Talk:List of articles every Wikipedia should have

Archives

---

• 2004
• 2005
• 2006
• 2007
• 2008
• 2009
• 2010
• 2011
• 2012
• 2013
• 2014
• 2015
• 2016
• 2017
• 2018
• 2019
• 2020
• 2021
• 2022
• 2023
• 2024
• Topic index

Please add new topics to the bottom of this page

---

Guidelines being agreed upon:

1. A change of the list needs more support than opposition
2. Proposals should be provided with a reason
3. a change needs at least 5 supporters on the discussion page
4. swapping like for like (category switch only with reason)
5. single swaps (no mass changes)

Add Wetland, Remove Lake Tanganyika

No need to list this Great African Lake when Lake Victoria is already listed. Also, of the three major African Great Lakes, Lake Malawi is arguably most important due to it having the highest fish biodiversity of any lake in the world. LightProof1995 (talk) 01:54, 10 June 2024 (UTC) No individual lake is more important than the concept of a wetland. Wetlands are seen worldwide: the floodplains along the Nile and Amazon, the swamps in the Sundarbans and American South, and the bogs in Siberia and Ireland are all wetlands. Being neither truly aquatic or terrestrial, wetlands are a biome of their own. Because of this, wetlands provide unique ecological benefits not seen in other biomes. Wetlands also protect coasts, purify water, and restore groundwater reservoirs.

Support

1.  Support as nom LightProof1995 (talk) 17:26, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
2.  Support OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 21:37, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

   Thanks for your support OhnoitsvileplumeXD I too am a Pokémon fan ! LightProof1995 (talk) 01:57, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

1.  Oppose Not convinced by the need of a swap between two different categories. --Nicolas Eynaud (talk) 19:26, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

   Wetland would also go under Geography. LightProof1995 (talk) 21:53, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

2.  Oppose Also not convinced. --Toku (talk) 07:39, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

   We can consider an objective measure in views.

   Lake Tanganyika: 18,024

   Wetland: 22,343

   LightProof1995 (talk) 09:44, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

3.  Oppose Invalid proposal (swap in the same category). Best regards, --Algovia (talk) 17:08, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

   There’s no need to say this is an invalid proposal. It’s in the same category: Geography. Even if it wasn’t, the rules clearly state a swap between isn’t invalid if there is a reason. Best regards, LightProof1995 (talk) 18:00, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

4.  Oppose Lake Tanganyika is important in Africa and in Bodies of water category. I'm not convinced by the need to reduce this category by one article. But, maybe, if we want to swap "like for like", we can question the presence of both Ocean and Sea articles at the beginning of Geography section of the list. --Tegest Vonis (talk) 14:26, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

   Wow, how did I miss that? You’re right, maybe swapping out “Sea” would be a better swap. On English Wikipedia, there is consensus the “Ocean” and “Sea” articles should be merged, but never will be due to the difficulty. LightProof1995 (talk) 01:52, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Neutral

1. Neutre I agree with removing Lake Tanganyika because it is not that important. Also, adding some general geographic concepts isn't a bad thing. However, I don't think the concept of "wetlands" is that important, so I won't state my pros and cons at this time.--Opqr (talk) 14:33, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

   Thanks very much for your vote and reasoning :) the importance of wetlands is unfortunately not well-taught in schools. It's something you'd only learn about at a university or professional level. LightProof1995 (talk) 19:53, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Discussion

I don't know what is more important, wetland or meadow or plain.--Reprarina (talk) 10:03, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out Reprarina. Grassland isn't listed either. Maybe we need to achieve a consensus on which to add: wetland, grassland, plain, or meadow. LightProof1995 (talk) 14:51, 4 April 2024 (UTC)

I feel like plain is too much of a generic term (Oxford dictionary defines it as simply "a large area of flat land with few trees" which includes everything from deserts to grasslands to tundra) and meadow is a common language term and isn't fully defined encyclopedically which may lead to significant inter-Wiki discrepancies, including the possibility of completely missing in some languages. So I'd say the choice should be between grassland and wetland. Deinocheirus (talk) 12:33, 16 April 2024 (UTC)

If everyone keeps being so strict on “switching between categories” when they’re referring to sub-headers under the same category, I’m afraid we’ll only be able to choose one or the other, in a swap out for Sea. LightProof1995 (talk) 02:02, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Add African Great Lakes, Remove Lake Victoria

Should we really list only one or two African Great Lakes, when all five North American Great Lakes are listed as a single article, and we have limited space? The Great African Lakes are special in that they were all formed by the Great African Rift. All of them are known for the rich fish biodiversity, especially cichlids, with Lake Malawi having the most. The fish populations in the lakes are important for the local populations and fishery economies in adjacent countries.

Support

1.  Support as nom LightProof1995 (talk) 17:42, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

1.  Oppose I don't think Lake Victoria is that important, so I agree with its removal. However, I would object if Africa's Great Lakes were to be included instead of Lake Victoria. As I said last time, the major lakes of Africa's Great Lakes, Lake Victoria, Lake Tanganyika, and Lake Malawi, all belong to completely different water systems and are not interconnected. In other words, the African Great Lakes is a meaningless classification of ecologically and economically unrelated lakes forced together based solely on geographic and geological commonalities. Compared to the African Great Lakes, Lake Victoria is much more important. I strongly oppose cramming unimportant concepts into this list just to save space.--Opqr (talk) 14:29, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

   Thank you very much for voting. Sorry I missed citing your excellent reasoning for adding Algae to the list; I've cited your reasoning as well now. Please see https://www.britannica.com/place/East-African-lakes to read about how these lakes are connected hydrologically, geographically, ecologically, and economically; along with what I said before. Best regards, LightProof1995 (talk) 20:02, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

2.  Oppose since Lake Victoria is listed at WP:VA. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 02:14, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
3.  Oppose Per Opqr. --Toku (talk) 07:41, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
4.  Oppose I think the point of Opqr is right. African Great Lakes is just an expression but not a reality in ecology, in economy or in culture (maybe the Great African Rift would have been more relevant, but not sure). --Tegest Vonis (talk) 14:22, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Add Romania or Greece, remove Switzerland

I'm not sure if we need every major Western European country on here. We've got Germany, the UK, France, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Austria, and Portugal on here already, not to mention Berlin, London, Paris, Rome, Madrid, Amsterdam, Brussels, and Vienna also being listed. It's between Switzerland and Amsterdam for me, but I'd prefer to make individual swaps between countries and cities. And while Switzerland is projected to hit $1 trillion GDP in 2026, tax havens are not something we should list in the majority of cases.

Our only geographical article covering the Balkans is Athens, and we don't list any regions other than the Middle East, so either Romania or Greece is the best non-city to cover the Balkans. It's a tossup between the two for me. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 17:51, 20 May 2024 (UTC)

Support

Oppose

1.  Oppose Not convinced that Romania is more important than Switzerland. --Toku (talk) 07:39, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
2.  Oppose I'm opposed to this proposal, at least until the proponent choose between Romania or Greece. --Tegest Vonis (talk) 14:30, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

   I chose Romania, as stated in the comment below. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 14:37, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

3.  Oppose I'm surprised by this suggestion. Switzerland has a rather small population, but in every other respect it is one of the world's leading countries. Switzerland is truly one of the world's economic centers and, due to its unique political position, plays a major role in international politics.　To begin with, Romania's GDP is only about 40% of Switzerland's, and Switzerland is clearly superior in terms of national power.　From these points of view, Switzerland is more important.--Opqr (talk) 13:09, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Neutral

Discussion

• Please clarify, Romania or Greece. We don't vote for unclear propositions.--Reprarina (talk) 00:43, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

  I'll give the edge to Romania, since it has a much larger population and economy, and we already list many articles covering Greece's importance, most importantly Ancient Greece and Athens. I do understand that this is not a great nomination, so I will be met with strong opposition. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 02:11, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

• I’d support your suggestion of Amsterdam or Netherlands for Romania or Greece LightProof1995 (talk) 09:28, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Add Tourism, remove Rugby

Unlike other sports on the list, the Rugby (Rugby football in English Wikipedia, just Rugby in many other ones) article talks about a certain general concept that combines several similar sports into one (Rugby union, Rugby league, which in turn are divided into smaller ones). It’s difficult to write an article about this, and for example, in my language community, few people use “rugby football” as a term and as a concept and in the same time call rugby union just rugby. Relatively few Wikipedias have an article on Rugby football, and virtually no Wikipedias where it has received status.

It seems to me that tourism in the topic of recreation is a more suitable article.

For clarity, it’s worth comparing how many language sections already have an article about the subject.

• Rugby football: 122
• Backgammon: 92
• Go: 110
• Video game: 129
• Gambling: 104
• Swimming: 116
• Judo: 126
• Martial arts: 107
• Athletics: 127

versus Tourism: 146

I am convinced that tourism in the topic of recreation is undoubtedly one of the most important articles.--Reprarina (talk) 00:42, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Support

1. as nom--Reprarina (talk) 00:42, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
2.  Support Probably one of the many anglo-centric articles in the list. Among all the ball games icluded Rugby or Cricket are the least internationally known and important. Changing one of them (Rugby prefered for the reasons stated above) to a broader topic, that is internationally important is a good idea.--Flaverius (talk) 14:35, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
3.  Support per nom and Flaverius LightProof1995 (talk) 09:25, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Neutral

1. Neutre Since tourism is a very important subject and also belongs to the category of recreation, the problem of category swapping does not arise. I'm in favor of adding tourism, but I can't judge the removal of rugby. In terms of the number of language versions you provided as the basis for this proposal, rugby has 122 articles, more than any other item. This is not a valid basis; other items have fewer articles, right?--Opqr (talk) 13:35, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

1.  Oppose Not convinced by a swap between two different categories, especially with such comparisons. --Toku (talk) 07:05, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
2.  Oppose Per Toku. --Nicolas Eynaud (talk) 14:27, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
3.  Oppose Invalid proposal (swap in the same category). If I remember well, rugby is a sport and tourism an economic activity. Best regards, --Algovia (talk) 17:08, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

   The category in which sports is included is called "Recreation". I have no idea why tourism is not one of the most important items in the Recreation category. Nothing bad will happen if there are fewer sports topics. Certain sports are characterized by the fact that they are of great importance for some countries. The list prioritizes the most international things. Tourism is an international topic, and one of the most important. Reprarina (talk) 18:31, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

4.  Oppose Tourism belongs to Business and economics category and Rugby to Recreations. I don't think a swap between these two different categories is necessary. --Tegest Vonis (talk) 14:17, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Remove Los Angeles, Add Toronto

I think we should add a Canadian city. We list 3 US cities and 1 Mexican city. I think it would be fair to include 1 Canadian city and two US cities. NYC is too important to remove, so it is a tossup between Los Angeles and Washington DC, but I decided to go with LA because Washington DC is the seat of government of the world's only superpower. Interstellarity (talk) 23:12, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Support

1. Interstellarity (talk) 23:12, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

1.  Oppose No Canadian city rivals the three listed US-American cities in popularity and importance. Because of the movie industry Los Angelos is among the most filmed and internationally known cities. Canada is already listed among the most important countries. But I don’t think any single Canadian city is important enough to make the cut for this limited list.--Flaverius (talk) 12:00, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
2. Strong oppose per above. Even Chicago is more vital than Toronto. OhnoitsvileplumeXD (talk) 14:56, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
3.  Oppose Per Flaverius and OhnoitsvileplumeXD. --Toku (talk) 07:02, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
4.  Oppose per others. Since the United States and Mexico have much larger populations than Canada, it is okay they have cities listed while Canada does not. Also, the urban metro population of Los Angeles is ~17 million compared to Toronto’s ~7 million. LightProof1995 (talk) 09:34, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
5.  Oppose Per Flaverius, OhnoitsvileplumeXD and LightProof1995. --Algovia (talk) 17:10, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
6.  Oppose Per Flaverius, Los Angeles and Toronto are clearly in different categories. --Tegest Vonis (talk) 14:15, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
7.  Oppose per Talk:List of articles every Wikipedia should have/Archives/2024#Swap Vienna for Toronto - the rationale hasn't changed since last year. --Deinocheirus (talk) 16:41, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

Neutral

Discussion

Remove Manufacturing, Add Industrial sector

Swapped with enough support (support : 5, opposition : 0)

I propose removing Manufacturing and adding Industrial sector. Manufacturing is available in in 93 languages, among those many stubbs and many translation of the article in Simple English, probably only for the purpose of this list. als:Industrie, fy:Yndustry, ht:Endistri, ia:Industria, af:Nywerheid are linked here, but would be better under Industrial sector. The article for Industrial sector is available in 132 languages, is usally longer article and the main article about industry and manufacturing in most language versions. Most notable exception is English, as is redirects from Industrial sector over en:Industry (manufacturing) to en:Manufacturing. I think the article Manufacturing is an anglocentric addition to the list. The overlap of manufacturing and industry is hard to diffenrentiate in many languages. Flaverius (talk) 11:43, 3 June 2024 (UTC)  Support as nom. Flaverius (talk) 11:48, 3 June 2024 (UTC)  Support per nom. LightProof1995 (talk) 09:26, 6 June 2024 (UTC)  Support Britannica views manufacturing as a type of industry. So industry is probably a more general concept. Reprarina (talk) 19:36, 6 June 2024 (UTC)  Support Per nom. --Tegest Vonis (talk) 14:30, 9 June 2024 (UTC)  Support Makes sense especially given the opinion in the #Discussion subsection. --Deinocheirus (talk) 16:53, 10 June 2024 (UTC) Discussion There are great difficulties in translating the concepts of manufacturing and production into other languages. Thus, on Wikidata there are not entirely correct links from manufacturing to manufacturing industry in other Wikipedias. Many Russian-language sources still do not differentiate between the concepts of manufacturing and production, translating them into one word производство. We perhaps need to include a concept that, on the one hand, is general, and on the other, translates well into other languages. In addition, even the English Wikipedia could not make two different articles about Industry and Manufacturing, making the first a redirect to the second, although the extended list requires both articles.--Reprarina (talk) 12:37, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Remove Dentistry, add Surgery

It is not very clear to single out dentistry from all medical specialties (then it is strange that teeth are not on the list). Surgery is a more important thing from the point of view of preserving life, and partially includes dentistry in itself.--Reprarina (talk) 11:26, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Support

1. as nom --Reprarina (talk) 11:26, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

1.  Oppose I agree surgery is important, but as teeth is not in the list, I think dentistry should remain because it allows to express this notion. --Tegest Vonis (talk) 14:33, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

   I am against the compensation approach. On the contrary, if teeth are not very significant for anatomy, then dentistry is not very significant for medicine. The importance of topics in different sections are interrelated with each other. Reprarina (talk) 14:53, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

Swap Algeria out for Morocco

Morocco is the much more important country in history than Algeria is. Interstellarity (talk) 18:05, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Support

1. Interstellarity (talk) 18:05, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Is it a new part of Morocco and Algeria conflict on the web ? If not, Algeria is more populated, has a more important GDP and is more important in recent history than Morocco. --Tegest Vonis (talk) 18:46, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
2.  Oppose The nomination is not substantiated. In what ways is Algeria less important?--Reprarina (talk) 22:17, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
3.  Oppose Algeria is the largest country in Africa. LightProof1995 (talk) 22:21, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Neutral

Discussion