|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 1993 article.|
|WikiProject Years||(Rated List-class, Mid-importance)|
Page layout years
There is a discussion on my talk page on page layout.
For most of the last three hundred years there is inconsistency and duplication between the year in topic paragraph, the "see also" box and what is on the year by topic pages. Prior to 1950 I am pretty convinced we can painlessly (except for sore fingers) delete all of the year in topic paragraphs and ensure that the material goes into a "see also" box, creating such a box where none exists. Post 1950, particularly from the "year in US television" link a lot of material has been added to this paragraph as highlights (sometimes making up most of the page content pointed at).
Personally I think we should still delete the paragraph, keep the box linking to the topic sites and move any particularly important parts of the year in topic paragraph to the main chronological list. This does involve undoing quite a bit of work which someone has done.
Therefore, unlike for prior to 1950 (where I've said no objection= I do it) for post 1950 I won't touch these pages unless a significant number of people agree with the change. (I am also unlikely to get the pre 1950 stuff done before summer unless the service speed improves dramatically). talk--BozMo 13:42, 7 May 2004 (UTC)
Charles Manson's son's suicide
Do we really need all four milestones for Andrew Wiles and Fermat's last theorem on here (June 21, 22, 23, 24)? Can't we remove the lectures and just have the date of the solution on there? If there are no objections over the next few days, I'll remove the three lecture dates. --ParkerHiggins | Talk 21:52, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
Birthday for Crazy frog
Should we have a "birthday" listed for a fictional advertising character such as Crazy frog? I deleted it, but it was restored, and I don't feel like getting into a revert war. -- ArglebargleIV 19:37, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
- I agree, and removed it again. --TM 20:13, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
"October 13 - Angela Chandler, A serial killer who was only 14 at the times of her killings. She killed over 400 people in one week in horribly gruesome ways. She was not mentally ill, and claims she did it because she needed entertainment. She specified that there will be a murder of Christina Culley out of revenge for false accusations of committing a prank call. After being released from juvenile hall, she went on to a Catholic Private all girl school in southern California, whose name has been withheld due to security reasons."
"November 2 – TJ Burgess was born on this day and is cooler than Alex Jolly because Jolly thinks he is good at guitar. He is not and Tj will one day be the ruler of all the world mwahhahahaaaaaa.", that's sounds like rubbish to me m w (talk) 16:48, 7 October 2009 (UTC)Phthinosuchusisanancestor
Ruby programming language
"February 24 - Yukihiro Matsumoto starts working on the Ruby programming language."
Grammar and Style
"June 8 – In Paris, Christian Didier breaks into the home of René Bousquet, banker and former Vichy France administrator, and shoots him dead."
It seems to me like the phrase "shoots him dead" could be reworded to, say, "shoots him to death". I've taken the liberty of changing it. --Robe 20:26, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
- Sorry, but "shoots him dead" is the correct wording; "shoots him to death" is not very good English. I've revert it. -- MightyWarrior (talk) 10:28, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
- More nonsense than usual. Please get consensus at Wikipedia:WikiProject Years, or some other appropriate group, before making edits which disagree with both the real world and consensus. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 00:42, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
- No, because there's no year zero in the Anno Domini / Common Era, so it's the 1993rd year of said era. For the same reason, while it's the 994th year of the 1000s and the 94th year of the 1900s, it's still the 993rd year of the second millennium and the 93rd year of the twentieth century. It would also be the 3rd year of the "200th decade" if we talked about that; it's just that that's not common usage. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hymnodist.2004 (talk • contribs) 04:03, 2 March 2014 (UTC)