Jump to content

Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/1: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
vote
Lolitart (talk | contribs)
249 edits
Line 92: Line 92:
== Add Society ==
== Add Society ==


It appears we have multiple proposals and a general agreement to add Society, while yet to reach consensus about which to remove, why not we just add Society first while we consolidate on that instead of having fragmented discussion everywhere.
It appears we have multiple proposals and a general agreement to add Society, while yet to reach consensus about which to remove, why not we just add Society first while we consolidate on that instead of having fragments of the same discussion everywhere.


;Support
;Support

Revision as of 05:12, 16 November 2021

WikiProject iconVital Articles
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Vital Articles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of vital articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and work together to increase the quality of Wikipedia's essential articles.Vital ArticlesWikipedia:WikiProject Vital ArticlesTemplate:WikiProject Vital ArticlesVital Articles articles
General Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5
Level 5 Subpages

People History and geography Society STEM

Introduction

Since changes to this list may affect lower-level lists, discussions regarding its composition are best initiated at Wikipedia talk:Vital articles.

All proposals must remain open for !voting for a minimum of 15 days, after which:

  1. After 15 days it may be closed as PASSED if there are (a) 5 or more supports, AND (b) at least two-thirds are in support.
  2. After 30 days it may be closed as FAILED if there are (a) 3 or more opposes, AND (b) it failed to earn two-thirds support.
  3. After 30 days it may be closed as NO CONSENSUS if the proposal hasn't received any !votes for +30 days, regardless of tally.
  4. After 60 days it may be closed as NO CONSENSUS if the proposal has (a) less than 5 supports, AND (b) less than two-thirds support.

Nominations should be left open beyond the minimum if they have a reasonable chance of passing. An informed discussion with more editor participation produces an improved and more stable final list, so be patient with the process.

  • 15 days ago: 00:30, 26 August 2024 (UTC) (Purge)
  • 30 days ago: 00:30, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
  • 60 days ago: 00:30, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Swap: Add Politics,[1] remove The Arts

SNOW FAILS
2-8 snowball's chance in hell of passing Zelkia1101 (talk) 19:03, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

‎@Raimundo57br, Luizpuodzius, Piotrus, and John M Wolfson: As totalitarianism and economicism advances in current politics, this theme is more than indispensable. 2804:14C:5BB1:8AF2:DAA0:8CB9:3D76:EF83 (talk) 16:55, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support
  1. Law, Exact sciences and Humanities: question answered? 2804:14C:5BB1:8AF2:245A:9CBE:D8E9:7809 (talk) 16:35, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support removal I never was fun of having level 1 separaty from the level 2 (note how close vitality can have subjects which could be in top 5-15) but the arts is not important enough to b listed at this level. Probably swap with culture would be approciate. I have no comment about addition of politics but we couldsay that philosophy (IMHO certainly the most vital article) devatedly cover politics and religion which is also missed. Dawid2009 (talk) 05:54, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
  1. Oppose. Might support adding Government. Wouldn’t remove anything, but if important to add something, would expand to top 12 or so, and add as well Biology or Physics. Hyperbolick (talk) 20:03, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Oppose. The arts is clearly essential, and politics is only a particular aspect of society. If this nomination were to swap out language for society, I'd be likely to support. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 04:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Oppose Society is broader concept. --Thi (talk) 09:15, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  4. As totalitarianism and economicism advances in current politics Not only is that a quite debatable statement, but this list is supposed to be eternal, and thus not influenced by current events. In any event, I think art in some sense is important, and just as ubiquitous in general as philosophy, especially if we define it as "that which expresses the human condition". Whether the arts should be on here instead of Art, however, is debatable, but Art isn't even at level 2.  – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 22:38, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Oppose With Prehistoric art existing in nearly every region; the arts have always been around forever and are a very vital aspect of humans. Moreso than any modern concept of politics; even if there is a rise of "totalitarianism and economicism"; it does not erase out of history millenniums of art history. Also as a (largely) pop culture encyclopedia viewership wise; arts plays a very big part into the readership here. So considering our regular readers also a important part there. It's too indispensable to miss. GuzzyG (talk) 23:29, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Oppose agree with the above. If you look at Level 2, society is the parent article of politics and a better choice at L1. I could support society replacing either language, philosophy, technology, or the arts. Gizza (talk • voy) 00:05, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  7. Oppose I agree that Society is preferable to Politics. If you want to discuss any other swaps (and there's no point in any proposals other than swaps on a list of this size), please use the "Discuss" section rather than making an open proposal. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 15:47, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Oppose The arts have higher cultural significance than politics. Dimadick (talk) 15:53, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Discuss
Might be Government. 2804:14C:5BB1:8AF2:4644:F467:62A6:CD94 (talk) 04:10, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What article would you swap it with? Interstellarity (talk) 14:13, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Interstellarity The Arts. 2804:14C:5BB1:8AF2:2E5A:143C:3DFD:EEDB (talk) 17:22, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm, I'd rather remove human history as it is a subarticle of human. And as for the addition, out of the ones proposed, I'd add society. Another thought: The Arts could be swapped but for culture. In other words, society+culture > The Arts and human history is simply not necessary. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:58, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am Support. Good knowledge. 2804:14C:5BB1:8AF2:8AE5:1B72:9F5A:92DB (talk) 01:13, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

References

  1. ^ or Culture or Society or Religion or Economics or Business or Biology or Physics

Swap: Remove Language, Add Society

A discussion related to this list is at the Level 3 talkpage here.  – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 23:05, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal: Expand the list by a few

Top ten topics from a catalog of millions seems silly, arbitrarily small. Expand the list to twelve or thirteen or fifteen or so. Then we may without removing anything add a few really obvious ones like Physics, Biology, Government (or perhaps Law, or both), and Thought (or perhaps Mind, or both). Hyperbolick (talk) 08:33, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support
  1. [nom]
Oppose
  1. The first 4 levels are, and should be, the orders of magnitude; there are 10 level-1 slots, 10 times that number for level 2, 10 times that number for level 3, and 10 times again for level 4. (Sure, level 5 breaks that pattern, but that's unwieldy and controversial as it is.) The list is supposed to be restrictive, and if we increased the number to 15 there would be people asking for it to be increased to 20. I also dispute the "really obvious" additions; it would be inappropriate, in my view, to list both Science and branches of science. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 00:24, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Per above. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 01:47, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Every level is inherently arbitrary. In an alternate universe, each level could have been 12, 144, 1,728, etc. or 8, 64, 512, etc. but it wasn't to be. Agree with John that the small number forces us to make hard decisions and think about what is truly vital or not. Gizza (talk • voy) 04:25, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Adding society instead makes sense because it covers thought, mind, law, and government, while physics and biology are already covered by science. Bill Williams 06:08, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Discuss

Chemical is more important such as physics. Termobaric weapons is more relevant in the CEI for Russia and Ukraine, Georgia and Syria is nucked for old technology sovietic but not Central Asia or Ukraine for example. 187.20.113.226 (talk) 17:03, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Swap: Remove Philosophy, add Society

Philosophy is stated to be a social science, which is the study of society, therefore society should be on the list instead. If the proposal to swap society with language results in society being added, consider this a case to just remove philosophy.

Support
  1. Support as nom. Bill Williams 06:06, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support Philosophy is covered by Society (ethics) and Science at this level. --Thi (talk) 08:57, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support The humanities are better represented by an article on society than an article on philosophy. Cobblet (talk) 15:30, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
  1. Oppose in principle, philosophy is not social science, anyone with the faintest idea would know philosophy is not science at all, it's total different way of acquiring knowledge, and considered a father of modern science. Philosophy is not just ethics and science, and it's really not humanity. Philosophy in its earliest form refer to the human undertaking of the research and learning of the universe in the effort of discovering the truth. 38.94.109.226 (talk) 11:50, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Strong oppose per my comments at the Level 3 talkpage. Philosophy is very arguably "the" Level 0 article, as having abstract thoughts is what makes humans, well, human. It is not particularly accurate to pigeonhole philosophy as a "mere" social science, as it underpins much of science and mathematics, and ponders fundamental questions such as the nature of existence that are independent of society. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 15:31, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that Philosophy is important, but my point is that Society and Science together make up the entirety of Philosophy, since it is a science of society i.e. social science. Bill Williams 21:17, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And I'm telling you that that is incorrect. Philosophy is the "love of wisdom", and a method of inquiry; its article's very first sentence defines it as the study of general and fundamental questions, such as [minds, reason, etc.], and also states that social science branched off from philosophy in the late 19th century. Indeed, there have been quite anti-social characters in philosophy such as Nietzsche. There are quite a few fundamental concepts of philosophy, such as Logic, that I feel do not fit in neatly with either science or society. Philosophy's importance is such that PhilosophyAndLogic was the second ever article created on Wikipedia, after WikiPedia itself. While I'm agnostic as to whether society belongs at this level, it sure does not deserve to knock off what I feel to be arguably the most important article in Wikipedia. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 21:32, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Philosophy once included even science, but that is no longer the case. Today, Philosophy is completely comprised of what is within Science, Human History, The Arts and Society. Bill Williams 21:36, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I know modern philosophy is rather comprised of nerds stuck in their lockers, and indeed even successfully nominated to remove contemporary philosophy from level 3; philosophy in general, however, from Plato to Nietzche, spans all the important and eternal questions, both about the human condition and beyond, that it can be considered the "purest" article from which all the others are somewhat attached to. Since these top 2 levels should be generally evaluated by their "purity" and abstraction, philosophy represents the pinnacle of that and should thus remain. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 21:42, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I am not diminishing its importance, but every other category affects the daily lives of every person far more than Philosophy. We are all required to learn history in school, and it shapes the everyday actions of people and their governments across the world. Science, technology, and mathematics are the basis for many jobs around the globe that make society function on a day to day and long term basis. Humans and life is what every one of us is, in addition to things that live all around us everywhere on Earth. The arts includes entertainment that a large portion of people consume every day, and clearly we are using Language right now. Philosophy does not shape the everyday decisions that most people make. Some people might think of what ancient Philosophers believed as a justification for their actions, but most people simply use basic logic or emotions, not Philosophy, as the basis for their actions. Bill Williams 21:51, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
None of that necessarily matters for the intents and purposes of this list. As said earlier, purity and hierarchy on a great chain of being is far more important than what people do in their day-to-day lives; this isn't WP:TOP25. Also, even if pure "day-to-day caring" is a criterion I find it rather a stretch to talk about "history" shaping everyone's decisions when quite frankly nobody really cares about Columbus while running errands; indeed, the fact that everyone lives on Earth might make Sagan excited but is a big whoop-de-doo to everyone else. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 21:56, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah you are definitely right that history does not constitute people's day to day actions, but it constitutes the world's long term actions (including those of governments). Philosophy is not the main justification for people's long term life choices or those of governments. Today, governments use history, emotion, or logic as a basis for their actions, and people usually use their own personal history or their emotions and logic as a basis of their long term actions or goals, not what Philosophers thought centuries or millennium ago. Bill Williams 22:00, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As said earlier, it doesn't really matter what goes on in the mundane world for the intents and purposes of this list; it should be a pure and eternal list that alien civilizations can understand. That said, personal history ≠ human history, so the equivalence is false. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 22:04, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Oppose, Philosphy in its broadest encompasses religion and even politics and the law. Hyperbolick (talk) 23:40, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
All of which are Society. Bill Williams 20:12, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Discuss
Eurocentrism... 187.20.19.59 (talk) 19:38, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Society is only European but Philosophy is not...? Bill Williams 19:45, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ignore him, he spouts nonsense like that somewhat frequently. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 21:14, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Add Society

It appears we have multiple proposals and a general agreement to add Society, while yet to reach consensus about which to remove, why not we just add Society first while we consolidate on that instead of having fragments of the same discussion everywhere.

Support
  1. As nom. - Lolitart (talk) 08:09, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Support Dimadick (talk) 10:18, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  3. Support --Thi (talk) 11:51, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Support. We certainly need to keep the list to ten overall, but adding this and then figuring out what to remove is a perfectly alright process. Society is a very broad topic that deserves its place here. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 16:44, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  5. Support as I have stated above. Bill Williams 20:13, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
  1. Oppose I prefer keeping the list at ten articles. Cobblet (talk) 13:38, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Per Cobblet; if we can't agree on a removal, then the addition should also fail. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 15:06, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Discuss
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Vital_articles/Level/1&oldid=1055492381"