This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
List of -gate scandals and controversies article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1,
2Auto-archiving period: 183 days
![]() |
![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
![]() | This article was nominated for
deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
![]() | On 1 August 2022, it was proposed that this article be moved to List of scandals and controversies ending in -gate. The result of the discussion was Moved to List of -gate scandals and controversies. |
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Like many lists, this is a target for OR, SYNTH, SPAM, and PROMOTION violations.
Notability is the primary inclusion criteria for all articles (notability in enough RS to survive an AfD). Notability is also a requirement for inclusion in a list article. The quick and easy method we have used for a very long time is somewhat unofficial, but it works very well. Notability must be established/proven by the creation of an article on the topic that would survive an AfD.
The burden of proof is on the proposer for inclusion, so let them create the article first. Even a stub is good enough. It is not the duty of other editors to prove notability by examining the references provided. This has successfully prevented the spam addition of all kinds of frivolous and non-notable topics to our list articles.
We really need to enforce this. I found these discussions in the archive:
Valjean ( talk) 16:00, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
Some event may meet the definition of a scandal, but that is not the only inclusion criteria here. How big a scandal? It has to be really BIG, as in many RS and public recognizability. Lists like this have their own notability criteria, and that is enough notability using that term to have an article with that name. So ask yourself these questions: Is use of the term "Whatevergate" so ubiquitous that WP:Common name allows us to use it as the title of the article or a good section in another article about the incident with many RS? If you said "Whatevergate", would the average person know what you were referring to?
We place the burden of proof on the editor who wishes to include it. It is not our job to doublecheck all the references they use. Let them create the article. If it survives the inevitable AfD(s), where the references will be checked, then we can add it here. With this approach, we prevent misuse of lists for promotion, which is a big problem. Just because 3-4 RS mention the term does not make it a big enough scandal for inclusion here. -- Valjean ( talk) ( PING me) 14:52, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved to List of -gate scandals and controversies. Consensus developed around LaundryPizza03's suggested alternative title, List of -gate scandals and controversies. ( closed by non-admin page mover) – robertsky ( talk) 20:53, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
List of "-gate" scandals and controversies → List of scandals and controversies ending in -gate – This seems to make the most sense, and is somewhat consistent with List of words ending in ology (which I also propose to be moved to List of words ending in -ology). The suffix in the title should be formatted in italics too, so that it shows as List of scandals and controversies ending in -gate and List of words ending in -ology respectively. QueenofBithynia ( talk) 10:09, 1 August 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. signed, 511KeV (talk) 10:35, 8 August 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. CollectiveSolidarity ( talk) 20:43, 15 August 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. CollectiveSolidarity ( talk) 20:44, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
List of -gate scandals and controversiesper MOS:WAW, under which words referred to as words are to be italicized, not quotation-marked. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 16:15, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
Apparently, aquariums are the new pizza: [1] 2604:2D80:6984:3800:0:0:0:AD07 ( talk) 18:07, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Are these three sources [1] [2] [3] (which include The New York Times and Forbes), sufficient to show that the unlawful slaughter of all mink in Denmark, an event which led to snap elections, [4] has been called " Minkgate"? At least one editor does not seem to think so. Here are some additional sources. [5] [6]
References
— BarrelProof ( talk) 17:02, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
Got to admit that I've never seen WP:HEADLINES prior to being cited in this editor's 3rd revert of the day (4th revert overall), but there are at least two WP:RS that can be found in which Qatargate is explicitly mentioned within the body of the article: Politico and The Atlantic. Banana Republic ( talk) 00:18, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
I know it's the actual name of the company, but I think it might be qualified to be added to this list. Pewtercupcakes ( talk) 22:43, 3 July 2023 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
List of -gate scandals and controversies article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives:
1,
2Auto-archiving period: 183 days
![]() |
![]() | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
![]() | This article has been
mentioned by a media organization:
|
![]() | The
contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which has been
designated as a contentious topic. Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page. |
![]() | This article was nominated for
deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:
|
![]() | On 1 August 2022, it was proposed that this article be moved to List of scandals and controversies ending in -gate. The result of the discussion was Moved to List of -gate scandals and controversies. |
![]() | This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Like many lists, this is a target for OR, SYNTH, SPAM, and PROMOTION violations.
Notability is the primary inclusion criteria for all articles (notability in enough RS to survive an AfD). Notability is also a requirement for inclusion in a list article. The quick and easy method we have used for a very long time is somewhat unofficial, but it works very well. Notability must be established/proven by the creation of an article on the topic that would survive an AfD.
The burden of proof is on the proposer for inclusion, so let them create the article first. Even a stub is good enough. It is not the duty of other editors to prove notability by examining the references provided. This has successfully prevented the spam addition of all kinds of frivolous and non-notable topics to our list articles.
We really need to enforce this. I found these discussions in the archive:
Valjean ( talk) 16:00, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
Some event may meet the definition of a scandal, but that is not the only inclusion criteria here. How big a scandal? It has to be really BIG, as in many RS and public recognizability. Lists like this have their own notability criteria, and that is enough notability using that term to have an article with that name. So ask yourself these questions: Is use of the term "Whatevergate" so ubiquitous that WP:Common name allows us to use it as the title of the article or a good section in another article about the incident with many RS? If you said "Whatevergate", would the average person know what you were referring to?
We place the burden of proof on the editor who wishes to include it. It is not our job to doublecheck all the references they use. Let them create the article. If it survives the inevitable AfD(s), where the references will be checked, then we can add it here. With this approach, we prevent misuse of lists for promotion, which is a big problem. Just because 3-4 RS mention the term does not make it a big enough scandal for inclusion here. -- Valjean ( talk) ( PING me) 14:52, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: Moved to List of -gate scandals and controversies. Consensus developed around LaundryPizza03's suggested alternative title, List of -gate scandals and controversies. ( closed by non-admin page mover) – robertsky ( talk) 20:53, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
List of "-gate" scandals and controversies → List of scandals and controversies ending in -gate – This seems to make the most sense, and is somewhat consistent with List of words ending in ology (which I also propose to be moved to List of words ending in -ology). The suffix in the title should be formatted in italics too, so that it shows as List of scandals and controversies ending in -gate and List of words ending in -ology respectively. QueenofBithynia ( talk) 10:09, 1 August 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. signed, 511KeV (talk) 10:35, 8 August 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. CollectiveSolidarity ( talk) 20:43, 15 August 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. CollectiveSolidarity ( talk) 20:44, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
List of -gate scandals and controversiesper MOS:WAW, under which words referred to as words are to be italicized, not quotation-marked. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 16:15, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
Apparently, aquariums are the new pizza: [1] 2604:2D80:6984:3800:0:0:0:AD07 ( talk) 18:07, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Are these three sources [1] [2] [3] (which include The New York Times and Forbes), sufficient to show that the unlawful slaughter of all mink in Denmark, an event which led to snap elections, [4] has been called " Minkgate"? At least one editor does not seem to think so. Here are some additional sources. [5] [6]
References
— BarrelProof ( talk) 17:02, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
Got to admit that I've never seen WP:HEADLINES prior to being cited in this editor's 3rd revert of the day (4th revert overall), but there are at least two WP:RS that can be found in which Qatargate is explicitly mentioned within the body of the article: Politico and The Atlantic. Banana Republic ( talk) 00:18, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
I know it's the actual name of the company, but I think it might be qualified to be added to this list. Pewtercupcakes ( talk) 22:43, 3 July 2023 (UTC)