential (something about being MIT students and designing their own equipment). Even if it's true though, I don't think VA5 has that much room. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 01:36, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Makkool (talk) 13:10, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
5. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:40, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 5-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Once again, another classic rock band that I'm not sure how ended up here. This one seems just as unimpactful as Boston above, or even less impactful. Their legacy section is only one sentence, they have less than 50 interwikis, and they are not included on the list of best-selling music artists, list of best-selling albums, and they have no songs or albums on any Rolling Stone's Top 500 lists except for Never Tear Us Apart (INXS song), which has only nine interwikis. My same rationale for wanting to remove {{VA link|Boston (band)}} applies here, but even more so. I see no reason why this band should be vital.

;Support

1. As nom. λ NegativeMP1 22:30, 12 December 2024 (UTC)
2. Strong support, nothing against the band, but this is getting into the territory where I wonder if the People quotas should be cut. Also, it's a silly comparison, but as someone that wasn't around for new-wave and only learned about it after the fact, I know way more songs by {{VA link|Men at Work}}. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 01:36, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
3. Per nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 03:32, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Makkool (talk) 13:10, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
5. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:41, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Swapped 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Stub article on the president of a barely recognized state with a population of ~50k vs the president of Iran, with a population of nearly 90 million at what has been a time of major international crisis directly involving the country.

;Support

1. Nom Iostn (talk) 20:59, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
2. Support both per nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:42, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
3. Support, although he wasn't president for very long, Raisi's presidency was a very dynamic one, especially on the diplomatic front. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 04:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Makkool (talk) 13:10, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Swapped 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Head of state of Kuwait (a small country) for a decently long length of time, but no indication that he was that internationally important vs the recently killed leader of {{VA link|Hamas}}

;Support

1. Nom Iostn (talk) 20:59, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
2. Al-Sabah's article does not indicate any lasting importance, while Haniyeh was definitely an important politician. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:48, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
3. :Although, I feel like {{VA link|Yahya Sinwar}} would be more important to include, and I don't think Hamas is important enough for two politicians. Support for now, but I would rather add Sinwar than Haniyeh. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:49, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
4. ::Haniyeh was in a more senior poistion, Sinwar I think was more strongly linked to the October 7 attack/current war specifically to my knowledge Iostn (talk) 20:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
5. We already list several Al-Sabah rulers, including the sheikhs that established the country and the king during the Iraqi occupation. Hamas also definitely transformed under Haniyeh. I get the logic of suggesting Sinwar, but like Iostn, I think he might be more fitting as a military commander. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 04:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
6. Makkool (talk) 13:10, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Swapped 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

A guy who was prime minister for not even a month vs the just killed long-time leader of {{VA link|Hezbollah}}

;Support

1. Nom Iostn (talk) 23:02, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 12:55, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:19, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Support add, prefer moving Bahonar to Rebel / Activist instead of removing? He may not have been prime-minister long, but he had a major part in organizing the revolution prior to that. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 04:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atop

| status = withdrawn

| result = Other discussion opened with more participants

}}

Premier (albeit for a long time) of a non-independent overseas territory with a population of ~60k vs one of the most notorious leaders of Central America today

;Support

1. Nom Iostn (talk) 23:02, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Swapped 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 03:59, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

A Putin loyalist who filled the office of Prime Minister (which is not the most powerful position in Russia) for a short length of time vs the "the longest-serving foreign minister since the Tsarist era" (20 years). ALso notorious for his role in the {{VA link|Russo-Ukrainian War}}.

;Support

1. Nom Iostn (talk) 23:02, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
2. Support; Lavrov has been a household in Russian diplomacy during the Putin era. Idiosincrático (talk) 21:04, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
3. --Thi (talk) 15:59, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Support swap but consider moving Zubkov to Misc -> Businesspeople? I wanted to skim the Zubkov article first, and his official political career is definitely less notable than Lavrov's. Chairman of Gazprom for over 15 years isn't small potatoes either though. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 01:36, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. Makkool (talk) 21:00, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

From Italy. One of the most influential cinematographers. Worked in Apocalypse Now. Also 3 Academy Award wins.

;Support

1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 19:44, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
2. _pbp 20:05, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 07:25, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Kevinishere15 (talk) 19:03, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Both removed, The Pogues 5-0 and Thin Lizzy 4–0. Anthrax not swapped for The Pogues 1-2. Makkool (talk) 20:18, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

}}

Both these bands stick out like sore thumbs in their respective groups and they feel like they were just added to hit some sort of geographical diversity quota but I'm not sure Ireland is the best representative for that (and at least in the hard rock category, we have 1 Brazilian and 3 Scandinavian bands).

Thin Lizzy is, for most intents and purposes, a "one-hit wonder" band with The Boys are Back in Town. According to Spotify, this track has almost 5x more plays over their next most popular one. Arguably their second most famous track, Whiskey in the Jar, is a cover of an Irish folk song and not even the most popular cover (that honor would go to Metallica's version which has 5x more plays on Spotify and won a Grammy). Obviously, number of streams isn't the only factor to determine notability; we include groups like {{VA link|Death (metal band)}}, for example, whose 800,000 monthly listeners pales in comparison to Thin Lizzy's 3.5 millions. But at least Death is a pioneer in the fairly influential death metal subgenre. Thin Lizzy isn't really a pioneer in anything, none of their commercial numbers are that impressive (no platinum certifications in Ireland, the UK, or the US across any of their studio albums), and they haven't achieved much critical success as evidenced by their album ratings on RateYourMusic. Their legacy section indicates that they were respected and influential to some of their peers but this is also the case for a wide variety of other bands we don't list.

The Pogues are an Irish punk band that seem to be even less notable than Thin Lizzy. Low Spotify streaming numbers (1.5 million listeners a month), no particularly famous tracks besides a low-tier Christmas song, no major commercial or critical success, and no legacy section on their article. Their lede states that they reinvigorated traditional Irish music but I don't think that by itself is adequate for VA5 contention.

Maybe this is American bias but I don't think these groups are that influential but maybe one of our more UK/Ireland-leaning contributors can chime in here. Either way, even within Ireland, I think there are better contenders such as The Cranberries whose 69 interwikis are almost as much as The Pogues and Thin Lizzy combined. They are also Top-Importance in Irish music and have 3 songs that have more Spotify streams than the most-streamed Thin Lizzy or The Pogues song. They were also one of the best-selling alternative acts of the 1990s globally. I would not vote to add them in but this is just an example of how Thin Lizzy/The Pogues aren't even the most influential groups within the niche of Irish rock.

As a weak swap suggestion for the Hard Rock category, I'd support Anthrax (band) who are considered one of the Big 4 of thrash metal. We list the other 3 ({{VA link|Metallica}}, {{VA link|Slayer}}, and {{VA link|Megadeth}}). I am also fine with this just being a removal proposal. Aurangzebra (talk) 20:22, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. as nom, remove both Aurangzebra (talk) 20:24, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Support a swap between The Pogues and Anthrax. Weak keep Thin Lizzy. Idiosincrático (talk) 20:53, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Support both per nom. Makkool (talk) 21:01, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Support for both removals. I would rather cut a few classic rock bands from the 1970s, but there's still sysbias towards rock. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 21:10, 1 December 2024 (UTC)
5. Support removing both, just to clear up any confusion about the vote margin. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Oppose Anthrax. I think they're less vital than both Thin Lizzy or The Pogues. We won't need to add them only to complete the big four of thrash metal. Makkool (talk) 21:01, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Oppose adding Anthrax, just to clear up any confusion about the vote margin. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

;Neutral

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopy

| status = stalled

| result = Not swapped 1-1, open > 3 months, also may be repeating a recently closed proposal. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 04:46, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

}}

The Web entertainers and internet personalities section does not have enough non-English speaking creators, the only one being Germán Garmendia. Rubius started his channel in 2006 and has over 40 million subscribers on his main channel and 12 million on his second channel. He also has one of the most-followed Twitch channels in the world. iJustine does not seem to have as much long-term significance being known for the 2007 video 300-page iPhone bill which may have been notable at the time but I doubt that many would recall it. Sahaib (talk) 20:12, 20 September 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. Listing nom's vote explicitly. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 04:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. I wouldn't be opposed to removing iJustine (her main notability is that she was a pioneer in lifecasting and live streaming in general but her impact hasn't really stood the test of time). But I would be opposed to adding El Rubius. I feel like Youtuber subscriber and Twitch follower counts don't mean much for vitality. When you look at the List of most-subscribed YouTube channels and List of most-followed Twitch channels, I guarantee you that there will be many, many names on there you won't recognize at all no matter how terminally online you are. In fact, there are two Spanish Twitch streamers who are ahead of El Rubius (AuronPlay and Ibai Llanos). It doesn't make sense to add him when we recently rejected IShowSpeed who truly has an international audience and attracts massive crowds that, as two examples, have shut down entire malls in Malaysia [https://www.reddit.com/r/youtube/comments/1fix2qf/ishowspeed_in_malaysia_went_wrong/] and blocked off entire streets in Norway [https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/happened-ishowspeed-norway-explained-051741131.html]. Aurangzebra (talk) 00:34, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
2. : Just a small correction, El Rubius and other Spanish-speaking YouTubers do have an international audience, there are 21 countries that have Spanish as an official language so I would say that is quite international, plus you might not recognize them because of cisbias, but they are pretty well-known. The Blue Rider File:Postal horn icon.svg 15:46, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
3. ::That's true but I still cannot justify adding streamers like this who have virtually no presence outside of the Spanish-speaking world (even factoring in sysbias, you can reason this out by the fact that he doesn't offer any content in languages outside Spanish nor does he provide closed captioning in other languages) when we quickly reject other streamers who can draw insane crowds no matter what country they go to.
4. ::In general, I would also say content creation on Youtube/Twitch is a finicky business. It is very easy for your audience to outgrow you as they age or you yourself to outgrow what you do as you burn out/realize you've grown out of what made you famous and want to make an unpopular pivot. People who were considered superstars just a decade ago are no longer relevant (an easy example is the aforementioned Germán Garmendia). Streamers or creators can take over the Internet for a couple of years and make it seem like they're never going to drop off in relevance but it is very rare to find content creators whose relevance has stood the test of time.
5. ::This is not to say that El Rubius has been affected by this. It seems like he is still relevant today. But my point is that we need to hold Youtube content creators to a higher standard. If we judged VA5 based on popularity/most followers/most subscribers, this list would be 80% content creators most of us would have never heard of before. Aurangzebra (talk) 19:50, 21 September 2024 (UTC)

;Discussion

1. I don't know how much pioneers should be given credit, but at the time of this nomination had it been 6 month since she survived the last demotion attempt. I guess if a lot of people keep nominating something to be demoted, maybe the smoke indicates a true fire, but I don't like revisiting noms more than once a year. We should definitely have a 6 month hiatus.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:21, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
2. :That's a good find. If this repeats a recent proposal, I agree with you that maybe we should let this die on the vine. I don't particularly like the idea of any influencers being on the list, but it looks like this proposal is stalling out anyways. Unless everyone objects or suddenly revives it, I say we close it out as stalled after the 3 month mark (ca. Dec 20th). -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 01:36, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
3. ::Many celebrities are influencers. There was much ado about splitting Internet celebrity from Influencer. I am iJustine's page creator. I've created pages for several such social media influencer persons (Chiara Ferragni, Adrien Nunez, Elle Leonard and Hanna Cavinder). I am not sure what the future will bring in terms of lasting impact, importance and percieved vitality. Of all my vital articles, I would guess iJ is the most at risk of demotion, as I understand it. I'm pretty sure I am not seeing the issues as clearly as an unbiased discussant.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:36, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
4. :::I understand, and I think maybe we just have different priorities, which is fine. The voting rounds away most of our individual biases. It looks like there's not much interest in this proposal even now though. Maybe it's worth revisiting in 2026, but for now, if nobody steps in to revive it, we can probably consider it stalled regardless. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
5. Per above Makkool (talk) 17:15, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = All removed 5–0. Makkool (talk) 19:44, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

}}

The proposed removals have no direct connection to VA5 publications, historical events, or awards. Some of them are included as the "first publication in X region," but many of these publications were short-lived, had little diffusion, and no wiki articles. Plus, some of these claims may be insufficiently sourced or subject to debate.

• {{VA link|Samuel Orchart Beeton}}
• {{VA link|Cho Gab-je}}
• {{VA link|Benjamin Harris (publisher)}}
• {{VA link|Ebenezer Landells}}
• {{VA link|Henry Muddiman}}
• {{VA link|Roy W. Howard}}
• {{VA link|Samuel Keimer}}
• {{VA link|Frederick Wimble}}

;Support

1. As nominator. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 22:01, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
2. None of these seem vital. Kevinishere15 (talk) 06:18, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
3. sure GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 06:25, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
4. All of these get super low pageviews, Samuel Orchart Beeton is the biggest at ~13 a day and everyone else is even worse.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 10:14, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
5. Good argument. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atop

| status = redundant

| result = Already removed through this. Makkool (talk) 19:46, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

}}

He is notable for having a monopoly of print and publishing The London Gazette (which is not a vital article). Other people who had monopolies include Roger L'Estrange and Théophraste Renaudot who are both not listed. Also doesn't appear to have a legacy.

;Support

1. As nom. Sahaib (talk) 10:34, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
2. Per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 23:10, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 17:15, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

{{abot}}

There are a lot of rock acts that I think should be removed in similar vein to my above proposals to cut {{VA link|Boston (band)}} and {{VA link|INXS}}, with almost all of these proposals using the same rationale as the one I provided there. However, since there are so many that I think should go, and I don't want to flood this talk page, I'm grouping all of these further proposals into one header.

As for my rationale for removing most of these, most of the following can generally be applied to them unless stated otherwise:

• No songs or albums that are listed on a Rolling Stone 500 greatest of all time list. I also generally do not think even one song or album making it onto those lists is enough.
• Has relatively few interwikis compared to other acts listed at this level, alongside their main songs having few interwikis. A song having only 20-40 interwikis is most of the time understandable, but if a band itself only has that many then I believe it's very easy to tell they're largely irrelevant internationally or aren't truly that important.
• Limited commercial success, such as not being one of the best selling artists of all time, or have not made one of the best selling songs or albums of all time.
• No long lasting impact, and/or are not included in the {{VA link|Rock and Roll Hall of Fame}}.

An additional consideration is that, even if some of these are influential to some extent (or clearly do not meet one of my points above), this section has a clear rock bias, is over quota, and honestly I think our quota for musicians should probably be lowered. Obviously, anyone is free to disagree with what I think the bar for removal should be and this is completely subjective, but this is here to basically summarize all of the proposals I have created below.

(Also, I'm might be adding more proposals to this topic over time.)

{{atopr

| status = failed

| result = Not removed 3-2. Makkool (talk) 18:24, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

}}

They seem to be a long-running band that has clearly seen some success to continue going after a few decades, and good for them, but I don't think they belong here. 28 interwikis is a pitifully low number compared to any other act listed here, and the only claim to vitality I can find of theirs is their AllMusic biography that describes them as "one of the most original and celebrated bands of the post-punk and alternative rock eras in the '80s and onward." And when their article only has 28 interwikis, completely lacks a legacy/impact section, and the band itself has fairly limited commercial success, I highly doubt that claim. Even if they are truly influential in alternative rock and their article just doesn't do a good job of demonstrating it, I feel like the listing is more or less just gap-filling trivia about the genre rather than a truly standout act.

;Support

1. As nom.
2. Makkool (talk) 13:10, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
3. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:42, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. FYI, a lot of the interwikis are instead probably being covered with the article for Nick Cave (who as a name is more well known than Bad Seeds), who is on 49. Commercial success aside, they have been influential over a long span of time. Iostn (talk) 15:16, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
2. per lostn. Aurangzebra (talk) 04:16, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

;Neutral

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 6–0. Makkool (talk) 18:24, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

}}

I will give this band credit where it is due, they have three albums listed on the Rolling Stones 500 listed, and one song listed on that same sites best songs list, and a couple of critics said they were the best band of the 1990s. But with that being said, I think that can safely be pushed to the side when this band possibly has the fewest interwikis out of any modern rock act listed at vital articles (24), which in my opinion makes them liable to be cut. Combine this lack of international relevancy with their lack an impact/legacy section. I commemorate the critical acclaim they have received, but for vital articles I think the reasons they shouldn't be here outweigh the reasons why they should. Refer back to my argument about the potential rock bias.

;Support

1. As nom. λ NegativeMP1
2. Makkool (talk) 13:10, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
3. They have a large cult following with a lot of critical acclaim, but they are still too niche for VA probably, and unlike Throbbing Gristle they can't really be credited with originating a broad style of music. Iostn (talk) 15:16, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Important to alternative music, but as the nom says it just falls short too much. 49p (talk) 20:51, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
5. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:43, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
6. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 05:20, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Neutral

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{atopr

| status = failed

| result = Not removed 3-3. Makkool (talk) 18:24, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

}}

Before I get into why I think they should be removed, I will say that they are listed as one of the best selling musicians of all time, with a claimed 100 million units sold. Key word "claimed". Their certified units only amount to about 48.5 million, which is nothing to scoff at, but compared to other rock bands that number is fairly low. Their article does make the claim that they are among the most successful bands to the RIAA and Billboard, but based on List of highest-certified music artists in the United States I highly doubt that claim and the only source for it is an AllMusic biography. Of course, sales numbers aren't everything, but to add onto this, they have no albums or songs that are among the best selling of all time, none that are on any Rolling Stone lists, and their legacy section is basically just saying that their music is popular to cover. Which... okay? They also have a decent amount of interwikis (45), but that's still not a lot. And their most popular song appears to be Hard to Say I'm Sorry, which only has nine interwikis. I think the same logic I applied in my proposal to remove {{VA link|Boston (band)}} can be applied here. They were popular in the 70s-80s, they had a decent amount of chart success, but they just haven't stood the test of time. The only band out of those classic radio-oriented rock groups that I think should be kept is {{VA link|Journey (band)}}.

;Support

1. As nom. λ NegativeMP1 05:32, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
2. Makkool (talk) 13:10, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
3. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 00:37, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Their 100+ million units sold claim is included in their Rock and Roll Hall of Fame induction essay [https://rockhall.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Chicago_2016.pdf] which one would assume would be thoroughly fact-checked. They are verifiably the second most successful band in Billboard history after {{VA link|The Beach Boys}} which gives further credence to the previous claim. If we delist them, they would be literally the only musical group with over 100+ million units that we don't include (if you don't believe me, check List of best-selling music artists). Also, I don't think Hard to Say I'm Sorry is their most popular song so that argument is faulty as well. Their song with the most streams on Spotify is If You Leave Me Now which has 14 interwikis, on par with other VA5 tracks such as {{VA link|Tutti Frutti (song)}}. So many of their songs get classic rock radio airplay such as the aforementioned If You Leave Me Now and Hard to Say I'm Sorry but also 25 or 6 to 4 and You're the Inspiration. Judging from the streaming numbers, these are all well-known tracks. Streaming numbers indicate that both Chicago and Journey have stood the 'test of time' equally well; I don't think you can get rid of one and not the other. Aurangzebra (talk) 05:20, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
2. Per above. CopiousAmountofCannons (talk) 16:48, 3 January 2025 (UTC)
3. Per above.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:33, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

;Neutral

1. Having a hard time really opposing your argument.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:45, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

;Discuss

• Really close to supporting, but User:Aurangzebra has a very good point about sales. It's counterintuitive to me since I don't know anybody that talks about the band, but that must just be the people I'm hanging out with. I will say, however, that if we agreed to cut Boston (band), I totally think we should cut Journey (band) too. I know they have a couple popular songs (and those largely as karaoke memes?), but unless they sold way more albums or influenced more bands than I realize, I wouldn't consider them vital. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4–1. Makkool (talk) 18:24, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

}}

The same logic behind wanting to remove {{VA link|Chicago (band)}} and {{VA link|Boston (band)}} applies here. Like seriously, the exact same logic, there is nothing more to add or remove. Take my proposal to remove {{VA link|Chicago (band)}} above, and you pretty much have the exact same reasons as to why I think Foreigner should be cut. I guess to be fair here though, I Want to Know What Love Is is a pretty popular song, and you could maybe make a similar case as to wanting to keep them based on an extremely popular song like that, similar to how I mainly advocated to keep {{VA link|Journey (band)}} based on the widespread success of {{VA link|Don't Stop Believin')). But with that being said, I still maintain the general reasons why I think they should be cut: not that many interwikis (43, which I guess is more than Journey but still), a decent amount of commercial success but nothing particularly extraordinary, no best-selling albums or songs, no critically acclaimed songs or albums on a Rolling Stone list (IWKWLI was on the 2010 version of the best songs of all time but it isn't on that list anymore), and so on and so forth. Also all of their songs besides I Want To Know What Love Is have very few interwikis.

;Support

1. As nom. λ NegativeMP1 05:32, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
2. Makkool (talk) 13:10, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
3. Per nom. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 00:37, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Personally suspect they're less influential than Boston (band), and I agreed with cutting them. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Unless you want to swap in "I Want to Know What Love Is"-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:48, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
2. :"I Want To Know What Love Is" is not a song that I would personally list as vital, and I definitely wouldn't list it and not the band. Neither should be here, but that's my opinion. λ NegativeMP1 22:55, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

;Neutral

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{atopr

| status = failed

| result = Not removed 2-3. Makkool (talk) 18:24, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

}}

A different kind of proposal from the other ones in this topic, but I still want to bring it up. {{VA link|The Who}} is already V5 and I'm not sure if Townshend himself has enough of a separate career from that band to warrant being listed. He did get ranked on some magazine's choices for the best guitarists, but those primarily took into account his work as part of The Who. If we're gonna list people for those reasons, then sure, I guess that's fine, they're definitely influential, but does anything make him more worthy of vitality than someone like {{VA link|James Hetfield}} or {{VA link|Gerard Way}}? For the record, I'm not advocating for Hetfield or Way to be listed here, since similarly, their associated bands ({{VA link|Metallica}} and {{VA link|My Chemical Romance}}) are already V5, but more or less my point is where would we draw the line. Nevertheless, I still think this listing is redundant to the band itself.

;Support

1. As nom. λ NegativeMP1 05:32, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
2. Makkool (talk) 13:10, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Townshend wrote practically every song for the Who and is the brainchild behind all of their work, including {{VA link|Tommy (The Who album)}} ("My Generation" also used to be VA-5). While I'm not arguing for the Who to be VA-4, the Who is quite close, being "one of the most influential rock bands of the 20th century" with acclaimed work spanning a decade. I think keeping Townshend in VA-5 will maintain that distinction. I find Townshend in a similar boat to {{VA link|Roger Waters}} or {{VA link|Jimmy Page}}/{{VA link|Robert Plant}} as a songwriter who led an influential band.CopiousAmountofCannons (talk) 11:16, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
2. Per above. The Who are nearly VA4 so having Townshend isn't superfluous. Also, I don't think our criteria for band members rely on their solo careers. If that were the case, then people like {{VA link|Jim Morrison}}, {{VA link|Keith Richards}}, or {{VA link|Ringo Starr}} should be cut first. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 00:37, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
3. per above Aurangzebra (talk) 05:20, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

;Neutral

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{atopr

| status = failed

| result = Not removed 2-3. Makkool (talk) 18:24, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

}}

We already list {{VA link|Neil Young}} (who appears to be worthy of vitality himself) and I don't think he needs a subtopic when he's only V5. He himself definitely outweighs the influence of the band. The same logic for why I wanted to remove other rock bands in this topic applies here (no widespread commercial success, no long lasting impact as a group, etc.)

;Support

1. As nom. λ NegativeMP1 05:32, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
2. Makkool (talk) 13:10, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Highly influential in their own right Iostn (talk) 15:16, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
2. :The band article has no legacy section, and I highly doubt it's worth listing when Neil Young is already vital. Could you please elaborate on your argument for how they are influential in their own right? λ NegativeMP1 22:57, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
3. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:49, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Besides being iconic for their political activism and influence to the counterculture movements of the late '60s and early '70s, they literally achieve all the criteria you want out of a rock group. They have 2 albums and 2 songs on the RS 500 greatest of all time (you might have missed them because this article covers both Crosby, Stills, and Nash and CSNY). 40+ interwikis. I can't find exact certified units numbers but Déjà Vu (Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young album) has 8 million+ units sold which is Neil Young's best-selling album ever. Rock and Roll Hall of Fame induction in 1997 (as CSN, not CSNY, indicating vitality independent of Neil Young). Aurangzebra (talk) 05:20, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

;Neutral

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4–0. Makkool (talk) 18:24, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

}}

Not a rock group, but I think my reasons for wanting to remove them are identical to why I want some of these rock groups removed, so I'm putting this here anyways. Basically, I can't think of a single reason why this group should be vital. 33 interwikis is not that much, their only critically acclaimed album, Presenting the Fabulous Ronettes (422 on a Rolling Stone list), has only 3 interwikis, and they're not that commercially successful or influential on the music industry.

;Support

1. As nom. λ NegativeMP1 05:32, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
2. Makkool (talk) 13:10, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
3. Weak support. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 00:37, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
4. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 05:20, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Neutral

1. {{VA link|Be My Baby}} is massively influential and they contributed a lot to "A Christmas Gift for You From Phil Spector" which Rolling Stone ranked the greatest Christmas album of all time, although both are famous primarily due to {{VA link|Phil Spector}}'s production. It doesn't seem we have any classic girl groups besides {{VA link|The Supremes}}, so I am not against keeping The Ronettes. CopiousAmountofCannons (talk) 11:20, 22 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4–0. Makkool (talk) 18:24, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

}}

AFAIK, her influence is more on technical grounds rather than being that well-known or critically acclaimed musically/stylistically - to note, the genres she's associated with were well-established by the start of her career. I considered her to maybe be the weakest listing under electronic music, and if Throbbing Gristle is removed (which I strongly disagree with) then so should she.

;Support

1. Nom Iostn (talk) 15:29, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
2. λ NegativeMP1 18:19, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
3. Interesting artist but nothing particularly vital here. Aurangzebra (talk) 05:23, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Makkool (talk) 17:15, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Discuss

Iostn (talk) 15:29, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopr

| status = Failed

| result = Not added 1-3. No votes supporting nominator. Nominated 18 days ago. Last vote 17 days ago.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:22, 5 January 2025 (UTC)

}}

Out of the artists I compiled [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Vital_articles/Level/5/People&oldid=1263666127 here], he is one of the more vital ones in my opinion. See Cultural impact of Harry Styles and List of awards and nominations received by Harry Styles. It is similar to Justin Timberlake and NSYNC in that One Direction is already vital.

;Support

1. As nom. Sahaib (talk) 00:20, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. {{VA link|One Direction}} is already level 5 and I would argue his solo career (which began less than a decade ago) to fall under too recent. I recognize his widespread impact and popularity, but his fame isn't something truly extraordinary and we don't know if it will stand the test of time. And besides, I think we should list less musicians, not more. λ NegativeMP1 01:50, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
2. Per NegativeMP1. Also if we recently voted to boot Dua Lipa who has had both more critical and commercial success than Harry Styles as a solo artist (not to mention way more interwikis), I don't think we can justify adding him yet. Aurangzebra (talk) 01:54, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
3. Although his 3rd Multiplatinum album, inches him a bit above Dua Lipa, I can't support both as a solo artist and part of a band.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:55, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4–0. Makkool (talk) 18:24, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

}}

There is more vital artists from Southeast Europe that are not listed such as Dino Merlin who actually wrote Bosnia and Herzegovina's national anthem (I would have suggested him but Bosnian Goran Bregović is already listed) as well as Lepa Brena and Zdravko Čolić (Bosnian emigrants to Serbia). In terms of just Kosovo/Albania, artists such as Dua Lipa, Era Istrefi, Rona Nishliu, Bleona have more language links but I don't really think there is a vital artist from the countries as of now.

;Support

1. As nom. Sahaib (talk) 07:40, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
2. Per nominator. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 22:23, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 22:39, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Makkool (talk) 17:15, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = All removed 4–0. Makkool (talk) 18:16, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

}}

Slightly more influential than the list above, but some of these inclusions hinge on inherited vitality (The John Walters who were in succession editors-in-chief of The Times after their father/grandfather, {{VA link|John Walter (publisher)}}) or place too much emphasis on being co-founders of newspapers, despite having limited participation in running the outlets themselves (McGarvie and Miller). Others are near-stubs that do not assert much vitality.

• {{VA link|James Franklin (printer)}}
• {{VA link|John S. Knight}}
• {{VA link|Gordon Lish}}
• {{VA link|William McGarvie}}
• {{VA link|Paul Steiger}}
• {{VA link|John Walter (editor, born 1776)}}
• {{VA link|John Walter (editor, born 1818)}}
• {{VA link|Andrew Miller (publisher)}}

;Support

1. As nominator. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 00:18, 25 December 2024 (UTC)
2. Good argument. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
3. Kevinishere15 (talk) 06:21, 31 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Makkool (talk) 17:15, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

There is a disproportionate amount of American Christian leaders, especially televangelists, in the religious leaders section. There's just a few people listed from the UK, even Australia has more. American Christians are surely influential in the global scene and more well-known figures, but I think we should have some more British people on that list for diversity's sake. I have here some suggestions to consider, not everyone needs to be added.

I also think we could spare to remove some of the televangelists to have more proportionality, we don't even have {{VA link|Televangelism}} as a vital article. But that'll be a separate proposal.

:Probably three or four of the modern American televangelists should be removed. Of these additions, I think one is fair, but all three is excessive. It bears mentioning that contemporary UK is largely a nation of non-adherents. _pbp 15:12, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

::If we would decide that just one is needed, then maybe we should choose to list the current Archbishop of Canterbury. Although Williams is arguably more famous than Welby. Makkool (talk) 16:10, 14 September 2024 (UTC)

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. Makkool (talk) 22:13, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

}}

The currect Archbishop of Canterbury, and the leader of the worldwide Anglican church. Has focused in social justice and modern challenges in his leadership.

;Support

1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 19:18, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
2. Iostn (talk) 09:37, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
3. Support, but ironically looks like he's not going to be at Canterbury much longer. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 22:31, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Interstellarity (talk) 21:41, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. Makkool (talk) 22:13, 7 January 2025 (UTC)

}}

A former Archbishop of Canterbury. A respected theologian, public intellectual and Christian writer in the UK, a still active commentator today.

;Support

1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 19:18, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
2. Of the three proposed additions, I consider he to be the most worthy _pbp 22:37, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
3. Surprised we don't list him honestly; I'm neither British nor Christian, but I've definitely read about him. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 22:31, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Interstellarity (talk) 21:42, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Discuss

{{abot}}