Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5/STEM/Archive 5#Add Ford Mustang 5

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. Makkool (talk) 18:12, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

}}

A tree with a wide geographic distribution, used for many purposes and with folkloric and mythological meanings. We could also add European rowan, which has much more interwikis.

;Support

1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 19:46, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 12:05, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
3. Interstellarity (talk) 12:28, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
4. 🍋‍🟩 OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 21:23, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Neutral

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. Makkool (talk) 18:12, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

}}

Also known as linden, or lime tree. Another tree used for several purposes and which has cultural significance.

;Support

1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 19:46, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 12:05, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
3. Interstellarity (talk) 12:28, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
4. 🍋‍🟩 OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 21:24, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Neutral

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. Makkool (talk) 19:08, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

Also known as Norway maple. A common type of maple in the old world, and also as an invasive species in America.

;Support

1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 19:46, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
2. Interstellarity (talk) 12:28, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
3. 🍋‍🟩 OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 21:24, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Trees, we still have so much room for trees. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Neutral

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

Found these three omissions

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. Makkool (talk) 18:31, 8 August 2024 (UTC)

}}

We list {{VA link|Rib}} and {{VA link|Sternum}}, but not this.

;Support

1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 11:55, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
2. Obvious. Mathwriter2718 (talk) 11:56, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
3. Per above. JpTheNotSoSuperior (talk) 17:00, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
4. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 09:20, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. Makkool (talk) 19:08, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

Also called "solar plexus"

;Support

1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 11:55, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
2. suitable for this level. starship.paint (RUN) 09:20, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
3. Interstellarity (talk) 12:24, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Surprised we didn't have this already. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. Makkool (talk) 19:08, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

Now, a more better understood part of the body

;Support

1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 11:55, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
2. suitable for this level. starship.paint (RUN) 09:20, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
3. Interstellarity (talk) 12:24, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Surprised we didn't have this already. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. Makkool (talk) 16:19, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

}}

A commercially important species of fish, farmed and fished for use as food in many countries.

;Support

1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 20:29, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
2. Per nom. JpTheNotSoSuperior (talk) 01:35, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom Aurangzebra (talk) 20:59, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
4. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 12:05, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Neutral

;Discussion

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. Makkool (talk) 18:10, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

}}

"one of the most abundant fish species in the world", important to the fishing industry for many countries

;Support

1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 19:54, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 12:05, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
3. Interstellarity (talk) 12:27, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
4. 🍋‍🟩 OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 21:22, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Neutral

;Discussion

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = Passed

| result = Passed 4-0. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 09:31, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

The European species of {{VA link|Perch}}, popular game fish for recreational fishing around the world.

;Support

1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 19:54, 30 August 2024 (UTC)
2. Interstellarity (talk) 12:27, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
3. 🍋‍🟩 OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 21:22, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
4. We have the room, let's close this batch out. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 17:56, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Neutral

;Discussion

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. Makkool (talk) 19:08, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

A large and diverse genus of plants, includes {{VA link|Raspberry}} and {{VA link|Blackberry}}. We are below-quota on Plants, so there is room for it.

;Support

1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 18:55, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:03, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom.GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 20:47, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Inject the plant additions into my veins! -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. Makkool (talk) 17:15, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

Important everyday item we don't yet list. Add under Wikipedia:Vital_articles/Level/5/Technology#Lighting

;Support

1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 20:36, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
2. --LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 21:22, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Lost my lighter, emergency matches are what I am using to light the cigarettes up; pretty commonplace in every day activities and thus vital. The Blue Rider 03:54, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
4. per nom. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:00, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Neutral

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = PASSED

| result = Added 4-0. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 09:11, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

{{VA link|Variance}} helps understand the spread of a sample, but its value alone may not provide much insight. This is where the coefficient of determination comes into play. The Blue Rider File:Postal horn icon.svg 13:25, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. As nominator. The Blue Rider File:Postal horn icon.svg 13:25, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
2. Interstellarity (talk) 01:09, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
3. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 16:14, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Support, very basic and we're still barely at quota in math. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = PASSED

| result = Added 4-0 —Femke 🐦 (talk) 09:11, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

{{VA link|Covariance}} helps understand how two variables change together, but its value alone doesn't show the relationship's strength or direction. That's where the coefficient of correlation comes in. The Blue Rider File:Postal horn icon.svg 13:25, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. As nominator. The Blue Rider File:Postal horn icon.svg 13:25, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
2. Interstellarity (talk) 01:09, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
3. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 16:15, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Support, very basic and we're still barely at quota in math. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = Pass

| result = Added 4-0. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 09:09, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

In fields like economics and statistics, it's vital to remember this fallacy. Recognizing this distinction is crucial for accurate data interpretation and analysis. The Blue Rider File:Postal horn icon.svg 13:25, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. As nominator. The Blue Rider File:Postal horn icon.svg 13:25, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
2. Interstellarity (talk) 01:09, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
3. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 16:16, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Support, very basic and we're still barely at quota in math. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = pass

| result = Added 5-1, but under Politics -> Wars by type. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

Many world wars besides WWI and WWII have existed, a vital concept for history, politics and culture. 72 interwikis. The Blue Rider File:Postal horn icon.svg 23:06, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. As nominator. The Blue Rider File:Postal horn icon.svg 23:06, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
2. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 07:18, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Interstellarity (talk) 00:13, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
4. Supporting and agreeing with above. JpTheNotSoSuperior (talk) 02:20, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
5. Support but only under History, not STEM. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Too general of a term.TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 12:33, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

:# Not true, it is pretty well defined. Plus we list things much more abstract than this. The Blue Rider File:Postal horn icon.svg 14:27, 27 May 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = pass

| result = Added 4-1, but under Politics -> Governance. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

Controversial issue that is often debated in politics. 37 interwikis. The Blue Rider File:Postal horn icon.svg 23:06, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. As nominator. The Blue Rider File:Postal horn icon.svg 23:06, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
2. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 07:18, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
3. Per nom. Interstellarity (talk) 00:13, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
4. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 16:51, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Besides being closer to a philosophical thought experiment or literary trope in my mind, we already have UN and international organizations. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

;Discuss

• I'm guessing this will pass, but if so, doesn't it belong more under Politics than STEM? -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 6–0 near {{VA link|Demographics}}, < 7 days after last vote per WP:AVALANCHE. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 18:43, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

Widely studied concept per itself but also its implications; important for geography, politics and demography. 77 interwikis. The Blue Rider File:Postal horn icon.svg 23:06, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. As nominator. The Blue Rider File:Postal horn icon.svg 23:06, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
2. per above. starship.paint (RUN) 07:18, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
3. Per nom. Interstellarity (talk) 00:13, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
4. Important. JpTheNotSoSuperior (talk) 02:21, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
5. Support. Mathwriter2718 (talk) 18:15, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
6. Support, but only under the Social Sciences. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = PASS

| result = Remove 4-0. PrimalMustelid (talk) 20:38, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

As much as I dislike contributing to the bias against invertebrates, I unfortunately don't see much indication that these fossil arachnids are important enough concepts to be vital articles given their taxonomic recency combined with not being very popular research topics in general. PrimalMustelid (talk) 19:07, 27 June 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. As nom. PrimalMustelid (talk) 19:08, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
2. Interstellarity (talk) 12:19, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
3. Defering to nom on this one. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Mostly deferring here too. Don't see an argument for inclusion from reading the short articles or looking at pageviews. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 16:12, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Neutral

;Discussion

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 5–0, under Technology -> Agriculture -> Forms. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

Combining cash crops and large estates, plantations have been important in creating the modern world economy, and they date back to ancient times. Their history is full of exploitation and conflict.

;Support

1. As nominator. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 05:15, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 11:25, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
3. Supporting. JpTheNotSoSuperior (talk) 02:27, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
4. Interstellarity (talk) 12:20, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
5. Support but shouldn't it be under Economics? This is more a historical form of production than a distinct technology in my mind. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zar2gar1 (talk • contribs) 00:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. Makkool (talk) 18:38, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

An important aspect of the {{VA link|printing press}}.

;Support

1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 22:03, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
2. Interstellarity (talk) 12:21, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
3. I actually like this one for technology; very intricate topic with a long history but still relevant today. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
4. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 16:16, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Neutral

;Discussion

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

We use these everyday like books and TV. Interstellarity (talk) 00:16, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. Interstellarity (talk) 00:16, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
2. Easy support. It connects all of this stuff together. JpTheNotSoSuperior (talk) 02:40, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 10:23, 5 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Support, I actually like there to be some overlap in Level 5; it suggests ways to merge/split articles. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = PASSED

| result = Passed 4-0. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 09:22, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

Clopen sets are really not an very important concept. They matter basically only insofar a connected space is defined to be a set with no nontrivial clopens. If anything, Connected space should be nominated, and in fact I will nominate it. Mathwriter2718 (talk) 13:08, 18 July 2024 (UTC) Edit: I am changing this proposal from just removing Clopen to replacing Clopen with Connected space, as I should have done from the outset. Connectedness is one of the most fundamental concepts in {{VA link|General topology}}. Mathwriter2718 (talk) 02:56, 3 August 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. Per nominator. The Blue Rider File:Postal horn icon.svg 02:59, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
2. Mathwriter2718 (talk) 03:17, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
3. Interstellarity (talk) 12:22, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Absolutely, glad to start seeing the math proposals. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Discuss

• {{ping|Mathwriter2718}}, hello! Here at WP:VA we support as nominator; also make sure to include a support, oppose and discuss subsection for people to vote. Cheers.
• {{ping|The Blue Rider}} I am changing this proposal from just removing Clopen to replacing Clopen with Connected space, as I should have done from the outset. Feel free to retract your per nom support if you disagree.

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

A number system that extends the complex numbers. Used in mathematics, physics, and computer science. 64 interwikis.

;Support

1. As nominator. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 18:15, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
2. Support for level 5, quaternions are fairly important. Mathwriter2718 (talk) 12:40, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
3. Interstellarity (talk) 12:25, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Absolutely, glad to see the math proposals coming in. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Swapped 4–0. Makkool (talk) 18:43, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

I feel like the general concept should be listed than just "file sharing" cause there are many other usage of P2P that isn't just file sharing.

; Support

1. 49p (talk) 15:31, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
2. Makkool (talk) 17:01, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
3. Interstellarity (talk) 12:31, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
4. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 16:25, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

; Oppose

; Discuss

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopr

| status = Failed

| result = Failed proposal (3-5). 60% necessary for listing. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 09:33, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

Sailing the seas has a longer legacy than Napster. One lasts 20 years and ongoing, and the other only lasted 3 years. The Pirate Bay is "one of the most visited torrent websites in the world" and "sparked controversies and discussion about legal aspects of file sharing, copyright, and civil liberties".

; Support

1. 49p (talk) 15:38, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
2. Per nominator. The Blue Rider File:Postal horn icon.svg 15:58, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
3. Per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 01:47, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

; Oppose

1. Neither should be there. Both covered by the more basic concept above (Peer to peer file sharing) Big Blue Cray(fish) Twins (talk) 21:00, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
2. : Not every more basic concept is always more important than its subconcepts or examples. The Blue Rider File:Postal horn icon.svg 00:03, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
3. per above Makkool (talk) 17:01, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
4. Remove both. Interstellarity (talk) 12:32, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
5. Napster and the legal battle surrounding it were of pivotal importance to the development of music sharing and distribution on the Internet, and foreshadowed the development of copyright conflicts to come. Neutral on adding TPB, which was influential, but by far the first service of its kind and has been in decline for years. Iostn (talk) 21:45, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
6. Both should be there. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 04:01, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

; Discuss

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

The page curved spacetime was recently split from Spacetime, a level 4 vital article. I believe that the topic of curved spacetime is vital enough and could fit under spacetime in the hierarchy. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:29, 10 September 2024 (UTC)

Support

1. As Nominator GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:29, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 13:40, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
3. Interstellarity (talk) 12:33, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Sure, I could see this in Lv5 Physics. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

Parent topics of {{VA link|Cathode}} and {{VA link|Anode}}. Place under {{VA link|Electrical conductor}}.

;Support

1. As nominator. feminist🩸 (talk) 04:03, 11 September 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 13:40, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
3. Interstellarity (talk) 12:34, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Sure, physics has room and I like some overlap at Level 5 to stimulate merging / splitting. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 17:56, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. Makkool (talk) 16:01, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

Important industry worldwide. List under Agriculture.

;Support

1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 06:57, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 13:21, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
3. Iostn (talk) 21:45, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
4. --LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 16:28, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Neutral

;Discussion

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0, Prediction to Philosophy -> Philosophy of science, Forecasting -> Science basics. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

A {{VA link|Prediction}} is a commonly created form of intangible property; and {{VA link|Forecasting}} is the process of creating it. There is some overlap with {{VA link|Estimation}} but a key difference is that predictions are concerned with future events or data, whereas estimations can be for both existing and future data.

Prediction can be placed under Mathematics#Statistics and probability; Forecasting can be placed under Technology#General.

;Support

1. As nominator. feminist🩸 (talk) 03:09, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 14:22, 6 October 2024 (UTC)
3. Critical in stats and meteorology. -1ctinus📝🗨 03:35, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Support both, but disagree with the categories. Skimming the articles, seems like Prediction belongs somewhere closer to Philosophy and Forecasting belongs with Science Basics. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. Makkool (talk) 19:08, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

Also known as Giant African land snail. A popular pet animal, and also a major invasive species in some parts of the world.

;Support

1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 17:24, 26 September 2024 (UTC)
2. Articles in 32 languages. This [https://www.researchgate.net/figure/The-countries-in-which-Achatina-fulica-specimens-infected-naturally-with-nematodes-have_fig2_365931975 species] is very common: USA, China, Brazil, Italy, Nigeria, Papua New Guinea.... starship.paint (RUN) 13:20, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
3. We definitely have room for this. QuicoleJR (talk) 12:13, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Sure. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

Important medical topic, one million people are blinded every year by the fungal version alone, and that version isn't even the most common one. In my opinion, this could potentially make VA4. 33 interwikis.

;Support

1. As nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 12:18, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
2. Makkool (talk) 18:28, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
3. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 16:21, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
4. We have the room. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

A class of computers that includes Home computers.

;Support

1. Interstellarity (talk) 12:48, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
2. Makkool (talk) 06:12, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
3. Covers the {{VA link|Commodore 64}}, {{VA link|Raspberry Pi}}, {{VA link|ZX Spectrum}} and {{VA link|Apple II}}, among others Iostn (talk) 21:45, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Sure GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 06:10, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

The World Health Organization lists several "Essential Medicines" in their document [https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/345533/WHO-MHP-HPS-EML-2021.02-eng.pdf?sequence=1 here]. Many are not included in the list. Furthermore, several common drugs are also not included. I have gone through and found several that are on their list but not on ours, as well as one that is not on their list (hydrocodone, Gabapentin, alcohols (medicine), and medicinal cannabis) but that I think is important to include.GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 17:12, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

;Support

1. as nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 17:12, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
2. Important type of antidepressant. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:02, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 18:55, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Definitely. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

;Support

1. as nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 17:12, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
2. There is room. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:09, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 18:55, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Definitely. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atop|Already being discussed in a different section on the talk page. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:03, 22 October 2024 (UTC)}}

;Support

1. as nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 17:12, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Comment

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

;Support

1. as nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 17:12, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
2. More than seven million prescriptions in the United States. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:10, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 18:55, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Definitely. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

;Support

1. as nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 17:12, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
2. Per discussion below. QuicoleJR (talk) 00:16, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 18:55, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Definitely. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Comment

:{{ping|GeogSage}} Can you please explain why this one should be listed? I can't really tell from reading the article why it is more important than other medicines we could list. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:12, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

:Yes, so I went through the WHO Model List of Essential Medicines and spot checked a few medicines. I believe everything on this list should be included on Vital, and wanted to get the ball rolling. I started with medicines that were psychiatric because that seemed to be thinner. Ultimately, I would like to go through the list systematically and add all the UN essential medicines, but this is a start as it could get overwhelming otherwise. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 19:38, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

;Support

1. as nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 17:12, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
2. We have room for this, and it can always be removed if we stop having room. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:14, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 18:55, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Definitely. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

;Support

1. as nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 17:12, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
2. The tenth most commonly prescribed medication in the United States, with over forty million prescriptions. Definitely vital. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:16, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 18:55, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Definitely. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

;Support

1. as nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 17:16, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
2. More than eleven million prescriptions in the United States. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:20, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 18:55, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Definitely. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

;Support

1. as nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 17:12, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
2. Obviously. {{VA link|Ethanol}} is VA4. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:21, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 18:55, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Definitely. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4–0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

;Support

1. as nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 17:12, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
2. Definitely vital. {{VA link|Cannabis}} is VA4. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:22, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 18:55, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Definitely. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopy

| status = stalled

| result = Not added 1-1, proposal open > 6 months. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 18:22, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Found a lot in libraries. Interstellarity (talk) 23:47, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. Interstellarity (talk) 23:47, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. I continue to assert WP has many redlinks and redirects that could be vital articles. Microfilm and microfiche should not be redirecting to this subject and either or both could be VA5. This term is uncommon and made important by virtue of its vital subjects that redirect to it.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) — Preceding undated comment added 08:30, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
2. : I think I'm neutral overall, but I'd imagine we could substitute either of those for this list if you'd prefer. It would just be on somebody to propose changing the main page and doing the move. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopy

| status = stalled

| result = Not added 2-1, 1-2 for Gustave (crocodile), proposal open > 5 months. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 18:22, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

We can probably have some man-eaters on the individual animals section. These animals are held to at least killed 100 people. (There's also the Leopard of Rudraprayag, but we already have the hunter who killed him.)

;Support

1. SailorGardevoir (talk) 04:37, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
2. Support Tsavo man-eaters and the beast of Gevaudan. Oppose Gustave, as it seems to be too recent and we can't see if it's a long-standing topic that has vitality in the future. Makkool (talk) 11:16, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. I just can't convince myself that these are vital in the same way that so many Vital Articles are. Mathwriter2718 (talk) 11:40, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

;Discuss

1. We literally have fourteen individual animals. Not sure if these are the next ones to add. Vileplume 🍋‍🟩 (talk) 02:54, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
2. :The animal page is still under quota. SailorGardevoir (talk) 04:43, 1 June 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopr

| status = failed

| result = Not added 3-2. Makkool (talk) 19:02, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

Under Scripting languages. Among the more popular programming languages in recent "scripting history", with 48 interwikis. One could argue that this is a similarly/more widely recognized language than a couple currently listed as VA by programmers. B3251_(talk) 06:41, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. As nom. B3251_(talk) 22:30, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
2. Interstellarity (talk) 12:35, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
3. Iostn (talk) 21:45, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Arguably those other languages shouldn’t be there either. Not a fan of adding this language since it doesn’t have history of being used for large amounts of time in serious software. Maybe in the future but not now. -1ctinus📝🗨 03:33, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Agree with 1ctinus; I personally think a lot needs to be cut from Computers and Software in Tech, not just the programming languages. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Infant mortality added 4–0, birth defect was already listed. To society page instead of health. Makkool (talk) 18:53, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

Noted in a discussion above the pages for Infant mortality and Birth defect are not listed. I am posting to correct this as I believe they are a pretty serious omission.GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 02:23, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. as nom.GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 02:24, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
2. Support infant mortality per nom, there is already an active proposal for birth defect which obtained consensus to add two months ago but has not been added yet. QuicoleJR (talk) 12:12, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
3. :Note: I closed that proposal. Birth defect is now listed. QuicoleJR (talk) 12:50, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Add 'em both. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
5. Yes, absolutely key topic. Might be a level 4 one. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 18:49, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

Our military technology section has 19 pages for "specific aircraft." Of these, 14 are U.S. built planes (Including the Enola Gay), 3 are European built planes, 1 is South American (Brazilian), and 1 is Russian/USSR. This seems a bit unbalanced in my opinion, and most of the US aircraft are contemporary planes still in use. To resolve this, I'm going to nominate several U.S. planes for removal (which hurts because I love U.S. planes) and nominate several other aircraft to be added. I'm going to post on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aviation and Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history to see if they have any interest in contributing.

{{atopr

| status = failed

| result = Not removed 2-2. Makkool (talk) 19:16, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

I'll rip this Band-Aid off and say while the A-10 is cool, it isn't really vital to the understanding of military aircraft.

;Support

1. As nom. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:34, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Makkool (talk) 16:49, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. It's quite literally the best example for understanding the modern employment of close air support. It's absolutely vital to understanding U.S. military doctrine from the Gulf War onward. Show me another aircraft that is as synonymous with its mission as the A-10 is with Brrrrt.⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 03:34, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
2. The A-10 is by far the most prolific example of a close air support throughout history. The only aircraft to even come close was perhaps the Junkers Ju 87, but the CAS role has evolved since WWII to the point that they're not even similar. - ZLEA _T\^C 04:43, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopr

| status = failed

| result = Not removed 2-2. Makkool (talk) 19:16, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

Similar to the F-18, the F-16 is a cool plane but I don't think it is vital compared to countless other similar fighter aircraft in other countries.

;Support

1. As nom. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:34, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Makkool (talk) 16:49, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. "Countless other similar fighter aircraft in other countries" do not have the service record nor widespread usage of the F-16. It was/is the predominant 4th generation land-based fighter of NATO and the West in general. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 03:47, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
2. The F-16 is by far the most common fixed-wing aircraft in military service around the world. Perhaps second only to the Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21, the F-16 has one of the most colorful service histories of any fighter aircraft in history. - ZLEA _T\^C 04:43, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4-0.. Makkool (talk) 19:16, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

The Messerschmitt Me 262 was a WWII Nazi aircraft. It is notable as the first fighter aircraft that used jet engines.

;Support

1. As nom. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:34, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Makkool (talk) 16:49, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Only by virtue of being the first jet fighter. It had almost no actual impact on the war itself, and Allied powers had already developed their own plans for jet aircraft in parallel. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 03:45, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
4. As the world's first operational jet fighter, this one is an obvious choice. - ZLEA _T\^C 04:43, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4-0.. Makkool (talk) 19:16, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

The Zero was a WWII Japanese aircraft. In understanding the war in the Pacific, I believe the Zero is extremely important. During the early war, the U.S. struggled with the Zero.

;Support

1. As nom. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:34, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Makkool (talk) 16:49, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Most important fighter in the Pacific. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 03:43, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Perhaps the most well known fighter of all the Axis powers of WWII. - ZLEA _T\^C 04:43, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopr

| status = failed

| result = Not added 2-1, 1 neutral. Makkool (talk) 19:16, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

The MiG-19 was the first USSR fighter aircraft capable of supersonic flight. It was widely distributed to countries across the world, and has seen widespread usage in multiple wars.

;Support

1. As nom. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:34, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Makkool (talk) 16:49, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Of all the MiG fighters to see production, this would probably be my last pick. It does not have nearly the reputation of its predecessor, the Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-15. - ZLEA _T\^C 04:43, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

;Neutral

1. While widely distributed, it had a poor service record. It's mainly notable for the Gary Powers incident and for being destroyed in large numbers in Vietnam and the Six Day War.⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 03:41, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

;Discussion

@ User:ZLEA, do you want to nominate the MiG-15? The main issue I have is the list is WILDLY American centric. I know the U.S. is a leader in Aviation, but I think USSR tech needs to be represented.

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopr

| status = failed

| result = Not added 2-1, 1 neutral. Makkool (talk) 19:16, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

}}

The MiG-25 is a USSR fighter and one of the fastest military aircraft to enter service. The plane has significance to understanding cold war dynamics, specifically, the U.S. F-15 was developed in response to this plane due to the concerns it caused.

;Support

1. As nom. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:34, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Makkool (talk) 16:49, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. The MiG-25 itself had very little influence over the field of combat aviation generally; misconceptions about the MiG-25 played a minor role in U.S. defense policy for a few years until we figured it out. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 03:37, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

;Neutral

1. Not sure about this one. Most of this aircraft's reputation came from misconceptions which were quickly dispelled after one fell into western hands. I would probably choose the Mikoyan MiG-29 over this one, but I won't oppose this. - ZLEA _T\^C 04:43, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

;Discussion

GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:34, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopg

| status = removed

| result = Removed 5-0 per WP:AVALANCHE. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 19:07, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Technology is over the quota, and this article does not seem that important. Only 2 interwikis.

;Support

1. As nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:17, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Per nom.GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:58, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Weak support, since we already list fishing line and others; no section should be entirely free from quota discipline either. See proposal above for note about Agriculture coverage though. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Makkool (talk) 17:50, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
5. Support  Carlwev  08:07, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopr

| status = failed

| result = Not added 2-2. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 20:03, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

A class of computers that includes {{VA link|Laptop}}s.

;Support

1. Interstellarity (talk) 12:56, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
2. Makkool (talk) 06:12, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. I'm not that much of a fan of having very abstract articles in our vital list, when there is a highly similar concrete article with higher pageviews. Laptop is VIT5, which is enough for me. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 18:56, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Oppose, my "some overlap is good at Lv5" principle is no match for the fact that Computers are massively over-represented. At another time, say if the Computers section could be cut down to ~400 articles, I would support. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 5-0 per WP:AVALANCHE. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 20:03, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

We do not need to list every single Boeing plane that ends with the number 7. Of the ones we list, these two seem the least important, although if you think a different one is the least important, let me know. Technology is currently over the quota, and more things need to be added, so I think these two articles can go.

;Support

1. As nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 15:45, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Per nom. I was targeting the Aviation specific examples for a wave of removal proposals coming up so am glad ot see this listed. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 17:56, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Makkool (talk) 17:26, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nom. Was just thinking this while browsing the list. KatVanHuis (talk) 20:00, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
5. Can't think of anything remarkable about these models. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 19:07, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4-0. Makkool (talk) 10:02, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

It's missing, probably because {{VA link|Dialysis (chemistry)}} was listed instead in medical technology. I propose adding the proper article, because it's an imporant technique in medical treatment. Add to Wikipedia:Vital_articles/Level/5/Technology#Techniques

;Support

1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 17:26, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Seems pretty important. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:42, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Key concept in medicine. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 09:23, 30 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Definitely. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 19:07, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Neutral

;Mixed

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 5-0 per WP:AVALANCHE. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 20:03, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

To me this looks like a fun hobby, yet it's too much of a niche to be listed.

;Support

1. As nom. KatVanHuis (talk) 20:21, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Does not seem that important. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:43, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Per nom. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 22:40, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
4. --LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 07:43, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
5. Definitely. If there are other ones like this, maybe they should be cut too. I like the idea of having some articles about hobbyist / homebrew / improvised technology, but would prefer general concepts over specific communities. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 19:07, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 20:03, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Minor concepts in Engineering. The latter is actually a humanities field that's part of Science and technology studies, and we don't list it

; Support

1. As nominator. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 17:00, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
2. Per nom. Makkool (talk) 17:50, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
3. I believe STS is a vital topic however. Our article describes it as interdisciplinary, so it could fit under Technology still. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 18:53, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
4. These two articles do not seem vital. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:08, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

; Oppose

; Discuss

• Mainly bumping to keep this open for a bit... but honestly, both of these can probably just be merged boldly: the 1st to Design optimization and the 2nd to Science and technology studies. I could maybe even do it myself over Thanksgiving holiday. Following that though, I agree with Femke that STS is vital, and we should definitely list some kind of optimization article related to Engineering. I don't think most people realize how much of a working engineer's time is spent on iteratively tweaking really mundane things. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopy

| status = stalled

| result = Not added 1-2, open for > 6 months. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 20:03, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

The ancestor of {{VA link|LibreOffice}} and {{VA link|Apache OpenOffice}}. Interstellarity (talk) 10:48, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. Interstellarity (talk) 10:48, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. It was one of the most popular pieces of open-source software in its heyday, but it still had a significantly lower market share than MS Office even at its peak. It did not last a particularly long time, with less than ten years between its first and final releases. feminist🩸 (talk) 07:07, 2 September 2024 (UTC)
2. Oppose, purely on my no-name-brands-in-tech principle. I personally think word processor program would be sufficient, even for MS Word. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

;Neutral

;Discussion

• {{VA link|Apache OpenOffice}} is not vital. QuicoleJR (talk) 22:24, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
• :@QuicoleJR: I know it's not. That's why I proposed its predecessor which is the ancestor to LibreOffice and OpenOffice. Interstellarity (talk) 11:51, 18 May 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopy

| status = stalled

| result = Not added 1-1, open > 6 months. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 20:03, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

We list NYC subway at L4, but we don't have coverage for the bus system that goes there. I suggest adding these so that the buses and other forms of transit are covered here. Interstellarity (talk) 21:41, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. Interstellarity (talk) 21:41, 22 May 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Oppose here, but would support on a different list. See discussion below for more detail. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

;Neutral

;Discussion

• {{ping|Interstellarity}} You raise a good point about transit authorities; in big cities like NYC (and NYC is relatively small by global standards), they have to juggle lots of logistical and political demands. After looking at the list though, we don't list transit authorities at Tech, just specific built networks. As an urban organization more than a technology, maybe they could go under Pol & Econ or even Geography -> Cities? -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopy

| status = stalled

| result = Not added 2-1, open > 6 months. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 20:03, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

We list taxis, but not ridesharing. Interstellarity (talk) 00:55, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. Interstellarity (talk) 00:55, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
2. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 16:27, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Oppose here, but neutral if you'd move it to Economics and Business. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopy

| status = stalled

| result = Not added 2-0, open > 6 months. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 20:03, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

We list Public transport bus service and this should be listed as well. Interstellarity (talk) 19:30, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. Interstellarity (talk) 19:30, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
2. For now, per my "some overlap is good at Lv5" principle. Haven't skimmed the article, but definitely seems like a candidate for an eventual merge. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 20:03, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Maybe Residential buildings and housing units in Technology. It's clearly a need for all organisms. Interstellarity (talk) 00:42, 31 August 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. Interstellarity (talk) 00:42, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 12:05, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
3. Basic concept. JpTheNotSoSuperior (talk) 18:31, 31 August 2024 (UTC)
4. Support, especially since it's a stub (so incubate it here on Lv5). Could also eventually be split to distinguish human shelters from general sheltering used by animals. A recent proposal noted that we don't even list things like Nest or Beehive for biology yet. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopr

| status = failed

| result = Not added 2-1, 4th vote neutral. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 20:03, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

It attempts to explain the horn/spike/sandpaper-y growths, mostly on the heads of male fish in the breeding season. I consider it a vital part of fish anatomy, and I was surprised this article didn't exist! So, I created it by machine-translation from its Spanish counterpart and expected it to be picked up by experts who would run with it. This didn't happen. I have no formal scientific or academic education beyond mandatory schooling, and I am out of my depth. So, I hope that others consider it to be as vital as I do, and propel the article content to where it needs to be! Big Blue Cray(fish) Twins (talk) 13:51, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. As nominator. Big Blue Cray(fish) Twins (talk) 13:54, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
2. Interstellarity (talk) 12:30, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Cool topic! I'd never heard of it before. From List of fish families, I gather there are some 525. This is only a feature in 15 families, which makes this feel rather niche. I don't think listing it here will attract experts; a note on a Wikiproject may do so. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 16:24, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

;Neutral

1. I'm honestly neutral on this one; it's interesting and we still have room, but it's also very specific. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 17:56, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 5-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 20:03, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

PFAS is a well-known pollutant and carcinogen. Given its importance in Chemsitry and environmental science, I believe it should be a vital article. -1ctinus📝🗨 19:53, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. as nom -1ctinus📝🗨 00:59, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Good find, especially since this topic is topical. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
3. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 11:12, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Definitely vital. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:20, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Discuss

• {{u|1ctinus}} it is standard to support has nominator on the WP:VA project. The Blue Rider 00:51, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
• oops -1ctinus📝🗨 00:59, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 5-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 20:03, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Broad group of classes of German/NAZI submarines used during WWI and WWII.

;Support

1. As nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 22:11, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Makkool (talk) 16:49, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Hard to fully explain WWII without it. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 06:48, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nom. -1ctinus📝🗨 18:10, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
5. Obviously. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:07, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 20:03, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

As above.

;Support

1. As nom.  Carlwev  20:59, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Per nom. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 02:57, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
3. --LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 18:33, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
4. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:19, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 20:03, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Technology is over the quota, and this does not seem like a vital topic. Only one interwiki.

;Support

1. As nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:04, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Terrible stats; ~3 daily pageviews, rated Low-importance in Agriculture. This is the kind of junk listing for which we should have a vitality estimator to quickly catch them with.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 18:35, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Per nom. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:57, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Weak support, since we do already list Cover crop and no section should be entirely free from quota discipline. Just noting for further proposals though, Agriculture is only around 6-7% of our list, and many of those articles arguably belong elsewhere. So even unpopular pages that seem niche may be filling in coverage gaps. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4–0. Makkool (talk) 18:18, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Not seeing how "concrete sprayed through a hose" is vital.

;Support

1. As nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 02:35, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Per nom. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 03:38, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
3. per nom. Makkool (talk) 17:26, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 01:51, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Weak oppose, I'm close to neutral on this one, but while it may seem niche, I think it's about the technique involved as much as the material itself. Plus we're probably under-represented on Construction topics. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{clear}}

{{Clear}}

Furthermore, I think that some of the "recreational drugs" should be recategorized. If the drug has a recognized medicinal use, then it should not be there. Failing to do so adds unnecessary stigma to people who are taking the medicine for a medical reason. These include:

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Recategorized 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 17:43, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Methamphetamine has legitimate medical uses, even in the United States under the name brand "Desoxyn." This should not be controversial, as while this prescription medicine is widely abused, many people can it at a pharmacy.

;Support

1. as nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 17:12, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
2. Per nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:23, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 18:55, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
4. Thought about this more, and I agree with moving. Besides the legit medical use, I'm not sure I'd consider meth abuse as "recreational". -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 21:18, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopr

| status = failed

| result = Not recategorized 1-4 per WP:SNOW. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 17:43, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Alcohol is used for medicinal purposes and as a component of many over the counter meds. We can leave Alcohol intoxication in its place.

;Support

1. as nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 17:12, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. That article does not mention any of the medical uses, instead being an article focused solely on the recreational and societal uses. Also, we are adding the article about its medical uses to the list. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:31, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
2. Per above Makkool (talk) 18:55, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
3. Agree with QuicoleJR that we now have the separate medical-use article. And if there's still significant content in this one about medical usage, that should be migrated at the article level. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 21:18, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
4. :Not sure why, but my oppose vote wound up under comments. Moving it here. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:32, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
5. Per above. Kevinishere15 (talk) 19:13, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

;Comment

1. :{{ping|QuicoleJR}}, I may be misunderstanding the article, but on Alcohol (drug)#Uses it lists "Medical" and "Self-medication." This seemed like a good reason to move it from "recreational" as there are legitimate medical uses. Cough syrup has alcohol in it for example. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GeogSage (talk • contribs) 15:44, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopr

| status = failed

| result = Not recategorized 1-4 per WP:SNOW. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 17:43, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

This is much more controversial obviously, but in many states in the United States, people ARE getting prescriptions for medical cannabis.

;Support

1. as nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 17:12, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Weak oppose. I understand the reasoning, but we are adding {{VA link|Medical cannabis}} to the list, so I don't think this is needed. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:25, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
2. Per above Makkool (talk) 18:55, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
3. Agree with QuicoleJR. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 21:18, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Per above. Kevinishere15 (talk) 19:13, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

;Comment

We may want to make a section for drugs that were used historically, but are now replaced with something better. If such a category is created, Opium and Heroin can go into it. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 17:12, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopy

| status = moot

| result = Already listed under Ranged Weapons, vote reaffirmed 5-0 per WP:AVALANCHE. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 19:02, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Javelins and Harpoons have been used for tens of thousands or years. Javelin throw the sport event is already in at level 4. Significant weapons for hunting, warfare, sport, fishing and whaling. Spear is in at level 4, so expanding on it at level 5 would be reasonable. Although it wasn't successful, there was some support to add spear to level 3 as well. We have other sub weapon types which seem less significant, that could feasibly be swapped out if necessary, like Ji (polearm) and Partisan (weapon) for example seem less important.

;Support

1. As nom.  Carlwev  20:59, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 02:57, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
3. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:19, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Kevinishere15 (talk) 19:09, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
5. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 08:01, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 5-0 per WP:AVALANCHE. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 17:43, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

A bassic concept in chemestry, it can even be in level 4. It has more than 60 interwikis and more than 300 daily views. Also we listed {{VA link|Materials science}} so this one should also be. It can be listed here or here.

;Support

1. As nom. Brunoblocks274 (talk) 18:27, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
2. --LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 18:32, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Great catch, another basic concept we've missed until now; also agree with adding to Chemistry somewhere. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:54, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 16:44, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
5. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:17, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 5 - 1-ish per WP:AVALANCHE. Possible article reorganization noted elsewhere. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 17:43, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

• {{VA link|Engineering statistics}}
• {{VA link|Engineering research}}
• {{VA link|Microwave engineering}}

Technology is over the quota, and there are still plenty of things that could be added. With that in mind, these three stubs do not seem vital. They all have low interwiki counts and low WikiProject ratings, and nothing in the articles suggests vitality for any of the three.

;Support

1. As nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:04, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Support. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:57, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 17:50, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 16:44, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
5. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:18, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Neutral

;Mixed

1. Weakly oppose outright removal. They're all good finds, but there may be better ways to dispose of them:
2. : Move Eng. Stats. to Math, it strikes me as a pretty legit topic, despite the embryonic state of the article.
3. : Merge Eng. Research, into the Applied research section of the Applied science article, which would allow boldly removing from the list as a duplicate.
4. : Keep Microwave Eng. for now, I think we're still under-represented in analog electronics, and while we list RF engineering, we don't list Radar engineering (one of the major subsets of microwave engineering). Keeping the article listed for now can stimulate reorganization. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 5-0 per WP:AVALANCHE. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 17:43, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Also known as rotting. Probably add under Wikipedia:Vital_articles/Level/5/Biology_and_health_sciences/Biology#Basics.

;Support

1. As nom.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 17:53, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Per nom.--Brunoblocks274 (talk) 23:03, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Sure. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Support  Carlwev  08:06, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
5. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:18, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4-1. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 17:43, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Technology is over the quota, and there are still plenty of things we should add. This is not one of those things. I'm not seeing from the article how this is vital, and it only has three interwikis. There are plenty of things I would rather list.

;Support

1. As nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 01:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Per nom.GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:58, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 17:50, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 01:58, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Oppose, it's maybe the most unromantic thing ever, but IIUC this is the essence of how many modern sewage treatment plants in the world today work. It should probably be listed under Industry -> Sanitation instead, where we only have around 5 articles. Considering how critical sanitation is to everyday life, I think it's a very under-represented topic, and I would interpret the lack of interwikis as a coverage gap, not low vitality. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

As was brought up recently by user @Zar2gar1, we are starting to get a bit over the limit in technology. The category for weapons is a very bloated, which is expected as so much of our technology is dedicated to killing each other, and weapons are very interesting to many people. That said, I think we can trim some of this section down a bit. To be clear, I'm not proposing adding anything to replace these, but instead to make room for all the other additions people are suggesting we add, and will continue to propose in the future. I'm not committed to removal of any one of these, although I feel more strongly about some then others. I do believe we need to trim a lot of stuff though, and that these are a start.

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 5-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 17:43, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Starting with what I think should be the most obvious and easy page to agree on removal. I love the idea of the railgun from an engineering perspective. That said, we don't have them, at least not in widespread use, and this is mostly a science fiction concept. To quote the page, "Railguns are still very much at the research stage after decades of R&D, and it remains to be seen whether they will be deployed as practical military weapons in the foreseeable future." Until the weapon is adopted and put into widespread use by at least one military, I think it is best left with concepts like {{VA link|Kinetic bombardment}} and {{VA link|Antimatter weapon}}.

;Support

1. As nom.GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:49, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Not vital enough to include. QuicoleJR (talk) 12:59, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 17:55, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 01:56, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
5. Updating vote now that the mechanism proposals are open. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 21:18, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Neutral

1. I'm actually neutral because IIUC it's also a general mechanism, not just a weaponized form? If there's a better article for the cascading acceleration it uses though, I'll cross this out and change to Support. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

;Discuss

:@Zar2gar1, the page for {{VA link|Linear motor}} would likely be what you are looking for. Railguns are a specific theoretical application. While we ARE currently researching them, the closest thing to their implementation is the Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System. In the Civilian world, {{VA link|Maglev}} trains are an example. I should point out here that {{VA link|Maglev}} would be a great addition to vital articles, as it is a type of train in widespread use globally. ALL of these pages would be better then Railgun in my opinion though, as they are actually employed in the real world. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 18:05, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

:I agree that Maglev should be listed, and would support it if you nominated it. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:08, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4–1. Makkool (talk) 17:21, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

A weapon that is used more in Hollywood then history.

;Support

1. As nom.GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:49, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Agree, we don't need to get this specific into thrown weapons. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 17:55, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 01:56, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Weak oppose. Not very historically important, but extremely common in fiction. QuicoleJR (talk) 13:04, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

;Neutral

;Discuss

{{abot}}

• THIS seems to support removal 4-1.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:23, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

:*Yeah, it actually does. Thanks for noticing! Makkool (talk) 13:43, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4-1, not swapped 2-1. Makkool (talk) 13:43, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

While they are a popular knife, especially in American hunting stores, there are MANY types of knives and including just one opens the door to many others that are equally worthy. On that note, if we don't remove it, we should swap it with Fighting knife, as it has many of the other knife types we could include as well.

;Support removal

1. As nom.GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:49, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Clearly not that important, not sure about fighting knife. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 21:29, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 01:56, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

;Support Swap with Fighting knife

1. Prefer swap but support plain removal, pretty much, consider this a swap vote unless we're on the fence between keeping outright or removing outright. In that case, I'd rather see it removed. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Makkool (talk) 17:55, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose both

1. Oppose {{VA link|Knife}} at VA 3 it deserves a few subtopics Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 03:44, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

;Neutral

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4–0. Makkool (talk) 17:21, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

As far as Japanese swords go, the {{VA link|katana}} should obviously be included. The Wakizashi just doesn't seem as vital in my opinion.

;Support

1. As nom.GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:49, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Agree, the 2 swords paired are interesting culturally, but that can be covered by other topics on Japanese history & society. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 17:55, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 01:56, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Neutral

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4–0. Makkool (talk) 17:21, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

There are many cartridges in use, and I don't really think we need to include any of them. If we did include any, 9mm makes a lot of sense, but I don't think any particular cartridge is that vital overall, and that inclusion of the page {{VA link|Cartridge (firearms)}} is adequate.

;Support

1. As nom.GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:49, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Support, I may have added these during the pre-vote days (I think the NATO standard cartridge was already there). Agree though that at quota, we really don't need to list specific ammo standards. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 17:55, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 01:56, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Neutral

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4–0. Makkool (talk) 17:21, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

The same argument as for {{VA link|9×19mm Parabellum}}, but stronger. There are many cartridges in use, and I don't really think we need to include any of them. If we did include any, 9mm makes a lot of sense, but {{VA link|5.56×45mm NATO}} makes a bit less. I don't think any particular cartridge is that vital overall, and that inclusion of the page {{VA link|Cartridge (firearms)}} is adequate. If we can remove both this and 9mm, we can remove the entire subcategory for Specific cartridges.

;Support

1. As nom.GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:49, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Support, at quota, we really don't need to list specific ammo standards. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 17:55, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 01:56, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Neutral

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 5-0 per WP:AVALANCHE. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 20:03, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

This is a relatively new family of firearms, and I don't believe it has been adopted as widely as others.

;Support

1. As nom.GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:49, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Does not seem particularly important. QuicoleJR (talk) 02:30, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Support, at quota, we really don't need to list specific ammo standards. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Makkool (talk) 17:55, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
5. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 01:56, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopr

| status = failed

| result = Not removed 3-1 or moved 2-0. Makkool (talk) 17:21, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Glock is a firearms manufacturer, not a specific firearm. I don't believe they should be included at all, but if they are we need to move them somewhere else besides "specific firearms" as they do not fit.

;Support remove

1. As nom.GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:49, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Strong support, both on my "no brand names in Tech" principle and the point that it's a company, not a design. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
3. : Just to clarify, I prefer removal, but if it comes down to keeping here or moving to Companies, consider this vote a move. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 21:18, 7 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 01:56, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

;Support move

1. It definitely should be in Companies. Oppose removal per QuicoleJR. Makkool (talk) 17:55, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. The Glock is very culturally important in the United States. Tons of people talk about "a Glock" as you would talk about "a Frisbee". Neutral on whether it should be under Weapons or Companies. QuicoleJR (talk) 12:55, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

;Neutral

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4–0. Makkool (talk) 17:21, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

This is an odd one. We include {{VA link|M4 carbine}} and {{VA link|M16 rifle}}. The AR-15 style rifle, to quote the page, ""AR-15" is most-commonly used to refer only to the civilian semi-automatic variants of the rifle which lack the fully automatic function." The AR-15-style rifle is distinctly not a military weapon, and is created specifically for the U.S. domestic firearm market. Based on the terminology and use, the most appropriate place for it would likely be under the category "Sports equipment" under [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vital_articles/Level/5/Everyday_life/Sports,_games_and_recreation], as the weapon is marketed as "modern sporting rifles", and is used mostly for hunting and target shooting in the U.S.. I vastly prefer removal though, and think that having the M4 and M16 listed is adequate.

;Support remove

1. As nom.GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:49, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Prefer removal, but support move, consider this a removal vote unless we wind up on the fence between keeping as is and just moving. Then consider it a move vote. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 17:55, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 01:56, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

;Support move

;Oppose

;Neutral

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4–0. Makkool (talk) 17:21, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

I believe the inclusion of the page for {{VA link|Baton round}} is adequate, and we don't need to include the TYPES of less then lethal bullet alternatives.

;Support

1. As nom.GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:49, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Support, I think this is another one I added during the pre-vote days to swamp coverage. Agree it's not vital now at quota. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 17:55, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 01:56, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Neutral

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4–0. Makkool (talk) 17:21, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Same argument as Bean bag round. I believe the inclusion of the page for {{VA link|Baton round}} is adequate, and we don't need to include the TYPES of less then lethal bullet alternatives.

;Support

1. As nom.GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:49, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Support, agree it's not vital now at quota. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 17:55, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 01:56, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Neutral

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4–0. Makkool (talk) 17:21, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Same argument as above. I believe the inclusion of the page for {{VA link|Baton round}} is adequate, and we don't need to include the TYPES of less then lethal bullet alternatives.

;Support

1. As nom.GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:49, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Support, agree it's not vital now at quota. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 17:55, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 01:56, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Neutral

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4–0. Makkool (talk) 17:21, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Same argument as above. I believe the inclusion of the page for {{VA link|Baton round}} is adequate, and we don't need to include the TYPES of less then lethal bullet alternatives.

;Support

1. As nom.GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:49, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Support, agree it's not vital now at quota. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 17:55, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 01:56, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Neutral

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4–0. Makkool (talk) 17:21, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

I believe the inclusion of the page for {{VA link|tear gas}} is adequate, and we don't need to include the TYPES of tear gas.

;Support

1. As nom.GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:49, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Support, agree it's not vital now at quota. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Makkool (talk) 17:55, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 01:56, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Neutral

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{atopr

| status = failed

| result = Not removed 3-2. Makkool (talk) 17:21, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Same argument as CS gas. I believe the inclusion of the page for {{VA link|tear gas}} is adequate, and we don't need to include the TYPES of tear gas.

;Support

1. As nom.GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:49, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Weak support, agree it's maybe not that vital now at quota, though (at least in the US), it's also marketed to individuals for personal protection. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Tear gas is definitely vital, and it's enough we list that. Makkool (talk) 17:55, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Definitely not, pepper spray is certainly a vital topic. QuicoleJR (talk) 02:29, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Important topic around self-defense for women and vulnerable groups. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:46, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

;Neutral

;Discuss

GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:49, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{Clear}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 5-0 per WP:AVALANCHE. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 17:43, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Important streets we have missed. Interstellarity (talk) 00:49, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. Interstellarity (talk) 00:49, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
2. Sure why not. Supporting both. JpTheNotSoSuperior (talk) 02:22, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
3. We're a little heavy on transportation infrastructure, but let's go ahead & put these here for now, per my "some overlap is good at Lv5" principle. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 16:45, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
5. Support both. Kevinishere15 (talk) 19:20, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 5-2. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 02:24, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Tilikum, a captive orca linked to three human deaths, symbolizes debates on animal captivity ethics and fostered awareness about animal welfare. The Blue Rider File:Postal horn icon.svg 01:25, 11 March 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. As nominator. The Blue Rider File:Postal horn icon.svg 01:25, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
2. SailorGardevoir (talk) 10:42, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
3. Interstellarity (talk) 12:00, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
4. I would also support adding animal ethics and animal rights, alongside having an example of an animal affected by these concepts. λ NegativeMP1 17:37, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
5. On 2nd thought, despite being recent and my feelings about individuals on VA, the representative point is a good one. Let's go ahead and push this across the finish line. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:40, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Feels too recent events to consider vital. Makkool (talk) 20:11, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
2. Oppose  Carlwev  05:59, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

;Discuss

I'm not sure of this one. We do list animal welfare at level 4 in fact. The suggestion here is that this animal would "symbolize" or "represent" animal ethics. But we do not yet list animal ethics, and we also do not list animal rights either, which could be a much more obvious addition. This whale is definitely notable but I'm not sure if it's notable enough for the vital articles or not.  Carlwev  13:47, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

• I'm neutral: we have room and Tilikum is noteworthy, but also recent. But even if it's currently passing, let's keep the discussion open since it's within a 1-vote margin. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 02:24, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

An important type of rail not listed. Interstellarity (talk) 19:32, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. Interstellarity (talk) 19:32, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
2. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 09:16, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
3. For now, per my "some overlap is good at Lv5" principle. Haven't skimmed the article, but possibly a future merge candidate? -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Kevinishere15 (talk) 19:20, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 5-0 per WP:AVALANCHE. Makkool (talk) 10:16, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

The highway network from North to South America, with a small gap in Central America. According to the Guinness World Records, "the world's most longest motorable road".

;Support

1. As nom. Makkool (talk) 23:32, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
2. Interstellarity (talk) 12:22, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
3. Actually convinced by Tabu's point below that we list Roman roads as precedent. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 19:19, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
5. Per nom. Brunoblocks274 (talk) 19:44, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Neutral

;Discussion

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = All 3 articles added 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 02:24, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Hominidae and Homininae are terms in the phylogenetic tree containing great apes and humans. Most other terms in the tree surrounding these are Level 4 or Level 5. Interbreeding between archaic and modern humans is a much-studied topic. Mathwriter2718 (talk) 11:54, 20 July 2024 (UTC)

; Support

1. As nom Mathwriter2718 (talk) 11:56, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
2. Interstellarity (talk) 12:23, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
3. Yeah, let's definitely add this. Interesting topic, attracts lots of research, and centers several other articles. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 17:56, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Kevinishere15 (talk) 19:19, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4-1. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 02:24, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

I'm not super confident about this one succeeding, since it's not one of the best-selling cars of all time, and we already have a Ford car listed ({{VA link|Ford Model T}}), but it's arguably the most iconic and best selling sports car of all time, and is also a iconic brand, especially in the United States. Not to mention, it gets more views on average than both the {{VA link|Volkswagen Beetle}} and the {{VA link|Toyota Corolla}} [https://pageviews.wmcloud.org/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&redirects=0&range=all-time&pages=Volkswagen_Beetle|Toyota_Corolla|Ford_Mustang] (sidenote: the Corolla is not yet a VA at the time of writing, but it will be soon).

;Support

1. As nominator. JpTheNotSoSuperior (talk) 02:09, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
2. Interstellarity (talk) 12:24, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
3. Per nom-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:58, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Per nom. Kevinishere15 (talk) 19:19, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Maybe I'm just biased by not being a muscle-car person (Zar2gar1 says, "A happy machine is a quiet machine"), but I think this is too specific. I'm ambivalent on listing specific car models in general though, even record-setting ones. I'm less opposed to the classes and design families of cars and trucks (like muscle car, which we do list) -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Removed 4-1. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 02:24, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

• Stub with 3 interwikis. starship.paint (RUN) 14:02, 1 September 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. as nom. starship.paint (RUN) 14:02, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
2. Does not seem like a very common or important type of medical facility. QuicoleJR (talk) 15:54, 1 September 2024 (UTC)
3. Interstellarity (talk) 12:29, 7 October 2024 (UTC)
4. : We have the room. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
5. Kevinishere15 (talk) 19:17, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Oops, missed that this was a removal. Stub-class & low interwikis can suggest an article isn't vital, but they could also mean Wikipedia has just overlooked it until now. We have the room and I imagine burn hospitals have a lot of unique factors the article could expand on: protocols, equipment, training, history, etc. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 17:56, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4-0 for Mobile home, 4-1 for Group home. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 02:24, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Maybe in Residential buildings and housing units, these types of homes are common in society. Interstellarity (talk) 20:16, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

;Support

1. Interstellarity (talk) 20:16, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom. starship.paint (RUN) 13:21, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
3. Support both; also note that Mobile home is proposed above too, but whether it's added here or there is fine. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Support both. Kevinishere15 (talk) 19:17, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Group home not essential.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:55, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 02:24, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Vital concept for determining cellular identity, organelle arrangement, migration direction, etc etc

Support

1. GraziePrego (talk) 01:58, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
2. per nom -1ctinus📝🗨 02:21, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Definitely. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Kevinishere15 (talk) 19:16, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 02:24, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Vital concept that determines how a cell works as part of a multicellular organism. All immune cells are constantly doing this, cells do it during early organism development, it's vital for everything a cell does.

Support

1. GraziePrego (talk) 02:01, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
2. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 16:22, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
3. Definitely. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 05:20, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Kevinishere15 (talk) 19:15, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4-1. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 02:24, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Important infrastructure in today's world.

; Support

1. As nominator. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 01:39, 18 October 2024 (UTC)
2. for sure Aurangzebra (talk) 23:37, 20 October 2024 (UTC)
3. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 18:49, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Kevinishere15 (talk) 19:14, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

; Oppose

1. Weak oppose without some removals. This is definitely a vital topic, and I hate to play the annoying proceduralist, but we have to start disciplining the Computers section. That said, if someone proposes 2 or more Computer removals with a decent chance of passing, I'll cross this out and change to Support. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 4-0. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 02:24, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Los Alamos National Laboratory has made some very significant contributions to the 20th and 21st centuries, specifically regarding the development of nuclear weapons, but also in other areas of research.

;Support

1. As nom. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 17:41, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
2. per non -1ctinus📝🗨 03:36, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Sandia National Laboratories should be added as well. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 04:00, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
4. Important. Kevinishere15 (talk) 19:12, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

;Discuss

GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 17:41, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

I'll propose it on the Level 5 page, but I'm starting to think that all of these specific facilities and infrastructure pages belong more in Geography. Even if they have a technological focus, it arguably makes more sense to center them around the cities they're in / near. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 21:18, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopr

| status = failed

| result = Not added 3-2. Makkool (talk) 10:28, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

U.S. Aircraft carriers are a major technological and geopolitical topic. The Gerald R. Ford-class is the newest entering service, and is the centerpiece of the U.S. Navy.

;Support

1. As nomGeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 06:07, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
2. weak support per nom. Possibly a joke to be made here. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her)
3. Relevant as the first example with electromagnetic catapult.⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 03:58, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Adding the newest one because it is the newest one seems a bit recentist. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:40, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
2. :# We could add more of them, I think the Ford-class represents the cutting edge of technology and engineering that the worlds powers will seek to emulate though. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 02:36, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
3. :#:I guarantee that in 50 years it won't be the cutting edge of technology. Would we then swap it out for the latest new design? QuicoleJR (talk) 18:23, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
4. :#::Honestly, I think we need to put more warship classes in general when it comes to military hardware, and the section likely needs to be looked at very carefully. I'm not sure why, but I think there is a bias against ship classes, possibly due to a lack of interest among editors. There is a huge number of aircraft though, and these are disproportionately American aircraft.
5. :#::For example, from the United States we have the {{VA link| Northrop B-2 Spirit}}, {{VA link|McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle}}, {{VA link|Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II}}, {{VA link|Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptor}}, {{VA link|General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon}}, and {{VA link| McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornet}}, {{VA link|Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II}}, {{VA link|Boeing B-52 Stratofortress}}, {{VA link|Boeing B-29 Superfortress}}, (and the{{VA link| Enola Gay}}), {{VA link|Lockheed C-130 Hercules}}, {{VA link|Lockheed SR-71 Blackbird}}, {{VA link|North American P-51 Mustang}}, {{VA link| Rockwell B-1 Lancer}}. That is most of the U.S. militaries current fixed wing aircraft, and several that are no longer in use. From Europe, we have the {{VA link|Eurofighter Typhoon}}, {{VA link|Panavia Tornado}}, and {{VA link|Dassault Rafale}}. Europe has MANY more highly influential aircraft then that. From the Soviet Union/Russia, we have {{VA link| Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-21}}, which is abysmal as the USSR was the direct reason most of the American aircraft were even designed. With all that said, we don't have ANY specific classes of warship. The U.S. navy {{VA link|Arleigh Burke-class destroyer}} not being included is quite odd, as are the carriers, submarines, battleship classes and specific notable ships. The {{VA link|German battleship Bismarck}}, Japanese {{VA link| Yamato-class battleship}}, and {{VA link| Iowa-class battleship}} not being included is shocking. Warship classes are just as vital as specific types of aircraft, the carriers that launch the F-18 and F-35 should be at least as vital as the planes, especially given the carriers central roll in the U.S. Navy, tremendous investment, and diplomatic implications. I may make a larger post after some consideration to remove/add some planes and more broadly add some classes of ship later. Please let me know what you think, I'm just looking into this more deeply and am a bit shocked at the state of the Military technology section. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 19:04, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
6. :#:::I agree that it makes sense to list some ship types, but this is an odd one to start with instead of something more historically impactful. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:22, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
7. :#::::Fair. I had honestly assumed more ship types were already included and am just now really noticing the scope of the discrepancy. I did not think this would be the first one, I thought it was an omission from a list I expected to be as inclusive as the fighter/bomber/cargo aircraft. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 21:07, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
8. Per QuicoleJR Makkool (talk) 16:49, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

;Neutral

;Discuss

@OlifanofmrTennant What's the joke? I've been sitting and thinking for an embarassing amount of time so I thought I'd just ask. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 02:37, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

:I can't speak for OlifanofmrTennant, but it could be the carrier itself, or it could be about the proposal matching some Wikipedia stereotypes. Personally, I just find it funny (more in a random than a critical way, he did serve in WWII) that the US Navy was like, "Hell yeah, let's name something after Gerald Ford!" For the record, I'm pretty much neutral on all these specific military platform proposals, but we should keep an eye on the quota (we're almost past the 102% mark). -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:54, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

::I'll never tell Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 18:01, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

::I just nominated a bunch of military removals that might be able to address us being over. I think the military category is the one in most need for an overhaul and broad re-evaluation. It isn't really internally consistent with what we consider vital. That said, a huge part of technology is military or of military origin, so it isn't a surprise it's a big category. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 02:03, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

::: {{ping|GeogSage}} I agree with you that the military section can use an overhaul, but it's actually not bad on a % basis (I think it's still around just 10% of the Tech section). Computers and then Transportation are the biggest sections. It's more that we recently had way more additions than removals in general on the page, and the recent big batch were all specific military platforms (which I think devolve into fandom-style arguments easier than general concepts).

:::Beyond what winds up on the list itself, I feel like there's a limited amount of oxygen on each discussion page. So even if the net change in article count winds up small, lots of activity in one topic can crowd out other ones. And I do genuinely believe that's part of why our other Science lists are relatively stagnant, but that's not a reason to stop making proposals. The solution to that is probably to split the STEM talk page and give Tech its own.

:::Anyways, thanks a bunch for being proactive & proposing the removals below though. They all look like easy wins and will definitely free up slots to add other military items; I even have a few in mind myself. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

::::I love military hardware from an academic perspective. I was specifically trained to study the military to help beat Swords to ploughshares. One problem with the various talk pages is that by splitting them out, we lose several page watchers and force would be voters keep up with several pages, instead of one or two.

::::The Fandom argument is 100% accurate though. Look at specific airplanes under Aviation, and specific airplanes under military technology, vs other vehicles. There isn't or single type of large {{VA link| Container ship}}, but we have 29 pages for aircraft under aviation, and 19 under military aircraft. Like, I get that the {{VA link|Cessna 172}} is an important trainer aircraft, it is what I got ALL my hours on, but I doubt it is more vital then the {{VA link|Panamax}} or {{VA link|Liberty ship}}. Planes have fandoms, but most people don't care much about boats. Look at the F-22 Raptor and A-10 removal discussions, and then notice how hard it is to get the large aircraft carriers for countries other then the U.S. listed. This makes some sense based on my experience, when I was a kid, everyone had a favorite plane, but most kids couldn't tell a destroyer from a cruiser. Planes are the stars of military recruitment ads, while ships are a backdrop. While computers and transportation are the biggest sections, the 48 specific aircraft we list seems to be disproportional. Because I couldn't get energy behind trimming them back dramatically, to balance stuff I felt we needed to list some other specific examples of vehicles (helicopters, tanks, and boats were where I started). For example, despite cars being a huge part of our everyday lives, we only have three "Specific automobiles" listed, and somehow the {{VA link|Toyota Corolla}} is one of them. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 17:54, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopr

| status = failed

| result = Neither added 1-3. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 02:24, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Two forms of {{VA link|taxi}}.

;Support

1. Interstellarity (talk) 02:01, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. I don’t see the essentiality of these services. -1ctinus📝🗨 03:30, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Not really essential. Water taxis aren't even available in most of the world. I have never taken one here in Chicago. I wouldn't even know where to catch them or how to pay.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:53, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
3. Not important enough, especially air taxi. Kevinishere15 (talk) 19:12, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

;Neutral

1. As a form of service, I feel like these belong more under Business somehow. If you move the proposal there though, you can change this to a weak support under my "some overlap at Lv5 is good" principle (we already list {{VA link|Ferry}}). -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 21:18, 7 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopr

| status = failed

| result = Not added 2–2. Makkool (talk) 10:04, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Important concept in data location and retrieval.

;Support

1. As nominator. Tabu Makiadi (talk) 21:13, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
2. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 15:57, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

1. Oppose without some removals. That said, if someone proposes another 2 or more Computer removals below (with a decent chance of passing), I'll cross this out and change to Neutral. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
2. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 08:04, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

;Discuss

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Added 5-0 per WP:AVALANCHE. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 02:24, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

Probably add under Wikipedia:Vital_articles/Level/5/Biology_and_health_sciences/Biology#Basics.

;Support

1. As nom.--LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 17:55, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
2. Sure. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 15:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
3. Support  Carlwev  08:07, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
4. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 13:19, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
5. Brunoblocks274 (talk) 19:19, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}

{{atopg

| status = passed

| result = Three added 6-0, two added 5-0 per WP:AVALANCHE. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 17:43, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

}}

This came up in the previous proposal to add {{VA link|Spider web}}, but we don't have any other shelters used by animals listed. I figure this should be an easy addition so I'm just listing as a batch:

• Ant colony
• Burrow
• Beaver dam
• Beehive
• Nest

;Support

1. As nom. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 14:24, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
2. Support  Carlwev  15:49, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
3. --LaukkuTheGreit (Talk•Contribs) 21:17, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
4. Kevinishere15 (talk) 19:06, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
5. Makes sense to me. Nest should be VA4. QuicoleJR (talk) 22:28, 11 December 2024 (UTC)
6. Support for Nest, Beehive, and Burrow. I don't have an opinion on the others. Mathwriter2718 (talk) 20:10, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

;Oppose

;Neutral

;Discussion

I would also suggest bird nest and Colony (biology) we have almost 400 articles about bird things, So I would expect bird nest within a list of 400 bird things.  Carlwev  15:49, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

{{abot}}