Talk:Expo 2025 pavilions

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:36, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Replaced photo with cropped version that does not show the Gundam statue next to the pavilion. -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 16:57, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:51, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Typo

There is a typo in the article instead of saying ... "out of" it says "put of" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.58.160.235 (talk) 02:08, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed You are welcome to fix typos or make other improvements yourself. -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 07:36, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is this actually a "class=List" article or something else?

The Expo 2025 pavilions article currently uses the class=List parameter in the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template. Is this correct? The article seems as if it has evolved into something more than a stand alone list (according to WP:RATER it is "B" rated at over 90% probability). -- Cl3phact0 (talk) 15:49, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ORES (the rating system Rater relies on) actually predicts that this is a GA, but that is beside the point as it cannot predict whether something is a list. However, lists with extensive prose do exist, and this is still mostly a list, despite having several paragraphs of prose. – Epicgenius (talk) 16:39, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks. Seemed like a question worth asking. Cheers, Cl3phact0 (talk) 17:15, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Request for help

@Epicgenius, I'm having a major issue with this list, because this is missing an entire category of entries. Type B pavilions are completely absent from this list because I remember blowing up the section due to sourcing issues. The only RS available on Type B pavilions is [1], as there is an unusually high absence of coverage on Type B pavilions. I was hoping that the media will cover them once the Expo starts, but it seems that I was wrong to expect something good out of these media companies.

In my original research, I kind of know pavilions like Brazil's [2] are Type B pavilions, but again even articles about them fail to mention them being Type B, so screw that as well. This is starting to tick me off. I at least want to add some sort of a disclaimer warning about the major gap, but I'm not sure if that is even allowed. AlphaBetaGamma (Talk/report any mistakes here) 01:38, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@AlphaBetaGamma, yeah it really sucks that sources don't mention Type B pavilions at all. I would personally add a sentence under "Other pavilions" or something, stating that there are type B pavilions. Wikipedia:No disclaimers discourages disclaimers in general, but something like "Type B pavilions are not listed here" should be OK, I think. – Epicgenius (talk) 01:49, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:54, 29 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

allikas: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_talk:Expo_2025_pavilions