This redirect 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
A bit sf-y, but discussed in science. The articles we have are generally about science, not sf treatment of those (fiction is generally relegated to seprate articles). Perhaps some of this belongs under physics and not technology, but that's a minor issue. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here03:21, 25 January 2024 (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.
The very concept. "Emerging technologies are technologies whose development, practical applications, or both are still largely unrealized... [but] are often perceived as capable of changing the status quo.". We list some of them already - artificial intelligence, robotics. But there's more to consider. 22 intewikis, ~450 daily page views. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here03:21, 25 January 2024 (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.
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.
Oppose, still too sci-fi for me to support adding to Tech. I wouldn't oppose if this came up on the Society page with other ideas from speculative fiction. Zar2gar1 (talk) 01:08, 27 January 2024 (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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
This one's a toss-up for me. The actual technical side of it isn't too speculative; people talk about it now and it probably could be done if somebody really wanted to. Skeptical the economics will ever let it take off though, at least in my lifetime. Zar2gar1 (talk) 01:08, 27 January 2024 (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.
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.
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.
Oppose, another idea that is (while outwardly simple) a bit too sci-fi for me to support in Tech. Wouldn't oppose under Speculative fiction though. Zar2gar1 (talk) 01:08, 27 January 2024 (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.
Another borderline one for me: it can approximately be done right now, but feel like a lot of the concept revolves around more futuristic applications. Zar2gar1 (talk) 01:08, 27 January 2024 (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.
Oppose, close to borderline for me, but article even says it's more focused on the speculative idea, not mundane things like ribosomes. Not opposed if it goes under Speculative fiction though. Zar2gar1 (talk) 01:08, 27 January 2024 (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.
Support, first impression is the article could distinguish natural and artificial instances better (article split?) Doesn't make the concept less vital though. Zar2gar1 (talk) 01:08, 27 January 2024 (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.
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.
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.
Oppose, seems like the article itself can't decide if it includes currently feasible structures or only more speculative, larger ones. However, would support an article that split out the more feasible bits or Megaproject. Zar2gar1 (talk) 01:08, 27 January 2024 (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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
I think this could start a slippery slope where we will feel compelled to list all modalities when they are inevitably released widely (text-to-video model, AI code generation which does not even have a page yet etc.). Maybe we want to do this (after all, we already do have Speech synthesis4 which is text-to-speech but this is a much more mature and widely used technology). But I feel like why bloat the list when your proposal for Generative artificial intelligence already covers all of these subfields and more. Aurangzebra (talk) 21:16, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The sibling topic to Suicide prevention5, this is what you do to stop a suicide if you are past the point of prevention. It is a pretty important topic to Suicide3, and appears a lot more than prevention in pop culture.
Don't see why this wouldn't be Level 5. That said, while they technically fit under Death, would the suicide-related articles make more sense somewhere under Health? -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 21:38, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@The Blue Rider: I don't see why not, I would argue it is just as important as Suicide prevention5, especially since it has more of a presence in culture due to being the default way of stopping a suicide in fiction. Besides, Suicide3 is VA3 and this is a notable enough subtopic to make the list. As you said, it is a fairly common practice. The comparison to Kamikaze also doesn't make much sense to me, since that was part of the Japanese military and not something happening to everyday people. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:18, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Kamikaze is a type of suicide thus the comparison. It's a common practice in psychiatric but it's relatively minor, in the sense that it just consists in a couple of questions on whether people have suicidal ideation, a time and date, access to lethal means and if that's so they probably will get admitted to the hospital, but that's the minority of people. Most of the work to mitigate suicide is done through prevention. The Blue Rider16:34, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Feature phones only came to be distinguished as "feature phones" upon the popularization of smartphones, at which point the category of "mobile phone that retains the form factor of earlier generations of mobile telephones" has become a relatively niche product. I think listing both Smartphone4 and History of mobile phones5 adequately cover the subject. feminist🩸 (talk) 09:57, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Chatbots are one of the primary applications of generative AI models, but they have a long history. They started long before gen AI entered the spotlight, and have been used in customer support for a long time.
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.
"Dermatitis was estimated to affect 245 million people globally in 2015, or 3.34% of the world population. ... In the United States, it affects about 10–30% of people."
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.
Support outside of Tech, this is really such a general & basic process, I feel almost like it belongs more in Philosophy somewhere. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 16:50, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I still support all of these, but presumably we want to keep all data-viz stuff with Statistics under Mathematics, which is already over quota. I can think up some batch removals, but I still think we need to discuss grabbing more slots for Math on the main Level 5 talk-page. -- Zar2gar1 (talk) 17:57, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Does Route 66 have any historical importance? For instance, did people used the route during the territorial expansion of the US? The Blue Rider23:27, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It’s the first highway in the US to be fully paved. A lot of people used it to move to the West, especially a bunch of Okies escaping the Dust Bowl4. Again though, I’m mostly suggesting it because of how famous it is. SailorGardevoir (talk) 00:12, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Variance4 helps understand the spread of a sample, but its value alone may not provide much insight. This is where the coefficient of determination comes into play. The Blue Rider13:25, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Covariance4 helps understand how two variables change together, but its value alone doesn't show the relationship's strength or direction. That's where the coefficient of correlation comes in. The Blue Rider13:25, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In fields like economics and statistics, it's vital to remember this fallacy. Recognizing this distinction is crucial for accurate data interpretation and analysis. The Blue Rider13:25, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Vital_articles/Level/5/Archive_12 this article was removed, it was replaced by Megalonyx though no rationale was given for the addition other than personal opinion. Considering we are under quota and this is a widespread and behaviourally unique group of anteaters which is also decently common in captivity I think it deserves a place at this level. Maras are a widespread rodent in southern Patagonia that are also extremely widespread in captivity, considering we list other less known rodents from the region such as viscacha it would make sense to include the mara as well.
per nom. However, I think the DSM belongs under Nonfiction books in Arts (this is where we put Gray's Anatomy5 which is also a medical reference). ICD is fine in Health, Medicine, and Disease. Aurangzebra (talk) 22:45, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The vital MTOC for many animal cell types, a hugely important organelle. Also, centrioles are already on there, and they make up the centrosome, so surely centrosome is higher priority for being on there? GraziePrego (talk) 02:32, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Vital concept for understanding organism development at all stages, and differentiating between cell types in the adult organism. Also a vital concept for understanding in vitro cell cultures, early embryo development and more. GraziePrego (talk) 02:36, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Sydney Metro only opened in 2019 and only has an annual ridership of 19,738,171. Out of all the rapid transit systems listed as vital articles, the Sydney Metro has the second lowest ridership, only beating the Glasgow Subway. The only reason I can guess why the Sydney Metro is a VA is for there to be a token Australian transit system listed as VA. My first preference would be to remove Sydney Metro without replacement, but I would be open to replacing Sydney Metro with Sydney Trains as well. The Sydney Trains system has an annual ridership of 288.3 million, placing it much better compared to the rapid transit systems listed as VA. Steelkamp (talk) 14:54, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support
As someone who has used the Sydney Metro, I support removing it from VA5. It is not something that the rest of the world needs to read about in an encyclopedia of 50,000 articles. Gizza(talk)22:12, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't want to say I support or oppose just yet but I do want to add that part of the reason for its somewhat elevated status might be because it is currently undergoing and is planned to undergo significant expansion. Most of the network is currently under construction as well so I would expect patronage to increase significantly soon. Takerlamar (talk) 21:51, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I noticed that Apple and Microsoft are on a different page than Google, Amazon, and Facebook. I don’t think it makes sense to list several websites and companies on two different pages. I’m hoping that we can develop a structure so that major companies, websites, and services are all on the same page. Interstellarity (talk) 19:38, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think we need to list companies and websites on the same page. I moved webpages back to where they were, but I did leave the IT companies with the rest in Economics. I also think that we should have a structure: something like Meta Platforms and Alphabet Inc.5 in Economics and Facebook4 and Google4 in technology. Makkool (talk) 10:40, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Makkool I think we should discuss how we structure these pages at level 4. It didn’t make sense to me that Google, Apple, and Microsoft were on different places so I combined them into one. Any thoughts on what we should do with those pages? Interstellarity (talk) 15:10, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the best solution is the one I outlined above: to have Meta and Alphabet represent Facebook and Google along Apple and Microsoft. Makkool (talk) 15:18, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It was about 5 paragraphs when first listed in 2022, but as mentioned below was complete advertisement and had no verifiable information and so was cut down to what you see today. Reconrabbit14:51, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
Neutral
Discussion
This article was created mainly to advertise someone's website. Ceramics#Properties describes most of the information that could be here. A better name for the article would be ceramic chemical processing, but the scope of this delisting is to make room for other things and allow for an easier merge.
We list NYC subway at L4, but we don't have coverage for the bus system that goes there. I suggest adding these so that the buses and other forms of transit are covered here. Interstellarity (talk) 21:41, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to be the least important of the US cities where their transit systems are listed. There really isn't anything standing out that make it vital. Interstellarity (talk) 21:45, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I continue to assert WP has many redlinks and redirects that could be vital articles. Microfilm and microfiche should not be redirecting to this subject and either or both could be VA5. This term is uncommon and made important by virtue of its vital subjects that redirect to it.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD)
Many world wars besides WWI and WWII have existed, a vital concept for history, politics and culture. 72 interwikis. The Blue Rider23:06, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Widely studied concept per itself but also its implications; important for geography, politics and demography. 77 interwikis. The Blue Rider23:06, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We can probably have some man-eaters on the individual animals section. These animals are held to at least killed 100 people. (There's also the Leopard of Rudraprayag, but we already have the hunter who killed him.)
Support Tsavo man-eaters and the beast of Gevaudan. Oppose Gustave, as it seems to be too recent and we can't see if it's a long-standing topic that has vitality in the future. Makkool (talk) 11:16, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Twitter was much more vital and longstanding than X. As for the above points about why two articles exist, there was a major consensus to split Twitter into two articles. λNegativeMP119:50, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Ghan is the more well-known Australian long-distance train in my experience. Though it is questionable whether either should be listed: the only other train service listed is the Orient Express5.
We are well under the quota for Health, and we are missing a lot of very basic topics. These are definitely more important to include than some random obscure author or actor.
The process where your Immune system3 becomes better at fighting a specific Pathogen4. One way of achieving this is through a Vaccine3. 35 interwikis, rated High-Importance by WikiProject Medicine.
One of the two main immunity strategies found in the Immune system3. The main response found in plants and invertebrates, and the part that isn't specific to diseases you are immune to. 37 interwikis.
This is probably the best known hardness scale for minerals. (Also, I know that this is paradoxical, but I would kind of like to remove the guy who created it. His page is very short, and it doesn't seem like anyone has bothered to write more than a couple of paragraphs on him.)
We really need to work on improving our health list. This medicine is on the WHO List of Essential Medicines, over two million prescriptions in the United States alone. 42 interwikis, rated High-Importance by WikiProject Medicine and WikiProject Epilepsy.
As much as I dislike contributing to the bias against invertebrates, I unfortunately don't see much indication that these fossil arachnids are important enough concepts to be vital articles given their taxonomic recency combined with not being very popular research topics in general. PrimalMustelid (talk) 19:07, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Combining cash crops and large estates, plantations have been important in creating the modern world economy, and they date back to ancient times. Their history is full of exploitation and conflict.
With over 50 million units sold, it is by far the best-selling car in history. The Corolla is emblematic of the Japanese car industry much like the Volkswagen Beetle5 is for Germany.
19:46, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
