20 ms·
Notable items missing from English Wikipedia
- renewiltord 5y agoOh this is entertaining. Thank you. Perhaps I will set one or two of these up.
- mjd 5y agoI'm glad I could help!
- braingenious 5y agohttps://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_down_ass_up https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Face_down_ass_up This disambiguation has two entries, neither of which is the very popular song by 2 Live Crew
- Stratoscope 5y agoI believe that disambiguation pages only link to other Wikipedia articles. There does not appear to be an article about this song, only one about the band: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2_Live_Crew https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2_Live_Crew That page does not mention the song you named, so linking to it from the disambiguation page would just be confusing. If there were an article about the song itself, then it could be listed in the disambiguation page. I wonder if it would be acceptable to add a line like this: Song Name [not linked], a song by Band Name [linked] If you are so motivated, I would start by asking in the Teahouse: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse
- sp332 5y agoOr the album https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banned_in_the_U.S.A https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banned_in_the_U.S.A.
- Stratoscope 5y agoThere you go, maybe that will work. If one of you who is interested in the topic wants to pursue this, I say go for it! If you're new to Wikipedia, it wouldn't hurt to post your proposed addition in the Teahouse and ask if it sounds like a good edit.
- Sebguer 5y agoSeems like someone did exactly this, and so far it's stood.
- YuccaGloriosa 5y ago
- severine 5y agoWow, didn't expect such a "high quality listicle" when I clicked to see if it was worth the upvote and/or the front page. Bye, I'm going down the rabbit hole for the next... minutes? Starting here btw https://www.hfctrust.org/who-we-support/ https://www.hfctrust.org/who-we-support/
- mtmail 5y agoHN is full of interesting https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=wikipedia.org https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=wikipedia.org submissions that never make the frontpage.
- severine 5y agoYeah, and https://www.mostdiscussed.com/ https://www.mostdiscussed.com/ is handy too (I get the titles in my RSS feed), but this isn't a Wikipedia article per se, so I was curious.
- changoplatanero 5y agoi wonder if there is a way to find what are the most popular wiki articles in non english wikipedia that are missing a page in english?
- SOLAR_FIELDS 5y agoA rough but easy to glance at heuristic would be to take the top 100 entries from each non English language Wikipedia and run them through Google translate before searching. Immediate thoughts if that isn’t effective are to increase the search range to 1000 and throw away anything that isn’t a proper noun.
- smegsicle 5y agowikipedia has links for 'this page in other languages', so just looking for popular pages that are missing an english entry should be a pretty good collection of those of course you'd probably find a few which are simply missing the appropriate reference, and it would miss out on pages which have an inaccurate language reference to english, as iirc i've seen a few which i would call a bit too broad
- iamacyborg 5y agoCase in point, the English speaking world does not know about this beauty https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russe_(p%C3%A2tisserie) https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russe_(p%C3%A2tisserie)
- kingcharles 5y agoPublications International v. Meredith Corp is a very important copyright case in the USA. It definitely should have a good article. I hadn't heard of the Knox case, it sounds bizarre. I will have to read it now.
- aaron695 5y ago
- sandworm101 5y agoThe interesting aspect is that it is evidently easier to put something on a personal blog than get it into Wikipedia. Every time I have attempting to make a basic edit, a handful of times over many years, I have been shot down by whatever editor sees themselves as king of that little hill. I doubt any new entry by a new contributor would last 48h. The days of freewheeling openness at wikipedia are long behind us. The "professional volunteers" are in control there.
- emodendroket 5y agoI grew vexed at one point from correcting amateur translations from Japanese that were flat out wrong and seeing them reverted.
- mbustamanter 5y agoThere was also the drama of a teenager that wrote almost most of the articles of Scots wikipedia [0], with almost no knowledge of Scots. Some of the articles have been corrected, but the structure these few articles have is essentially the same as the version the teenager wrote. You might have run into a similar freak. [0] https://www.reddit.com/r/Scotland/comments/ig9jia/ive_discovered_that_almost_every_single_article/ https://www.reddit.com/r/Scotland/comments/ig9jia/ive_discov...
- Tao331 5y agoThat was heartbreaking. I really wanted to believe in Scots Wikipedia.
- teddyh 5y agoLinks? Or, should I say, citation needed?
- user3939382 5y agoEven worse, many of these self-appointed Article Sheriffs are part of little vigilante cliques that include members of varying rank and influence which they call on for reinforcements if they're formally challenged on anything. It's gotten to the point where, to get the full picture of any topic that might be controversial, I immediately skip to the Talk page.
- Toxygene 5y agoYikes, the authors summary of Knox v US sure glosses over a lot of context about the case.
- perardi 5y agoEw…yeah, it sure does, doesn’t it? https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com/&httpsredir=1&article=1100&context=iplj https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=ht... This extensive article goes into the full details of the case. And, from the description in this journal article, the tapes were, as described in the submitted Plover link, rather more than “videotapes of girls in leotards and swimsuits”.
- pokey00 5y agoBacking this up, because without the context I thought it looked like a goofy/funny quirk in the law. But god damn... > The tapes contained numerous vignettes of teenage and preteen females, between the ages of ten and seventeen, striking provocative poses for the camera. The children were obviously being directed by someone off-camera. All of the children wore bikini bathing suits, leotards, underwear, or other abbreviated attire while they were being filmed. The government conceded that no child in the films was nude, and that the genitalia and pubic areas of the young girls were always concealed by an abbreviated article of clothing. The photographer would zoom in on the children's pubic and genital area and display a close-up view for an extended period of time. Most of the videotapes were set to music. In some sequences, the child subjects were dancing or gyrating in a fashion not natural for their age. The films themselves and the promotional brochures distributed by Nather demonstrate that the videotapes clearly were designed to pander to pedophiles. As far as I can find, the conviction was upheld in the end... definitely the right decision.
- voidfunc 5y agoYea I googled for that case and the missing context is important to the outcome... That said, it is pretty messed up, but on the other hand culturally we seem to be OK with those weird little girl fashion/beauty pageants which are also pretty messed up.
- 8bitsrule 5y ago>Here are some items that are notable The definition of 'Notable' is open to interpretation; in WP's case there needs to be an author ready to write the article and assert (with cites) that the subject has enough lasting interest. For example, item: >Publications International v. Meredith Corp ... cookbooks are protected by copyright, the recipes themselves are not. WP already has an article on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meredith_Corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meredith_Corporation]. While it mentions that Meredith "acquired allrecipes.com" in 2012, looks like no contributor since 2005 (17 years ago) has known about and/or seen fit to mention that 1996 case - let alone write an article. If it's really notable, there's room between 1994 and 2012 for a paragraph mentioning the case and citing how important the outcome was. But a whole article? Why?
- williamscales 5y agoMy instinct would be that since it's a significant case, folks are interested independent of Meredith
- ghaff 5y agoIn general, I'd probably be hard put to argue that any SCOTUS case with a written opinion wasn't noteworthy enough to justify an article. And there's almost certainly no shortage of analyses of essentially all cases.
- cryptonector 5y agoThe wikipedia entry for jq was deleted because the person who decided it should be deleted thought it was Stephen Dolan's personal project and not a proper programming language, so fuck it, it's gone [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JQ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JQ]. I gave up arguing about it. It's truly unbelievable. Yeah, it is Stephen Dolan's personal project, and yes, it deserves a wikipedia entry because it's a fascinating and very popular programming language that now has more than one implementation.
- grozzle 5y agoI can't find that previous entry in the edit history, and the talk page history just has one question about Dolan's jq. Where can I see the background you're talking about?
- tjwds 5y agoI had a lot of fun putting my own version of this list together!
- chris_wot 5y agoI was writing about notable Australian women, but was indefinitely banned. Wikipedia doesn’t really care about the articles at this point.
- zaik 5y agoWho?
- julianlam 5y agoBack when I was a younger man, and my company was in its infancy, I made a Wikipedia article for it... it got shot down fairly quickly via the AfD process. It's the Wikipedia process working as it should... we were nobodies back then, and we wanted an article with no sources. Except now my company's article has a black mark on it, and even though we're much larger, used by large corporations, and have some articles written about us, any attempts to revive the article are instantly shot down. So we'll just never be on Wikipedia, that's okay too.
- tptacek 5y agoWhy should your company be in the encyclopedia? If mainstream news sources have written about you, you can probably get there. But why would you?
- CamperBob2 5y agoThe answer to your question lies in the Greek/Latin roots of the word encyclopedia itself, doesn't it?
- tptacek 5y agoThat feels like a flimsy argument.
- CamperBob2 5y agoIt is, certainly. So are the arguments for deletionism, IMO.
- tptacek 5y agoThe arguments for deletionism are far stronger than a mere appeal to etymology.
- Tao331 5y agoHave you seen the amount of stuff in Wikipedia that doesn't really merit an entry? Or noticed that Google usually returns a summary from Wikipedia to tell you what the thing you just searched is? The bar to entry is arbitrarily enforced, and the benefit of being in there is potentially huge.
- laplace2 5y ago"Tourettes Guy" is still banned from Wikipedia and I guess always will be.
- dhx 5y agoI just looked at one example being Richard Dattner who founded Dattner Architects, an architecture firm based in New York City. The Wikidata item for Richard Dattner[1] was created in 2020 by a bot importing data from authority files such as VIAF. Other than being a human with a name, Wikidata didn't know anything else about Richard so I added a few properties from some public sites where the information can be found. I also created a new Wikidata item for the firm Dattner Architects[2] which Richard founded and linked it to other Wikidata items which Wikipedia indicates were architected by this firm. I can see how no one has yet created a Wikipedia page for Richard Dattner or his firm because: 1. There isn't much public information on the Internet about Richard Dattner or Dattner Architects outside a few specialised architecture websites. 2. Not many English Wikipedia pages mention Dattner Architects as being an architect and when they do, it's because Dattner Architects were asked to redesign or upgrade a small part of a building or larger site, and English Wikipedia likes to combine small topics into large topics hence it's very unlikely that a head house (station house) of a larger train station would receive it's own article. Wikidata has no problem with having individual items for specific parts of a park, site or train station but no on has created the subordinate items yet. 3. The firm appears to be mainly involved with New York City based projects and therefore outside of Wikipedia editors interested in New York City architecture, would be less likely to have European editors (for example) interested in creating a new article. [1] https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q94687303 https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q94687303 [2] https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q111631560 https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q111631560
- mjd 5y agoDattner was most active in the 1960s and 1970s. There is a good deal of printed material about him and the adventure playgrounds that dates from that time. But it is not available online; to find it, I needed to walk into actual libraries. Sometimes good research takes actual effort.
- jacobolus 5y agoYou should at the least make a stub article for Dattner with a few sentences about who he was, and a few citations to the most important printed material you found about him. If you have time, you could write a more complete biography of a few paragraphs, again with citations to relevant literature. (And likewise for your other suggestions.) There are many, many interesting people missing from Wikipedia. The only way they ever get added is if those who miss their absence do something about it. Making a list of “stuff missing from Wikipedia” and hosting it at your own site is much less useful.
- causality0 5y agoKnox vs US is interesting. I've encountered more than one foot fetishist who should be in jail by those standards.
- EGreg 5y agoI am proud to say I started this article on Wikipedia back when I was in grad school 18 years ago! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hessian_matrix https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hessian_matrix My contribution: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hessian_matrix&oldid=2827364 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hessian_matrix&... I wrote the original sections, and have watched it evolve over the years. A lot of my original phrases are still in there (eg “However, more can be said from the point of view of [Morse Theory]). I didn’t actually understand Morse Theory, just linked to the article as it seemed relevant. Back then I was a bit of a practical joker (still am) so I pushed the limits a bit and claimed that the Hessian of a higher-dimensional vector space is a tensor of rank 3. I just kind of made that up - generalizing it. The first few years, a few people were a bit bewildered but eventually, an entire theoretical background was produced to support this generalization, and it is now in the article! I find that fascinating :) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Hessian_matrix https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Hessian_matrix
- notimetorelax 5y agoInteresting - you basically have a case of co-authored theory on the Wikipedia pages.
- arc-in-space 5y agoOh, that's hilarious. One thing I notice about math/compsci wiki pages is they're not always fully supported in their references, the authors simply wrote down what they knew, and not that many people are capable of verifying it. But I didn't think you could write down what you don't know and get away with it.
- mjd 5y agoI was reading that one yesterday, in connection with https://math.stackexchange.com/a/4429436/25554 https://math.stackexchange.com/a/4429436/25554 . (The answer that mentioned it has since been deleted.)
- benatkin 5y agoAnother is Cheems - doesn't have its own page on English Wikipedia, does on Spanish Wikipedia: https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheems https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheems Both have Doge pages: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doge_(meme) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doge_(meme) https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doge https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doge
- lkrubner 5y agoI think one could build a much larger list simply by listing important Supreme Court rulings that are still in force, and then seeing which ones don't have an article. Over the last 20 years the Supreme Court has averaged 80 rulings a year, of which perhaps a quarter have long lasting and profound implications. Over the last century there must be something over 1,000 rulings still in force and of significance. But here is a broad and inclusive Wikipedia list, which includes both Federal cases and also Supreme Court cases, and it only has about 300 cases: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_landmark_court_decisions_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_landmark_court_decisio... That suggests there are probably a lot of cases that deserve coverage. Also, there are many Supreme Court rulings that are no longer in force, but which need to be covered for historical reasons, of which the most notorious is probably the Dred Scott decision, followed by the horrendous Plessy v. Ferguson. Indeed, there might easily be 1,000 court cases that are no longer in force but deserve their own article. (But of course, the two cases I just mentioned do have articles in Wikipedia.)
- dirtyid 5y agoI wish Wiki could associate same articles from different languages in a sidebar, perhaps sort by length and last update. Sometimes other languages have better/recent writeups.
- MichaelMoser123 5y agoit might be possible to script that: find a notable article in language A, that doesn't have a translation into language B. i sometimes like to view a wikipedia page some 'other language'; sometimes you can get an additional point of view. What i noticed is that sometimes the function of viewing a page in 'other languages' is broken. (can't remember a specific case right off the top of my head)
- jl6 5y agoWikipedia is going to have a golden age in the 22nd century when many 20th century reliable sources (books, newspapers, TV) fall into the public domain and hence become verifiably citable. So much is digitized but so little is published to open URLs.
- kkfx 5y agoThe issue with Wikipedia is the fact it's a web-app, or something managed by few by technical nature, no matter how many third parties contribute. That's why we need decentralized and distributed tools where it's really hard to centrally govern anything. Think about HN, it's normally user friendly, mods do normally not work to censor but just to keep spam away, however HN is still a centralized services, we are all guest. On Usenet on contrary anyone can run it's own server and it's groups, there are moderated groups with mods acting as gods on land, others full of spam etc but overall a central governance it's not really possible. Now the issue: how to index and present coherent content in such setup. Well... It can be done with a community standard, so no formatted content but only tagged information anyone can inject in it's own template to render and a distributed search like YaCy built-in. Something we already see in many domains, webapp included, to a certain extent. The point is: how many are interested and how many will act against such free system for their own interests?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- theknocker 5y ago
- srvmshr 5y agoI faced an interesting issue where I took a fairly artistic photograph of a heritage monument & added it via my Wiki account to the monument's page. The photograph proliferated across dozens of clickbaity tourist sites & I received a speedy removal notice a year or so later, stating my photograph infringed copyright rules since it was probably taken from public sites. Oh the irony. I am dumbfounded that no effort was made to check the provenance before it was marked for speedy deletion & the appeals process is fairly opaque. I am fairly certain several rich media items would be facing similar fate because rest of the internet finds copypasta easy enough, without writing any credits & Wikipedia believes the media was lifted & not being person's own work. The real loss is emotional to the people who contribute in good faith. Now, it seems my photograph isn't mine & internet moderation has deemed its provenance belongs to some clickbait designer. I was fairly proud of the pretty rainy day pic adorning the article page for a couple of months. It hurts me whenever I think of it. The monument is 'Agrasen ki Baoli', a step well system in New Delhi, India (and a tourist attraction). I had no mental bandwidth to fight this deletion, so let it slide. [1] Talk page: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Souravmishra26#Speedy_deletion_nomination_of_File%3AAgrasenKiBaoli30082016.JPG https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Souravmishra26#Spe... [2] The image in question: https://ecdn.thelistacademy.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/AgrasenKiBaoli30082016.jpg https://ecdn.thelistacademy.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/A...
- cdrini 5y agoOh that sucks, I'm sorry to hear that :( I did some sleuthing and the undeletion rules/procedure really is quite convoluted. But from what I found: - The image was nominated for speedy deletion[1] by Pkbwcgs[2] for F9: Unambiguous Copyright Infringement[3] of this url: https://thelistacademy.com/list/haunted-places-in-india/ https://thelistacademy.com/list/haunted-places-in-india/ on 31 July 2021. - Speedy deletion here means that it would be deleted in < 1 week, assuming the user does not contest the deletion. I can't find if the deletion was contested. - Pkbwcgs is on a semi-retirement/break, according to their talk page. - The image was deleted by Fastily[4] on the same day. Now that the image has been deleted, I think the option here is "Deletion Review". The purpose section is pretty informative (albeit dense): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review#Purpose https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review#Purp... . But the instructions section recommends first contacting "the closer" on their talk page, since that is usually faster. I'm not sure who the closer is exactly in your case, but Fastily looks to be quite active, and since they have admin privileges to delete a page likely has the privileges to undelete a page. Posting a message on their talk page might be your best bet! I found a log of the file and saw that it was uploaded in 2016: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=File:AgrasenKiBaoli30082016.JPG https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=... . Looking at the claimed "source" image url, https://ecdn.thelistacademy.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/AgrasenKiBaoli30082016.jpg https://ecdn.thelistacademy.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/A... , it was clearly uploaded in 2019 to this wordpress site. Long after you uploaded it to Wikipedia. I think you have a pretty solid case! It looks like Fastily also contributes photographs, so hopefully they'll be understanding. Hope you can get it restored! EDIT: Furthermore, the oldest occurrence of this image online according to bing is from 2018: https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailv2&iss=sbi&form=SBIHMP&sbisrc=ImgDropper&q=imgurl:https%3A%2F%2Fecdn.thelistacademy.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2019%2F05%2FAgrasenKiBaoli30082016.jpg&idpbck=1&selectedindex=0&id=https%3A%2F%2Fecdn.thelistacademy.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2019%2F05%2FAgrasenKiBaoli30082016.jpg&ccid=IDR84XCc&mediaurl=https%3A%2F%2Fecdn.thelistacademy.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2019%2F05%2FAgrasenKiBaoli30082016.jpg&exph=1000&expw=800&vt=2&sim=15 https://www.bing.com/images/search?view=detailv2&iss=sbi&for... (Select "Oldest first" in the dropdown) [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_... [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pkbwcgs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pkbwcgs [3]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#F9 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_... [4]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fastily https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Fastily