Wikipedia talk:Move navigational lists to portal namespace

message: Note that a search for "list topics" returned 15,662 hits. If we decide to move all lists of topics to portal space, we will need to automate the process. I think it is an interesting idea and needs to be explored, but the benefits will have to be worth the effort required to make the conversion. -- Donald Albury 15:14, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Hm. The thing is, I don't think it's possible to use a bot as even categories can't be relied on - for an example, :Category:Mathematics-related_lists has articles such as Lists of integrals and List of limits. It may be possible using something like AWB, but that's Windows-only and I'm on Linux, so it's not practical for me to investigate. -Halo (talk) 15:25, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  I fully support this proposal, but it would definitely be difficult to implement. I do think that the redirects should remain in place to help people find these pages. Pyrospirit (talk · contribs) 15:42, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It's very important that these lists be easy to find.  If these articles are moved to portal namespace, I would strongly support keeping the article title as a redirect even though this is not normally done for cross-namespace redirects. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 17:12, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. Mathematics portal and Economics portal already link to the expected pages, so perhaps it's not such a big deal with portals -Halo (talk) 17:25, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I disagree - I think moving specific lists one at a time will cause more grief than a centralised discussion -Halo (talk) 16:43, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Discussion is fine. But this proposal seeks to overturn a previous and highly contentious decision with regard to Lists of mathematics topics. Does anyone here know of any previous discussions regarding any of the other affected lists? Andrewa (talk) 21:59, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

text: You mean, with the proposal to move all the navigational lists? Just seeking clarification, your indenting leaves some doubt in my mind as to exactly which idea you mean. Andrewa (talk) 21:59, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The initial proposal as it stands is what I agree with. Ambitious, but worthwhile. Your concerns below about providing sufficient notice before the move are also appropriate to the scope of this change. ClaudeReigns (talk) 05:49, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Andrewa, I challenge you to convince us that lists of mathematics topics should be considered "navigational".  Don't just act as if that's self-evident and uncontroversial; give us your arguments. Michael Hardy (talk) 22:06, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Initial comments 

message: Obviously, lists of mathematics topics is not intended to be used only, or even primarily, for navigation.  "Navigation" means finding your way to where you want to get to when you have in mind some specific place you want to get to.  I think if I regarded this is a "navigational list", I might not object to putting it in the portal space.
: 
Andrewa, I challenge you to convince us that lists of mathematics topics should be considered "navigational".  Don't just act as if that's self-evident and uncontroversial; give us your arguments. Michael Hardy (talk) 22:06, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Lists of mathematics topics" is NOT a "navigational list" 

message: Last posts seem to be about a month ago, what happened with this?  If it's still up in the air, I fully support it.  I've been quite frustrated with the proliferation of lists and think they'd make much more sense in Portal space, particularly if associated with specific portals.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 05:34, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Is this still under discussion? 

message: with the aggressive pushing of Wikipedia:Outlines by  since May or June 2009, this problem has again become much more urgent. We are now not looking at a few scattered "lists of topics", we are looking at a concerted effort of creating a list-like shadow article for each major (and not-so-major) topic.
"Outlines" are essentially "navigational lists" reloaded, on a much larger scale, and pushed with an astounding amount of "criminal energy", to the point where full article WP:LEADs are copy-pasted to the top of the lists, the lists are touted in talkpage templates and by  templates. --dab (𒁳) 09:59, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: "Outlines"

message: This is an 18 months old rejected proposal, yet I see the page has been edited recently. I would advise those interested purely to see it as historical and not to edit or try to resurrect it - some of the criticism of this proposal is now moot, and the baggage resurrecting this exact proposal wouldn't be helpful in any attempt to resurrect the core idea. 
However, I firmly believe that the core idea still should be implemented, especially now there is a clearer distinction between an 'index' and an 'outline' over pure lists as the ambiguity of what an encyclopedic list was which caused this to be rejected the first time around. If someone wishes to create a similar proposal, I suggest creating a new page writing up the details of the proposal, posting it in relevant places (posting in the village pump, WP:CENT, the "lists" page, the relevant portals, proposed renames etc). -Halo (talk) 17:32, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that this page should remain historical only. The Transhumanist 18:41, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Old proposal...