Swap: Add Ada Lovelace, Remove Georg Bednorz

Support !votes

1. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 16:57, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support. - Per nom. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 20:35, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support. Bedrieger (talk) 01:08, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Cobblet (talk) 00:10, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support Plantdrew (talk) 22:09, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

Discussion

Ada made the first computer program. I thinks that's more vital than Georg Bednorz's invetions. --V3n0M93 (talk) 16:57, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Add Nikolaus Otto

Support !votes

1. Support pbp 01:21, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

1. Opposeper Cobblet's comment below --(AfadsBad (talk) 22:22, 26 September 2013 (UTC))
2. Oppose Also the concept of the four-stroke engine had been patented by Alphonse Beau de Rochas; Otto was the first to create a practical version of it. This was very important, but including the four-stroke engine would allow us to cover the contributions of de Rochas and also Diesel (with the Diesel cycle). Neljack (talk) 23:23, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
3. Oppose. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:04, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Would prefer adding four-stroke engine instead, since this appears to be the only reason why he's notable. Cobblet (talk) 17:26, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Proposal: Rename "Inventors" to "Inventors and Engineers"

Support !votes

1. Support as nom Carlwev (talk) 18:30, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support. --Igrek (talk) 03:05, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 21:22, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Cobblet (talk) 21:33, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 22:59, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

1. Oppose. - This would lead to dozens of add threads, since the section does not currently cover engineers except for a few exceptions. If consensus develops in favour of the proposal I will reconsider my !vote. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 20:16, 6 July 2013 (UTC) GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 20:16, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose Hierophant443 (talk) 18:19, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Oppose per Gabe. --Melody Lavender (talk) 07:16, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Oppose An inventor is a specific category of person valued by society for a specific type of contribution. I would lump engineers with scientists rather than changing what an inventor is and the vitality of inventing to human culture. Even the Soviets were ultimately forced to segregate inventors and honor their contribution. No engineer who hasn't contributed a significant invention should be on this sublist. --(AfadsBad (talk) 11:49, 26 September 2013 (UTC))

Discussion

• As correctly pointed out by Gabe, some of the people listed in "inventors" may not have actually invented anything. Some of them may however still be notable as engineers, they could be great or brilliant engineers, but not inventors. Who ever added them to begin with put them under inventors, and as the list stands, that is probably where I would look for them. There is also an overlap I believe of people who could be described as both an engineer and a inventor, more so probably than other overlaps like business people and engineers not quite as much. Although some may deserve to go, we should remove articles because we truly believe they are not vital, but I wouldn't want to get in the habit of removing articles because they don't fit the header, I wouldn't want to remove who may be great engineers only because they haven't technically invented anything. Columbus didn't technically discover America. If someone has an alternative idea, like putting engineers in their own section or merging with another or just removing them all like we did with mystics and criminals bring it up. Carlwev (talk) 18:30, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
  • We have a little space in People now and certainly some engineers should be included, e.g. Thomas Telford. I don't see why engineers who weren't also either scientists, inventors or businessmen should be automatically excluded from consideration, which seems to be the point of this poll. Cobblet (talk) 21:33, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion about topic area: Inventors

• I am trying to find common ground with Gabe, and yes I can support some of these, my only issue is this: ignoring for a second the individual merits for the people above. We should have people who invent things they are important. But there is this kind of breed of people, for want of a better term "great engineers" chiefly from the industrial revolution, people that take machines/inventions market them use them in different ways get them out there in masses and change industry and the world. Yes they may not have technically invented the original machine, but they may still stand out as one of the most important people associated with an invention. Yes I think some of the entries do deserve to be removed, but the sentence for Brunel, "It would seem he was a brilliant engineer, but what exactly did he invent?" kind of says my point, even you say he's "brilliant". I think the error may just be in the header. Someone made the base for the list, including a header "inventors", and others, later, tried to add great engineers, and "inventors" seemed like the best place to put them. While yes I think some can go, I don't want to get in the habit of removing great engineers and adding fairly unknown original inventors. Which is sad, as sometimes true inventors are undeservedly forgotten. Part of me wonders if some of these engineers may technically be better placed in businessmen then? But I do think they are probably in the right list, as that's where other users placed them originally, they could have placed them in businessmen to start with but they didn't; as the list stands at the moment, investors is probably where I would look for them. I may propose to rename the section, inventors and engineers to correct this perceived error. As I said before I wouldn't want to remove a great engineer and add a less great inventor just because it fits the header above better. I will get behind some of your proposals I agree with, I hope you can get behind some of mine, we should be putting our differences aside and working together to improve the list, not disagreeing all the time. Carlwev (talk) 18:30, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Add Abū Rayḥān al-Bīrūnī

Support !votes

1. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 13:28, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:19, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support A remarkable polymath. Neljack (talk) 13:23, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Cobblet (talk) 01:19, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
5. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 00:40, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

Discussion

Add Zhang Heng

Support !votes

1. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 21:38, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support Cobblet (talk) 07:30, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:17, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 12:16, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support Another great polymath. Neljack (talk) 13:23, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

Discussion

Add Abu al-Qasim al-Zahrawi

Support !votes:

1. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 21:40, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support Cobblet (talk) 07:30, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:17, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 12:17, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support A very important figure in surgery. Neljack (talk) 13:23, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

Discussion

Add Gilbert N. Lewis

Let's try this again, this time as just a straight add. Again, it seems to me that Lewis is a serious omission from the list of chemists we have. He discovered the covalent bond and was the first person to isolate heavy water. Anyone who took chemistry in high school will remember drawing Lewis structures; any chemist will be familiar with Lewis acids and bases.

Support

1. Support as nom. Cobblet (talk) 09:25, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 14:52, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:13, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Many important contributions. Neljack (talk) 23:27, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
5. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 00:41, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

Discussion

Swap: Remove Leonid Kuchma, Add Ante Pavelić

Leonid Kuchma is largely unknown outside of Ukraine. Pavelić is vital from a historical point of view.

Support !votes

1. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 20:44, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 20:46, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 12:09, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support Cobblet (talk) 02:23, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

Discussion

1. Support removing Kuchma. Oppose adding Pavelic. john k (talk) 18:22, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

I think you should reword this so it's clearer who is largely unknown outside of Ukraine. --Rsm77 (talk) 12:09, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Done. --V3n0M93 (talk) 19:05, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Swap: Remove George S. Patton, Add Bernard Montgomery, 1st Viscount Montgomery of Alamein

Support !votes

1. As nom pbp 01:07, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 18:10, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Quite an omission, if we are going to have four allied commanders, to leave Montgomery off for Patton. Hollywood should not be a guiding factor. --(AfadsBad (talk) 12:22, 26 September 2013 (UTC))
5. Support Cobblet (talk) 04:13, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

1. Oppose. - If we are going to swap out Patton it should be for a non-westerner. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:11, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Yeah, Patton's a Californian like me. There are three other American WWII generals on this list: Ike, Marshall, and MacArthur. All held more significant commands than Patton. There are no Brits. I propose adding Marshal Montgomery, the Allied Commander at Dunkirk and D-Day to remedy this.

Add Alexander Kolchak

Leader of the White movement in the Russian Civil War.

Support !votes:

1. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 23:56, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:21, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

1. oppose not vital - a footnote in world history.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 23:45, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose Not at all a footnote in world history, although Americans seem ignorant of him, but comparatively not vital. --(AfadsBad (talk) 12:19, 26 September 2013 (UTC))
3. Oppose per AfadsBad. Neljack (talk) 13:06, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Swap: Add Mikhail Bakunin, Remove Marcel Mauss

Support !votes

1. Support, one of the founders of anarchism --V3n0M93 (talk) 20:55, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:31, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support I think Maunus understates Bakunin's influence on social movements. I would be happy to include both though. Neljack (talk) 23:42, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

1. Oppose I think probably both should be on the list, but Mauss is essential for his influence in shaping the social sciences as they are today. Bakunin's influence is rather limited outside of certain narrow circles of political radicals.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 21:39, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Amidst a fairly substantial number of obscure writers who probably don't belong, I can't believe that Eliot isn't already on here. She's probably more vital than half the writers on here.

Support !votes

1. As nominator john k (talk) 20:42, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:25, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 20:02, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 22:50, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support Cobblet (talk) 00:10, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
6. Support One of the most important English novelists. Neljack (talk) 03:44, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

Discussion

Add Sylvia Plath, Remove Madeleine L'Engle

Support !votes

1. Support Plath is notable for her poetry as well as the novel The Bell Jar. L'Engle is really not very notable. --Rsm77 (talk) 04:11, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support Cobblet (talk) 09:00, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 14:50, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Plath is certainly more important. Neljack (talk) 03:45, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
5. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 16:56, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

Discussion

• I'd support removing L'Engle, but I'm not convinced Plath is the most important writer not included. The swap would be better than the current status quo, though. john k (talk) 04:35, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Support !votes

1. Support, St. George is one of the most celebrated christian saints. --V3n0M93 (talk) 17:13, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:16, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Cobblet (talk) 17:43, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:20, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

1. Oppose Despite his fame and subsequent veneration, St George does not seem to have been particularly important or influential during his life, while Nestorius was an influential theologian who founded Nestorianism, leading to the Nestorian schism after his condemnation at the First Council of Ephesus. Neljack (talk) 01:49, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Swap: Add Mani (prophet), Remove Kumārila Bhaṭṭa

Support !votes

1. Support as nom Carlwev (talk) 19:20, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 20:19, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support john k (talk) 17:56, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

1. Oppose. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 19:42, 12 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose We just added Manichaeism. Cobblet (talk) 04:07, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Oppose BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Oppose per Cobblet, plus I don't know how many Hindu philosophers we already have on the list, but I bet we should not be removing them readily. --(AfadsBad (talk) 12:26, 26 September 2013 (UTC))

Discussion

Mani founded a fairly big religion religion, Manichaeism, (although it's now extinct) he would seem to me more notable than quite a few religious figures we have. I'm not too familiar just using my judgment to pick on someone who appears not exceptionally vital from religious figures. Reading Bhaṭṭa's article he doesn't seem to be that vital. I was also contemplating swapping out Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj or Al-Nawawi if anyone thinks they are better? I may suggest those two for removal also? Carlwev (talk) 19:20, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

Add Democritus

Support !votes

1. Support, important pre-Socratic philosopher. --V3n0M93 (talk) 18:05, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support Cobblet (talk) 21:39, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:38, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 12:14, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support One of the most important pre-Socratic philosophers, particularly with his influential materialist account of the world (atomism). More important than some Ancient Greek philosophers already on the list, such as Diogenes and Gorgias. Neljack (talk) 04:57, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

1. oppose Ancient Greek thinkers already have an overwhelming presence relative to other topic areas.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 23:42, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Swap: Add Gilbert N. Lewis, Remove Secretariat (horse)

Chemists seem a little under-represented relative to other scientists. Lewis discovered the covalent bond, the type of chemical bonding found in any substance that isn't a metal, a binary ionic compound or a noble gas. He was the first person to isolate heavy water and should've won a share of the 1934 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for it. Anyone who took chemistry in high school will remember drawing Lewis structures; any chemist will be familiar with Lewis acids and bases.

Secretariat was a horse. What's it doing on a list of people?

Support

1. Support as nom. Cobblet (talk) 07:30, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 09:23, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:17, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support. Someone not using his real name (talk) 21:33, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 12:18, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose, Secretariat, the most famous race horse of all times, was just voted to stay on the list a month or so ago. We deleted all the jockeys in horse-racing and left the only sports-"personality" on the list that did all the running. Voters did some research at the time and it looks like Secretariat outperformed all horses of his time (1950s I think) and his record has not been broken yet if I remember correctly. Secretariat has several streets named after him. I'd prefer to vote for Gilbert N. Lewis as a straight add. --Melody Lavender (talk) 07:32, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose my sentiments agree with Melody's pbp 15:10, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Secretariat was in many of those top athletes of the 20th century lists, the only horse on it. Importance wise, he easily trumps Balto (a rather semi-legendary figure) and Seabiscuit (famous because of a book) Secret ^account 22:42, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

When it comes to famous animals I think of Seabiscuit and Balto first. And is Secretariat really a better choice than Man o' War? Are all of these vital? Are any of them? Cobblet (talk) 04:24, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Move Secretariat (horse) to Sports

on the "Anthropology, psychology and everyday life" page. That way we don't have to debate the significance of a horse vs. a human.

Support

1. Support as nom. Cobblet (talk) 09:25, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support. I still think it isn't vital enough to be on the list
3. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 17:05, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
4. Support.Melody Lavender (talk) 17:30, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

Discussion

At present, the founder of microbiology is on the 1,000 list, but not on the 10,000. Generally, I at least believe 1000 articles should be on the 10,000 automatically. So what do we do?

Status quo

On the 1,000, off the 10,000

On the 10,000, off the 1,000

On both the 10,000 and the 1,000

1. pbp 18:47, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support Cobblet (talk) 19:39, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Don't really know the 1,000 list well but he belongs on this list anyway. --Rsm77 (talk) 23:05, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 11:15, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support. - Good catch! GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:03, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

On neither the 10,000 nor the 1,000

Discussion

Swap: Remove Vladimir Ashkenazy, Add Mstislav Rostropovich

Support !votes

1. Support as nom. --Igrek (talk) 13:47, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 20:59, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Hierophant443 (talk) 18:40, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support. Bedrieger (talk) 01:28, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
5. Support - Alfietucker (talk) 16:47, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
6. Support I have to second Alfietucker's comments - if Ashkenazy is a sufficiently important pianist to be on this list, I can think of at 20 other pianists we should add (I've read two surveys where leading pianists of today were asked who they consider the greatest pianists ever - one a top 10 and the other a top 20 - and Ashkenazy was not on either list). Rostropovich, in contrast, is undoubtedly more important than both of the cellists we currently have on the list. He is widely regarded as one of the most important classical musicians of the past century. Neljack (talk) 05:22, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

1. Oppose - support the addition of MR, oppose the removal.--ColonelHenry (talk) 22:02, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:07, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Oppose - we already have two cellists. Cobblet (talk) 21:19, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Oppose BluesFan38 (talk) 16:15, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Much as I admire VA, he's simply not in the same league as the other pianists presently on list; besides, MR is a far greater and historically more important musician. Alfietucker (talk) 16:53, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

The proposal below to add Rostropovich needs one more support !vote to pass. I would be happy to swap Ashkenazy for a more deserving pianist. I suspect he and Barenboim were initially added to the list because they are both notable pianists and conductors, though neither is really the most notable representative of each profession. Cobblet (talk) 05:40, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Add Mstislav Rostropovich

Support !votes

1. Support as nom. --Igrek (talk) 03:18, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 11:29, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support on condition we remove Jacqueline du Pré. Two cellists are plenty. Cobblet (talk) 06:24, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support - Alfietucker (talk) 17:21, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
5. Support Again I agree with Alfietucker. Consider what his fellow cellists have said about him. Julian Lloyd Webber called him "quite simply one of the greatest musicians to have ever lived...probably the greatest cellist of all time",[1] while Steven Isserlis said: "'There are very few musical performers who have earned the same sort of immortality as the great composers. One of these few is Mstislav Rostropovich, the great Russian cellist who, through his amazing playing and his irresistible powers of persuasion, managed to wring out major works for cello from an almost endless succession of major composers, from Prokofiev, Shostakovich and Britten to Dutilleux, Lutosławski, Boris Tchaikovsky, Schnittke, Shchedrin…"[2] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Neljack (talk • contribs) 06:07, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

1. Oppose. - Per Cobblet. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:53, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose. Small notability for this list. -- Ace111 (talk) 11:18, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

A musician who was acclaimed in his lifetime as one of the greatest in the world, inspired several major works from leading composers of the 20th century, including Sergei Prokofiev, Dmitri Shostakovich and Benjamin Britten, taught several great cellists including Jacqueline du Pré, Natalia Gutman and Mischa Maisky, and stuck his neck out for not only Prokofiev but also for Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn - the latter action ultimately leading to the cellist's enforced exile from his homeland - is scarcely one of "small notability". Alfietucker (talk) 17:20, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

Remove Jacqueline du Pré

Support

1. Support as nom. Not vital. Cobblet (talk) 06:24, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 09:40, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:29, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support. - Alfietucker (talk) 16:51, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
5. Support Rostropovich and Casals were greater cellists. Du Pre's tragic illness and her charisma explain why she is probably more well-known than them, at least in English-speaking countries. Neljack (talk) 06:31, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose one of the most important cellists, and one of the best known femal musicians of all times.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 00:22, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose greatest female cellist of all time. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

If we're talking cellists, Pablo Casals definitely ought to be on the list before her; if we're talking female instrumentalists (ignoring the many female singers we have on the list, and many more we could add), Martha Argerich, Nadia Boulanger, Wanda Landowska or Clara Schumann easily trump her credentials. Cobblet (talk) 09:13, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Boulanger is already on the list I believe, Clara Schumann might be a good addition but I wouldn't swap her for Du Pre. Landowska and Argerich I have never heard of.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 23:09, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Unless she isn't classified under People, Boulanger's not on the list. Landowska was a pioneer of historically informed performance. Argerich is one of the greatest pianists alive today—it's too bad you haven't heard of her. Cobblet (talk) 23:31, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Well she definitely was on there once, so she must have been removed.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 23:55, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Add Nadia Boulanger

Well this is an obvious omission. The most influential music pedagogue in the 20th century, she taught composers such as Copland, Glass and Piazzolla. She was also one of the first female conductors.

Support

1. Support as nom. Cobblet (talk) 09:05, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support - Alfietucker (talk) 16:57, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Females epically underrepresented among composers.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 23:36, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
4. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:16, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
5. Support Very influential. Neljack (talk) 23:51, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

Discussion

Swap: Remove Georges Bizet, Add Carmen

The opera is vital; its composer, not so much, especially when we have 23 other composers in the Romantic period.

Support

1. Support as nom. Cobblet (talk) 07:15, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:27, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support - it makes sense to represent one-hit wonder type composers and writers through their famous work, rather than their biography. john k (talk) 14:10, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 20:04, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 23:02, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
6. support User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 00:23, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

Discussion

We could maybe replace Rimsky-Korsakov and Mussorgsky with The Five (composers). Cobblet (talk) 07:15, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Remove Metastasio

I don't think librettists are vital.

Support

1. Support as nom. Cobblet (talk) 06:24, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 09:40, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:30, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 23:03, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
5. supportUser:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 00:20, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

Discussion

Swap: Remove Kiri Te Kanawa, Add Mahalia Jackson

There are other singers of comparable stature as Te Kanawa that we don't include, e.g. Kathleen Battle. Mahalia Jackson seems more significant.

Support

1. Support as nom. Cobblet (talk) 06:35, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 20:04, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 23:06, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
4. SupportUser:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 23:02, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose world renown, one of most famous persons from New Zealand. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose I would be open to replacing replacing Dame Kiri with another opera singer, but currently we have 11 opera singers (Bocelli isn't really an opera singer, though he's sung a bit of it, and in any case is set to be removed) and scores of popular singers. As an aside, I hardly think Kathleen Battle is of comparable stature to Dame Kiri as an opera singer. Neljack (talk) 04:30, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
3. Oppose pbp 15:46, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
4. Oppose. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:04, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Add Benjamin Britten

Support !votes

1. Support - Britten is pre-eminent in 20th century opera, and is unquestionably the greatest British composer of the second part of the century. Frankly, to list Satie but not Britten is fairly absurd. Brianboulton (talk) 16:03, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
2. Support – There are more performances worldwide of Britten's operas than those of any other composer born in the 20th century (see OperaBase). Devoted as I am to Elgar and others, Britten is the only British composer whose music is part of the regular international repertoire. Satie (agreeing with Brianboulton's comment above) is a cherishable niche composer, but not central to the world repertoire of classical music. Tim riley (talk) 21:16, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
3. Support. - Per Tim Riley and Brianboulton. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:23, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
4. Support One of the most important 20th century composers. I think you would be hard-pressed to find many people who know classical music who regard Satie or Scriabin as more important than Britten. I also agree with Cobblet that Richard Strauss should be included; Satie and Scriabin are not vital and can be removed to compensate. Neljack (talk) 00:00, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
5. Support Cobblet (talk) 07:28, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

1. oppose Classical composers way overrepresented already compared to all other genres. Swap him if anyone is less notable. I think a lot more people know Satie than Britten- perhaps swap for Scriabin a Cobblet proposes.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 22:49, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Would prefer a swap here—composers of classical music are rather generously represented already. I could get behind a swap of Satie for Britten; another prominent omission is Richard Strauss—maybe swap him in for Alexander Scriabin. Cobblet (talk) 02:58, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Not vital when we don't have people like Celine Dion or Whitney Houston.

Support

1. Support as nom. Cobblet (talk) 06:56, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 20:04, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 22:52, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 00:20, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support His opera singing has got mixed reviews, to put it mildly, so he certainly shouldn't be listed under classical singers. His non-classical stuff has been very popular, but we can't post every singer who is very popular and I see little wider impact or influence. Neljack (talk) 04:36, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

Discussion

Swap: Remove Beverly Sills, Add Joan Sutherland

Support

1. Support as nom. Cobblet (talk) 06:35, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 23:07, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Sutherland and Sills are quite easily comparable, since they both specialised in bel canto roles. While Sills was a very fine singer, I think the great majority of critics would agree that Sutherland was the greater and more important singer. She, along with Callas, was crucial in the bel canto revival and her voice was extraordinary in its combination of power and agility (not for nothing was she known as La Stupenda). Neljack (talk) 04:46, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
4. Support --(AfadsBad (talk) 12:29, 26 September 2013 (UTC))
5. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:25, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

Discussion

Add Camarón de la Isla

Support !votes

1. Support: Most important Flamenco artist of all time. User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 02:58, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

1. Oppose--V3n0M93 (talk) 08:45, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 02:26, 13 July 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Add The Chieftains

Support !votes

1. Support. Less influential in the genre, but perhaps better known in the US than the Dubliners. I remoind you again that the folk section does not have A SINGLE artists from outside of the US. Folk is a global genre, and Irish traditional music is globally known and appreciated. User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 02:48, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 08:41, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

1. Oppose. - Not vital. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 02:25, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose not influential. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Oppose A good call for an influential non-American folk group, but, unfortunately, I don't think that they are comparatively influential at the vital level. It would not necessarily be bias to have all American folk musicians in the vital section, even if undesirable. --(AfadsBad (talk) 22:25, 26 September 2013 (UTC))

Discussion

• I think it is very much undesirable yes. User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 22:28, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
  • I agree, but I am not sure what we could add. However, I have a friend who is a musical historian, and I will ask him for some insight on one thing I thought of, Calypso music. But, I don't know what we can do in this area. --(AfadsBad (talk) 22:32, 26 September 2013 (UTC))

I've already tried The Dubliners and Chief O'Neill for Irish folk, Camarón de la Isla and Paco de Lucia for Flamenco and several others just to try to get some international presence in the section that his half Country music and half Americana - but to no avail people here are intent on keeping semi-vital Americans (like Joan Baez who is known for covering Bob Dylan but never wrote a good song herself) rather than including truly vital non-American artists (I dont ascribe this to ill will, but simply to the fact that no editors here are really familiar with folk music and therefore only know the few names that are well known in their own local area). I don't think Calypso is a very good candidate for broadening the folk category, it is not usually considered folk music, more like a caribbean kind of popular music of the 1940s and it has little influence on contemporary folk styles.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 22:44, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

It is Caribbean folk music and it had a strong influence on later Caribbean folk music, influenced American music such as the Kingston Trio, also first million selling album was pseudo-calypso; all this eventually impacted American and British popular music (Hip Hop). I would start calling to remove less than vital American folk musicians, then. I think if we are going to concede (and I am), that it is largely an American music style, then we ought to limit it to a few representative examples. There's also Mariachi, although not as influential as Calypso, many people have heard of it, and it was far more influential in American popular music than most American realize. That it did not influence folk does not make it less vital; it influences popular music, Reggae, Hip Hop, etc. --(AfadsBad (talk) 22:55, 26 September 2013 (UTC))

PS You are correct that it is due to very limited participation and little knowledge of the genre. The ballet will have to be sorted out terribly; it's not a Russian sport. That is why it will be difficult to convince people of the importance and influence of calypso music on other genres, not on folk music other than Island Folk and exotica. --(AfadsBad (talk) 22:57, 26 September 2013 (UTC))

I have tried to remove many of the semi-vital Americans, but most have not been accepted. Only a couple of the least notable country artists were removed and they were not replaced with others. Les Paul who is not even known as a musician but as an inventor is still in the section. Also I do not concede at all that it is largely an American style there is a large folk scene throughout Europe, and I would claim that Irish trad is the best known folk genre worldwide.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 23:14, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

I said I think vital articles will be limited to American groups. Internationally Irish folk music is well listened to, but the world is crazy about American folk, too. I have friends who are folk musicians, a few very famous, but most only moderately so, and they travel Europe, Asia, Nigeria. Les Paul, again, is extremely important to another type of music, rock, so I don't see him being removed. --(AfadsBad (talk) 23:26, 26 September 2013 (UTC))

Les Paul should not be removed, but moved to the section on inventors.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 23:37, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

• For the record, Paco de Lucía was in fact added to the list. I would happily support adding calypso music and folk music of Ireland if strong arguments are presented for their significance relative to other folk music traditions. Cobblet (talk) 01:13, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Ah, I can see he was added in a separate "flamenco section" instead of the folk/country section (from which Bob Dylan has also been moved to "Rock"). I propose then that we rename the folk-country section to "Americana" which seems to cover its contents much better currently.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 01:23, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Renamed to "American folk and country." Cobblet (talk) 03:03, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

I think this improves the list.

Support

1. Support as nom. Cobblet (talk) 06:35, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose Ella Fitzgerald didn't give us In the Mood, Pennsylvania 65000, etc. pbp 15:22, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:32, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Oppose --V3n0M93 (talk) 20:04, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Oppose BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Add Paco de Lucía

Support !votes

1. Support: World renowned revolutionary Flamenco and Classical guitar virtuoso. Second most important Flamenco artist, but has played in many other genres and collaborated widely with great artists across genres. Honors include grammys, BAFTA, honorary doctorate of Berklee college of music and multiple "smash hits". Oh, and globalization.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 03:04, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 08:41, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:34, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 23:09, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support Cobblet (talk) 10:06, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

Discussion

In the rather crowded Romantic period I think Borodin is the weakest link, especially considering we already have two of the Russian Five in Modest Mussorgsky and Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov. Meanwhile we have no composers from the Medieval period; Machaut seems like the most appropriate representative.

Support

1. Support as nom. Cobblet (talk) 02:12, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:55, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 16:45, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 12:24, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 16:15, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

British anti-slavery advocate

Support

1. Support as nom pbp 21:07, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support, maybe we should swap him with one of the US entries, as they are too many. --V3n0M93 (talk) 22:11, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support. - Per V3, I would prefer a swap, but since we now have the size under control I don't see any harm in adding this glaring omission. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:37, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 00:02, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support Cobblet (talk) 00:10, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
6. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

Discussion

• Let’s discuss cutting an American: to review, the activists are Susan B. Anthony, John Brown, Frederick Douglass, Eugene V. Debs, Betty Friedan, Mary Harris Jones, Helen Keller, Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X, John Muir, Rosa Parks, Margaret Sanger, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Sojourner Truth and Harriet Tubman. As you can see, it’s hard to cut without cutting a woman or minority. The two I have the most qualms about are Jones (obscure) and Truth (redundant to Tubman, Douglass and others). I personally don’t care for Malcolm X, but this community. Likewise, I’d personally keep Debs and Muir, but I’m not sure how the community feels about them. pbp 14:35, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I'd say that Truth is the weakest of the bunch, but that really Truth, Parks, and Jones are probably all non-vital at the 10,000 article level (are they really more important than virtually every American politician who never became president, for instance?) john k (talk) 16:14, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Parks is absolutely vital. I could support Debs and Muir.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 23:06, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Remove Mary Harris Jones

Support

1. Support Pbp says she's obscure in the US. I haven't heard of her, whereas I've heard a lot about Debs, say. --Rsm77 (talk) 00:09, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support Cobblet (talk) 23:46, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 13:02, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support The activists etc category currently has a disproportionate and excessive number of Americans; Jones seems one of the less important American ones. Neljack (talk) 00:11, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
5. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:09, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

Discussion

Add Knud Rasmussen

Support !votes

1. Support User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 00:01, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 14:17, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Combined exploring and ethnology in his investigation of the Inuit peoples. Neljack (talk) 00:46, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

1. Oppose Hierophant443 (talk) 18:49, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:18, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Oppose. Northamerica1000^(talk) 15:09, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Add Zhang Qian

We have no Ancient Era explorers. I looked through Category:Ancient explorers and this seems like a pretty strong candidate for inclusion. His discoveries led to the establishment of the Silk Road.

Support

1. Support as nom. Cobblet (talk) 10:03, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support--V3n0M93 (talk) 15:08, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 10:45, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
4. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:03, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
5. Support The Silk Road was very important. Neljack (talk) 00:51, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

Discussion

Add Fridtjof Nansen

Support

1. Support as nom. --V3n0M93 (talk) 23:15, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:17, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 23:12, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 00:09, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

Discussion

Add David Thompson (explorer)

The greatest surveyor of all time? He singlehandedly mapped 20% of North America.

Support

1. Support as nom. Cobblet (talk) 07:06, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 15:11, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 10:45, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
5. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:06, 24 September 2013 (UTC)\

Oppose

Discussion

Remove Mia Hamm

Support !votes

1. Support Women's association football is getting better, but it doesn't remotely have the history of the men's game and as the list gets shorter I see less and less need to include Hamm --Rsm77 (talk) 08:33, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 11:48, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Cobblet (talk) 07:01, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

1. Oppose. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 19:02, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose. - Per DL1. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 20:38, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Oppose Women's soccer is big, and Hamm was an outstanding player. I think she deserves a place. Neljack (talk) 00:07, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

• More evidence that people are voting to cut sports personalities simply to cut sports personalities. Hamm belongs on this list until her career is surpassed and she i replaced with another woman soccer/football player. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 19:02, 20 July 2013 (UTC)

Swap: Remove Scythia, Add Scythians

Scytians covers the subject better.

Support !votes

1. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 19:49, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 00:12, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 20:31, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Cobblet (talk) 00:49, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support john k (talk) 19:59, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

Discussion

Add Xiongnu

Support !votes

1. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 18:21, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support The nomadic peoples of Central Asia are under-represented. Cobblet (talk) 05:05, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:26, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support. Someone not using his real name (talk) 23:37, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support Carlwev (talk) 17:48, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

1. Oppose Bedrieger (talk) 21:39, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Swap: Add Great Seljuq Empire, Remove Seljuq dynasty

Seljuq dynasty is mainly a list of kings.

Support !votes

1. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 19:52, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support Cobblet (talk) 00:49, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 23:00, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Plantdrew (talk) 22:12, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
5. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:10, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

Discussion

Remove Hausa Kingdoms

Support !votes

1. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 09:57, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:32, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:39, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

1. Oppose Cobblet (talk) 09:49, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose per Cobblet's discussion point. --(AfadsBad (talk) 12:42, 26 September 2013 (UTC))

Discussion

I'm going to start opposing proposals made with no justification. A cursory read of Sahelian kingdoms suggests that we've included all the other notable historical empires of West Africa on the list; it would be nice if someone could explain why this particular one isn't noteworthy enough to include. Cobblet (talk) 09:49, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Reading through the different articles, this one seemed not that vital. When I proposed this removal we were 250+ articles above the limit. Now that we are below the limit, I have no problem with this staying on the list, but I do feel there are more important topics that are not yet added that this article. --V3n0M93 (talk) 18:13, 29 September 2013 (UTC)

Swap:Add Carolingian Empire, remove Carolingian dynasty

The dynasty article is mostly a list of kings.

Support !votes

1. as nom. Someone not using his real name (talk) 22:52, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 09:39, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Cobblet (talk) 07:13, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:08, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support john k (talk) 19:59, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

Discussion

Add Chivalry

Support

1. Support as nom. Cobblet (talk) 06:36, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 10:50, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:08, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support. --Melody Lavender (talk) 17:32, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose. Seems redundant to Knight, already on the list. The first two sections in chivalry are more or less copies from the knight article. The knight article has a substantial section on Chivalric code. In 4m articles, it's fine to have such sub-articles, but probably not if you're limiting to just 10k. Someone not using his real name (talk) 18:25, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Add Winter War

Support !votes

1. Support as nom --V3n0M93 (talk) 17:18, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

1. Oppose Suggest Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact instead; this war was one of its many consequences. Cobblet (talk) 17:57, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose Bedrieger (talk) 21:39, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Oppose. - Per Cobblet. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:31, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Add Libyan civil war

Support !votes

1. Support as nom --V3n0M93 (talk) 17:18, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:36, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

1. Oppose Bedrieger (talk) 21:39, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose pending outcome. We don't include the failed 1991 uprisings in Iraq, do we? Not even the Lebanese Civil War is included. Someone not using his real name (talk) 20:28, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Oppose BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

We have the Arab Spring. The Syrian civil war may turn out to be more noteworthy; too soon to tell. Cobblet (talk) 17:57, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

Swap: Remove Wounded Knee Massacre, Add American Indian Wars

The overall war is more important than a single part of it.

Support !votes

1. Support as nom. --V3n0M93 (talk) 14:21, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support pbp 16:43, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Cobblet (talk) 00:49, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

1. Oppose. - We should include them both, IMO. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:38, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
2. oppose per Gabe, not either or.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 00:25, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Oppose Keep both per GabeMc. It describes an era and its closure with both, and Wounded Knee is far more important in modern day reflections on the atrocities than other battles and best known internationally for this. --(AfadsBad (talk) 19:38, 25 September 2013 (UTC))

Discussion

Could the objectors explain why Wounded Knee deserves mention over Battle of the Little Bighorn, the Nez Perce War, the Apache Wars, Tecumseh's War and the Second Seminole War, to name five other prominent US–native American conflicts? Cobblet (talk) 18:47, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Remove Contour line

Supports

1. As nom: non-vital and really just one particular aspect of cartography, which is already included. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:50, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 20:09, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Cobblet (talk) 03:19, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support --(AfadsBad (talk) 20:56, 27 September 2013 (UTC))
6. Support Plantdrew (talk) 22:14, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

Discussion

Now that we've added elevation, this can go. Cobblet (talk) 03:19, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

A contour line is far more general than just lines of equal elevation; it's a very important mathematical concept. --(AfadsBad (talk) 20:56, 27 September 2013 (UTC))

Remove Dependent territory

Supports

1. As nom: non-vital. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:33, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support article is largely a list. --V3n0M93 (talk) 21:42, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Cobblet (talk) 03:19, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 23:05, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

Discussion

Would suggest replacing with administrative division but that article's mostly a list. Cobblet (talk) 03:19, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Remove Scale (map)

Supports

1. As nom: non-vital/subsumed by map, which is already included. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:38, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 20:10, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support. Northamerica1000^(talk) 15:19, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support I'm a cartographer; the scale is part of a map, not a stand alone. --(AfadsBad (talk) 13:08, 26 September 2013 (UTC))
6. Support Plantdrew (talk) 22:14, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

1. Oppose pbp 16:46, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Remove Meridian

Supports

1. Support as nom: Subsumptive with longitude, analogous to circle of latitude, which is already on the chopping block. Cobblet (talk) 03:19, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 08:08, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 18:46, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 23:07, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

Discussion

Remove Eurasia

Support !votes

1. As nom. This is listed under Continents, but Eurasia is not a continent, its simply Asia and Europe combined and we already include both Asia and Europe. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:37, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support Hierophant443 (talk) 18:57, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

1. Oppose --V3n0M93 (talk) 19:11, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose Cobblet (talk) 03:19, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Opoose Keep and move pbp 15:23, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Maybe we should move it under politics, since it's more of a political term than geographical. --V3n0M93 (talk) 09:20, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

The division between Europe and Asia is a historical and cultural construct. Eurasia is a distinct physical and geological concept worth keeping. Cobblet (talk) 03:19, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Remove Gnomonic projection

Supports

1. Support as nom. --(AfadsBad (talk) 21:01, 27 September 2013 (UTC))
2. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:27, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Cobblet (talk) 04:19, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Plantdrew (talk) 22:14, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
5. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 04:53, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

Discussion

This is about vital articles; while there is not a single article on the list that is not very important, I question in a list with a finite number of articles, that gnomonic projection is a vital article at the 10,000 human items level. Without Mercator projections, the Age of Exploration would have been a fail, so it cannot be removed, particularly for a Anglo-centric encyclopedia. However, the article on map projections in general should be edited to reflect the variable importance of different large categories of projections, and gnomonic projection can await the 100,000 vital articles list.

Swap: Remove Andean states: Add Canberra

Support !votes

1. Support as nom. Carlwev (talk) 21:04, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 19:11, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose !votes

1. Oppose support remove, oppose add.Hierophant443 (talk) 18:57, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:35, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Oppose BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

User:Cobblet, Andean states was removed via a different proposal. I've left this one in case is gathers enough support to add Canbera. --V3n0M93 (talk) 08:13, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Remove Gulf of Bothnia

Supports

1. As nom: non-vital. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:21, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 22:25, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Part of the Baltic Sea. Cobblet (talk) 08:24, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 23:14, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

Discussion

• Google Books search results:
  
• "Gulf of Bothnia" — 153,000. --Igrek (talk) 13:11, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Remove Laptev Sea

Supports

1. As nom: non-vital marginal sea. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:42, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 20:10, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Propose replacing this and East Siberian Sea with Northern Sea Route. Cobblet (talk) 08:24, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
5. support 01:01, 24 August 2013 (UTC)User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw·

Opposes

Discussion

• Google Books search results:
  
• "Laptev Sea" — 38,800. --Igrek (talk) 13:11, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Swap: Remove East Siberian Sea, Add Northern Sea Route

Supports

1. Support as nom. The East Siberian and Laptev Seas seem less well known than their neighbours (33 900 and 52 300 hits respectively on Google Books), but are geostrategically important in the context of the Northern Sea Route, formerly known as the Northeast Passage. Cobblet (talk) 08:24, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 08:54, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 18:49, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

Discussion

Remove Solomon Sea

Supports

1. As nom: non-vital. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:05, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 10:46, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support If the Bismarck Sea isn't included this shouldn't be either. Cobblet (talk) 08:24, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 23:13, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

Discussion

• Google Books search results:
  
• "Solomon Sea" — 16,800. --Igrek (talk) 13:11, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Remove Barents Sea

Supports

1. As nom: non-vital marginal sea. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:15, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 22:25, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
4. supportUser:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 00:58, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

1. Oppose All its neighbours of similar size are on the list. Cobblet (talk) 08:24, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose Only sedimentary basin on the list; an important sea geologically. --(AfadsBad (talk) 19:26, 28 September 2013 (UTC))

Discussion

• Google Books search results:
  
• "Barents Sea" — 299,000. --Igrek (talk) 13:11, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Remove Beaufort Sea

Supports

1. As nom: non-vital marginal sea. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:18, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 22:24, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
4. support User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 00:59, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

1. Oppose Economically and geostrategically important to Canada and the USA. Cobblet (talk) 08:24, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

• Google Books search results:
  
• "Beaufort Sea" — 353,000. --Igrek (talk) 13:11, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Remove Sea of Okhotsk

Supports

1. As nom: non-vital marginal sea. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:32, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 20:12, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 01:01, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

1. Oppose Cobblet (talk) 08:24, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose Economically and geopolitically vital. --(AfadsBad (talk) 19:28, 28 September 2013 (UTC))

Discussion

• Google Books search results:
  
• "Sea of Okhotsk" — 157 000. --Igrek (talk) 13:11, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

I can't believe people think this isn't vital—this sea dominates Russia's Pacific coastline and is one of the largest seas on the list. See File:Oceans and seas boundaries map-en.svg. Cobblet (talk) 09:57, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Remove White Sea

Supports

1. As nom: non-vital marginal sea subsumed by the Barents Sea, which is also a marginal sea. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:49, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 20:12, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support. Northamerica1000^(talk) 15:21, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
5. support User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 01:03, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
6. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

1. Oppose pbp 20:31, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose Economically vital body of water for Russia throughout its history. Cobblet (talk) 08:24, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Oppose It's not just economically vital, but it is an important access point for Russia. Probably a little hard to see from a Western perspective, but vital. --(AfadsBad (talk) 19:34, 28 September 2013 (UTC))

Discussion

• Google Books search results:
  
• "White Sea" — 548,000. --Igrek (talk) 13:11, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

If this is removed I'll immediately nominate a swap of this for some other hydrology article—this really should stay on the list, IMO. While I think the Geography quota should probably be 1250 rather than 1300, we've got less than 1220 articles in this section now. Cobblet (talk) 07:41, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Remove Yellow Sea

Supports

1. As nom: non-vital marginal sea subsumed by the East China Sea, which is already included. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 22:35, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 20:12, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support. Northamerica1000^(talk) 15:26, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

1. Oppose pbp 20:31, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose Cobblet (talk) 08:24, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

• Google Books search results:
  
• "Yellow Sea" — 358 000. --Igrek (talk) 13:11, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

This is obviously distinct from the East China Sea. Again, see File:Oceans and seas boundaries map-en.svg, which is drawn according to the IHO definitions. Removing this because we have the East China Sea is like removing Gulf of Aden (and even Red Sea) because we have Arabian Sea. Unlike the East China Sea, it was only submerged after the last Ice Age and remains an unusually large area of shallow water. To quote the WWF, "the Yellow Sea is one of the world's largest areas of continental shelf covered in shallow water, providing for rich fishing grounds and an important site for migratory birds." Cobblet (talk) 09:57, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Add Inside Passage

Supports

1. Support as nom: one of the few places in the developed world where roads remain scarce relative to population and transportation by boat still predominates. Cobblet (talk) 08:57, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

1. Oppose, doesn't seem vital. --V3n0M93 (talk) 11:49, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:32, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Remove Kattegat

Supports

1. As nom: non-vital. Also, we already include Skagerrak, which is more vital. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:45, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 10:47, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

1. Oppose I'd say it's just as important as the Skagerrak, since together they connect the Baltic Sea to the North Sea. Cobblet (talk) 08:57, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Remove Strait of Malacca

Supports

1. As nom: non-vital GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:45, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 10:47, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

1. Oppose Cobblet (talk) 08:57, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose --Rsm77 (talk) 23:19, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Oppose Ypnypn (talk) 20:06, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

If there was one strait in the world worth including this would be this one, I think. A quarter of the world's traded goods and a quarter of the world's oil goes through this strait. Hong Kong and Singapore wouldn't exist without it. Cobblet (talk) 09:03, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Remove Angara River

Supports

1. As nom. We already have the Lena River, Ob River and the Yenisei River, so we don't really need their tributaries as well, do we? GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:33, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 10:50, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

1. Oppose Major tributaries are worth including. The Angara also happens to drain Lake Baikal. Cobblet (talk) 10:37, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

• Google Books search results:
  
• "Angara" — 301,000.
• "Angara River" — 19,900. --Igrek (talk) 14:05, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Add Darling River

Supports

1. Support as nom. Australia could use a little more representation, and the river system as a whole is usually known as the Murray-Darling anyway. Cobblet (talk) 10:37, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 11:52, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:36, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

1. Oppose Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Oppose Suggest the Murray-Darling Basin instead - they're usually referred to together, as Cobblet noted. Neljack (talk) 03:07, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Remove Irtysh River

Supports

1. As nom; we already have the Lena River, Ob River and the Yenisei River, so we don't really need their tributaries as well, do we? GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:33, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 10:50, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

1. Oppose Major tributaries should be included, particularly in cases where the tributary is longer than the named stem river—this river system's usually known as the Ob-Irtysh. You wouldn't remove Missouri River because we have Mississippi River, would you? Cobblet (talk) 10:37, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

• Google Books search results:
  
• "Irtysh" — 73,100.
• "Irtysh River" — 14,700. --Igrek (talk) 14:05, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Remove Kolyma River

Supports

1. As nom; non-vital. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:45, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 10:50, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

1. Oppose It's a pretty large river, and it'll be forever associated with the gulags. Cobblet (talk) 10:37, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

• Google Books search results:
  
• "Kolyma" — 212,000.
• "Kolyma River" — 20,500. --Igrek (talk) 14:05, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Add Nelson River

Supports

1. Support as nom. North America could use a little more representation, and the Nelson drains a large swath of Western Canada together with the Saskatchewan River. It's the longest river system on the continent not to be represented on the list yet. Cobblet (talk) 10:37, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 11:52, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:37, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

1. Oppose Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Remove Syr Darya

Supports

1. As nom: non-vital. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:42, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 10:50, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

1. Oppose Along with its sister river the Amu Darya, the lifeblood of Central Asia. Cobblet (talk) 10:37, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

• Google Books search results:
  
• "Syr Darya" — 61,900.
• "Syr Darya River" — 48,300. --Igrek (talk) 14:05, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Remove Tocantins River

Supports

1. As nom. Minor non-vital river currently listed as a tributary of the Amazon, which it isn't. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:33, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 10:50, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

1. Oppose It is a tributary of the Amazon, a major one in fact. Cobblet (talk) 10:37, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

• Google Books search results:
  
• "Tocantins" — 808,000.
• "Tocantins River" — 10,800. --Igrek (talk) 14:05, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Remove Ubangi River

Supports

1. As nom. Minor non-vital tributary. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:33, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 10:50, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

1. Oppose The Kasai River can go but this should stay; Africa deserves representation. Cobblet (talk) 10:37, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

• Google Books search results:
  
• "Ubangi" — 165,000.
• "Ubangi River" — 7,980. --Igrek (talk) 14:05, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Remove Northern Dvina River

Supports

1. As nom; non vital and short at only 744 km/462 miles long. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 01:02, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 10:50, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

1. Oppose Economically vital to Russia during its early history. Cobblet (talk) 10:37, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

• Google Books search results:
  
• "Dvina" — 182,000
• "Northern Dvina" — 15,300.
• "Severnaya Dvina" - 4,290.
• "Northern Dvina River" — 2,970. --Igrek (talk) 14:05, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Add Great Salt Lake and Lake Taymyr

Support

1. Support as nom. The former is the largest salt water lake in the Western Hemisphere and the 33rd largest lake in the world. The latter is the largest lake north of the Arctic Circle and the 21st largest lake in the world - the largest one not to be listed yet. Cobblet (talk) 11:25, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support pbp 17:03, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose not the right time to start adding, and this is not a topic area where there is a need to add new articles any way.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 12:59, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose--V3n0M93 (talk) 11:53, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Oppose. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:39, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Oppose BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Add Lake Volta and Lake Kariba

Support

1. Support as nom. The former is the world's largest reservoir by surface area, the latter the largest by volume. Both located in Africa. Cobblet (talk) 12:15, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support if we mapped the world from population density is article density on this list Africa and India would disappear. Lake Volta should have been a no-brainer put initially on the list. --(AfadsBad (talk) 13:25, 26 September 2013 (UTC))

Oppose

1. Oppose not the right time to start adding, and this is not a topic area where there is a need to add new articles any way.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 13:02, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose--V3n0M93 (talk) 11:53, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Oppose. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:40, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Oppose BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Given the demand for reduced Western bias elsewhere on this list, it's strange to see so many people oppose the addition of articles not only of interest to the world in general, but vitally so to developing countries. Cobblet (talk) 06:54, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Swap: Remove White Sea – Baltic Canal, Add Volga–Baltic Waterway

Support

1. Support as nom. The latter has a much longer history and remains economically much more important than the former. Cobblet (talk) 12:15, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:51, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose Support remove but not add. Not the right time to start adding, and this is not a topic area where there is a need to add new articles any way.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 12:57, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose--V3n0M93 (talk) 11:55, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Oppose. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:43, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Oppose BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Add Canal of the Pharaohs

Support

1. Support as nom. One of the first major canals ever built and the forerunner of the modern Suez Canal. Cobblet (talk) 12:15, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:51, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose not the right time to start adding, and this is not a topic area where there is a need to add new articles any way.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 12:57, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose--V3n0M93 (talk) 11:55, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Oppose. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:43, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Oppose BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Add Kiel Canal

Support

1. Support as nom. Busiest canal in the world today. Cobblet (talk) 12:15, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose not the right time to start adding, and this is not a topic area where there is a need to add new articles any way.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 12:57, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose--V3n0M93 (talk) 11:55, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Oppose. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:43, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Oppose Bedrieger (talk) 21:51, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Remove Davis Strait

Supports

1. As nom: non-vital. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:45, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 10:47, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support since Northwest Passage has been added. Cobblet (talk) 08:57, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 23:19, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

Discussion

Remove Denmark Strait

Supports

1. As nom: non-vital GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:45, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 10:47, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Cobblet (talk) 08:57, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 23:19, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
6. Support I'm Danish and had never heard of this.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 12:28, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

Discussion

Swap: Add Gulf of Aden, Remove Bab-el-Mandeb

Supports

1. Support as nom: part of the same waterway, but the former is much larger and better known than the latter. Cobblet (talk) 09:08, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 11:49, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support. - Per nom. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:29, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 23:19, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

Discussion

Gulf of Aden gets 507 000 hits on Google Books, compared to 122 000 for Bab-el-Mandeb. Cobblet (talk) 09:08, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Remove Makassar Strait

Supports

1. As nom: non-vital GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:45, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 10:47, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Cobblet (talk) 08:57, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 23:19, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

Discussion

Remove Strait of Otranto

Supports

1. As nom: non-vital GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 23:45, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 10:47, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Cobblet (talk) 08:57, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 23:19, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

Discussion

Remove Strait of Tartary

Support

1. Support as nom. Not vital. Cobblet (talk) 00:23, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:34, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 07:38, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 23:19, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

Discussion

Swap: Remove Tsugaru Strait, Add Seto Inland Sea

Support

1. Support as nom. The latter is a more notable feature of Japanese marine geography than the former. Cobblet (talk) 00:23, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 09:35, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:35, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support --Rsm77 (talk) 23:19, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

Discussion

Remove Daugava River

Supports

1. As nom; non vital. Its barely 1,000km/625 miles long a rather minor river as far as Russia and Eastern Europe is concerned. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 01:18, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 10:50, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Cobblet (talk) 10:37, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support--Rsm77 (talk) 23:24, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

Discussion

• Google Books search results:
  
• "Dvina" — 182,000
• "Daugava" — 97,400.
• "Daugava River" — 6,290. --Igrek (talk) 14:05, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

• "Dvina" is ambiguous - it also refers to the Northern Dvina. Cobblet (talk) 10:37, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Remove Indigirka River

Supports

1. As nom; non-vital. GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 00:50, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 10:50, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support Cobblet (talk) 10:37, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:47, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support--Rsm77 (talk) 23:24, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Opposes

Discussion

• Google Books search results:
  
• "Indigirka" — 39,000.
• "Indigirka River" — 5,070. --Igrek (talk) 14:05, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Add Saint Lawrence Seaway

Support

1. Support as nom. Has superseded the Erie Canal as a major artery for North American commerce. Cobblet (talk) 12:15, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:43, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
3. support pbp 16:44, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:51, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support as per nominator. BluesFan38 (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose not the right time to start adding, and this is not a topic area where there is a need to add new articles any way.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 12:57, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Oppose--V3n0M93 (talk) 11:55, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Swap: Remove Queen Elizabeth Islands, Add Aleutian Islands

The former is subsumed by the Canadian Arctic Archipelago. And the latter's probably better known anyway.

Support

1. Support as nom. Cobblet (talk) 21:58, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support--V3n0M93 (talk) 11:18, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
3. Support--Rsm77 (talk) 23:32, 24 August 2013 (UTC)
4. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 21:34, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
5. Support: pbp 16:36, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

Discussion

Remove Adirondack Mountains

Support

1. Support as nom. Not vital. Cobblet (talk) 21:27, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 01:30, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 09:44, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:59, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support Neljack (talk) 03:01, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose without more information, see issues below. --(AfadsBad (talk) 20:27, 28 September 2013 (UTC))

Discussion

What's the logic behind this removal? I know almost nothing about the Adirondacks except that they expose billion+-year-old Grenville Orogeny rocks; and, this, might be vital. I need more information about the reason for removal. --(AfadsBad (talk) 20:27, 28 September 2013 (UTC))

From a geologic standpoint, wouldn't Laurentian Mountains be the better article to include? And from a physiographic standpoint, why should this region be included over the other 24 American physiographic provinces, and other physiographic regions around the world? This is also my reason for wanting to remove Sierra Nevada. Cobblet (talk) 21:26, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Remove North American Cordillera

Technical umbrella term that the article mentions may not be precisely defined; we already have its largest component, the Rocky Mountains.

Support

1. Support as nom. Cobblet (talk) 21:27, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 01:30, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 09:44, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:59, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support--Rsm77 (talk) 23:40, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Oppose pbp 17:07, 3 August 2013 (UTC)

Discussion

Remove American Cordillera

It's a stub.

Support

1. Support as nom. Not vital. Cobblet (talk) 21:27, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
2. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 01:30, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 09:44, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:59, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support--Rsm77 (talk) 23:40, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

Discussion

Remove 5 North Asian mountain articles

Specifically Mongolian Plateau, Central Siberian Plateau, Sayan Mountains, Verkhoyansk Range, Sikhote-Alin. We do have the Altai Mountains.

Support

1. Support as nom. Not vital. Cobblet (talk) 00:57, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 01:30, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 09:44, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:59, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support--Rsm77 (talk) 23:40, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Oppose

Discussion

Remove 3 West Asian mountain articles

Namely Alborz, Pontic Mountains, Taurus Mountains. The largest mountain range in Iran and Iraq, the Zagros Mountains, is already on the list. So is the Iranian Plateau.

Support

1. Support as nom. Not vital. Cobblet (talk) 00:57, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
2. Support. - GabeMc ^{(talk|contribs)} 01:30, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
3. Support --V3n0M93 (talk) 09:44, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
4. Support Bedrieger (talk) 21:59, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
5. Support--Rsm77 (talk) 23:40, 24 August 2013 (UTC)