Talk:List of lists of lists

Please place new discussions at the bottom of the talk page.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of lists of lists article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated. Please read recent comments and look in the archives before commenting. Restarting a debate that has already been settled constitutes disruptive editing, tendentious editing, and "asking the other parent", unless consensus changes.

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination:

Deletion discussions:
snow keep, 8 December 2019, see discussion. snow keep, 9 August 2017, see discussion. snow keep, 7 June 2015, see discussion. keep, 21 August 2012, see discussion. Speedy keep withdrawn, 18 June 2012, see discussion. Withdrawn, 11 April 2012, see discussion.

Lists Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Libraries Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Libraries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Libraries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LibrariesWikipedia:WikiProject LibrariesTemplate:WikiProject LibrariesLibraries
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:

Alexis Kleinman and Maxwell Strachan (14 January 2015). "The 49 Most Entertaining Wikipedia Entries Ever Created". The Huffington Post. Retrieved 15 January 2015. Just what it says, but five times better than it sounds.
Mike Vago (10 August 2015). "Wikipedia devours itself with a list of lists of lists". The A.V. Club. Retrieved 12 August 2015.
Caitlin Dewey (6 November 2015). "Demon cats, helicopter escapes and crayon colours: The most fascinating Wikipedia articles you haven't read". National Post. Retrieved 10 November 2015.
Cecily Mauran (5 February 2022). "10 Wikipedia rabbit holes to fall down instead of doomscrolling". Mashable.

Archives

Index

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 3 sections are present.

Should the list contain itself?

I hit the undo button on someone removing the self reference because I thought that I would have somewhere I could explain why I was undoing it, but it just went through. In my opinion, as this is a list of lists of lists, it should contain all lists containing other lists; and as the page does contain lists, it would be incomplete without itself. Is there a mention in a style guide somewhere that you shouldn't link an article back to itself or something? Will Hendrix (talk) 04:38, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This has been discussed a lot of times in the talk page archives. Example: here. The argument in favor of including it is 1. it's technically correct. this page is a list, and everything listed on this page is also a list, so this page is a list of lists, so it belongs on this page. 2. there is some encyclopedic value in linking to recursion (last I checked it linked to russell's paradox but recursion is fine too). 3. it's fairly long standing consensus to include it. Arguments against including it were gut feeling / taste / WP:IDONTLIKEIT. It could make sense to argue that it's a bit silly and therefore takes away from the seriousness of this page... but this page is silly to begin with, so it's actually a net positive in my eyes. Another argument against including it is WP:SELFLINK which says it's generally not recommended, but obviously WP:IAR because this page is clearly a special case (I can't think of any other page that rightly ought to link to itself). Leijurv (talk) 05:51, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell, this page is purely for navigation. It only documents list of lists that exist on Wikipedia, thus its soul purpose is only to help in one's navigation of this website. To this end, documenting this article in itself is pointless and should be removed. Loytra (talk) 10:01, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think this page is pretty impractical for navigation. This page is a curiosity, a bit of silliness. I can't think of any practical reason why one would want to see a list of all pages that are two levels deep of lists. Even if you had such a reason, this page does count as a list of lists :) Leijurv (talk) 19:12, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think we just need a list of lists of lists of lists. That should solve it. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:42, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

List of lists of lists of lists was salted until recently haha Leijurv (talk) 22:28, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The current list is getting too long to navigate comfortably so it seems inevitable. And even higher? Maybe in the next age. This would seem absurd, and these lists themselves aren't encyclopaedic but arbitrary categories, so I think technically it shouldn't fall into the same remit as the other Wikipedia rules. Lightbloom (talk) 22:16, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is actually a potential practical argument here:

Let's say I am looking for some kind of overview about interesting topics related to Japan, then, using Ctrl-F "Japan" in this article is a decent option. More generally, this implies that splitting this article into smaller "Lists of Lists"-articles, one per potentially interesting high-level topic (like "Japan"), and then making one "Lists of Lists of Lists" article which lists all those "Lists of Lists"-articles, has some merit.

But... yeah, it's quite silly, but perhaps still worth a consideration. 2001:A61:2A48:B101:BCA9:1D1A:4901:401 (talk) 19:51, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"List of lists" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect List of lists has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 17 § List of lists until a consensus is reached. – BrandonXLF (talk) 09:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maintance page

I would consider this a maintance list, not in interest of a encyclopedia reader, move to Wikipedia namespace. Luhanopi (talk) 15:59, 11 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]