Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/December 8

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Q1: Why is [Insert event here], an event that is "more important and significant" than all the others that are currently listed, not posted?
A1: Relative article quality along with the mix of topics already listed are often deciding factors in what gets posted. Any given day of the year can have a great many important or significant historical events. The problem is that there is generally only room on the Main Page to list about 5 events at a time, so not everything can be posted.
As stated on Wikipedia:FAQ/Main Page, the items and events posted on the Main Page are chosen based more on how well they are written, not based on how much important or significant their subjects are. It is easier for admins to select a well-written, cited, verifiable article over a poor one versus trying to determine objectively how much a subject is important or significant.
Keep in mind that the quality requirements only apply to the selected bolded article, not the other links. Thus, an event may qualify for multiple dates in a year if there is an article written in a summary style and an article providing detailed content; if one of those pages have cleanup issues, the other page can be bolded as an alternate.
Another criterion is to maintain some variety of topics, and not exhibit, just for example, tech-centrism, or the belief that the world stops at the edge of the Anglosphere. Many days have a large pool of potential articles, so they will rotate in and out every year to give each one some Main Page exposure. In addition, an event is not posted if it is also the subject of this year's scheduled featured article or featured picture.
Q2: There are way too many 20th-century events listed. Why aren't there more events from the 19th century and before?
A2: The short, basic reason is the systemic bias of Wikipedia. There are not enough good, well-written articles on 19th-century and earlier events for all 365 days in the year. Currently, a majority of users seem to be generally more interested in writing articles about recent events. If you would like to further help mitigate the systemic bias in Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias.
Q3: This page seems to be biased toward events based in [Insert country or region here]. What can be done about it?
A3: This again is attributed to the systemic bias of Wikipedia. Many users are generally more interested in working on good, well-written articles pertaining to their home country. Since this is the English Wikipedia, there will be more English-speaking users, and thus more articles pertaining to English-speaking countries. And if there are more users who are from the United States, there will probably be more well-written articles about events based in the United States. Again, if you would like to further help mitigate the systemic bias in Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias.
Q4: Why is the birthday of [Insert name here] not listed?
A4: Births and deaths can only be used on centennials, etc. Exceptions can be made if they are directly related to assassinations, executions, natural disasters, civil accidents, genocide/extinction, or other historically significant topics that frequently appear on the Selected Anniversaries pages.
Q5: Are the holidays/observances listed in any particular order?
A5: Yes, there is a specified order: International observances first, then alphabetically by where observed. But this is a recent change (1 June 2011), so not every page has been updated to reflect this.
Q6: Some of the holidays/observances that are listed have dates in parentheses beside them. What do they mean?
A6: There are two reasons that some holidays/observances have dates next to them:
  • Non-Gregorian-based holidays/observances are marked with the current year as a reminder to others that their dates do in fact vary from year to year.
  • National Days, Independence Days, and other holidays celebrating the nationhood of a country are generally marked by the year of the significant historic date being observed.
Today's featured article for December 8, 2014 Today's featured picture for December 8, 2014
Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 8, 2014

viewtalkedit

None selected. See Wikipedia:Picture of the day/Guidelines for help.

create

Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/December 7 * Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/December 9


John Lennon[edit]

Prevously posted on WP:ERRORS:

(12/8) Not an error exactly, but I would have worded it 1980 - Former Beatle John Lennon was shot and killed outside of the Dakota apartments in New York City. Why give Chapman the publicity? Tvoz |talk 05:26, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

While I agree with your point, but the re-write you suggested is in the passive voice. I suppose the preference here is to use the active voice. ~Sasha Callahan (Talk) 05:41, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Those positions aren't opposites - they could both be satisfied with a version like "...Lennon died of gunshots outside of..." or "...gunshots received outside of..." Art LaPella (talk) 06:00, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
True, I was only commenting on the suggestion given. How about "Former Beattle John Lennon dies of four gunshot wounds, including one to the heart, sustained outside the Dakota" ~Sasha Callahan (Talk) 06:09, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
That would be fine - I wasn't thinking about the active vs passive voice. Tvoz |talk 16:21, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Why give Chapman the publicity? He's had that since 2004...[1] Zzyzx11 (Talk) 06:37, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Surely that's not a good enough reason to continue it. Tvoz |talk 16:21, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Our concern here is presenting information. To withhold pertinent (and already widely-available) information because we don't like the guy is not exactly the encyclopedic thing to do. -Elmer Clark (talk) 20:27, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
It's not a matter of withholding information - it's a matter of how the item is slanted, what is the emphasis. The notable thing that happened on Dec 8 1980 is what happened to Lennon - and I think it should not have been framed in terms of Chapman's action, making him the centerpiece- it is about Lennon's death. Active voice is not the most important consideration anyway - but even with it there are ways of stating this without making it a piece of news about Chapman. Do we say On September 30, 1955, Donald Turnupseed crossed into the car lane that James Dean was driving in, and killed him? For all I know we do, and if so, I'd object there too. It's news about James Dean, even if we have to write it in passive voice, not news about Donald Turnupseed. Tvoz |talk 03:10, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Pretty much any sentence can be re-written into the active voice. For the example you gave "James Dean dies after a car crash on..." ~Sasha Callahan (Talk) 03:16, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Right, as you suggested above: Former Beatle John Lennon dies after four gunshot wounds, including one to the heart etc. My objection is to the construction Mark David Chapman does such and such. If he had shot and killed an anonymous person that day it would have made the news in New York, but it wouldn't be commemorated 27 years later, is my guess. The story is not about Chapman, it's about Lennon, and the item should be about Lennon, that's all. Can we note the archives so the same thing isn't perpetuated next year? Tvoz |talk 03:23, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
If Chapman didn't shoot, there would be no story. Both are important. Lennon is more important, though. Please leave things as is. --74.13.130.57 (talk) 05:52, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
My point exactly - Lennon is more important. I don't care if we include Chapman's name or not - this isn't about "don't speak the monster's name", it's merely putting the focus on the important person in the exchange, not somehow elevating Chapman into equal or greater importance in the event. We also wouldn't say Yoko Ono watches as her husband John Lennon is shot dead in front of her. If we must, put Chapman in at the end of the sentence - but the focus should be on Lennon - if he had been hit by a cab it wouldn't say Joe Cabdriver runs over John Lennon, killing him. Or it shouldn't. Tvoz |talk 18:35, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

John Lennon -- Murdered vs. Assassinated[edit]

The prevailing theory is that Lennon was murdered, not assassinated. Or, more precisely, when people say Lennon was "assassinated," they tend to mean he was sent by the CIA to kill Lennon. If you say Lennon was murdered (as most people do) you tend to believe he was killed by a nutcase.JoelWhy (talk) 19:04, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Changed to "shot and killed". howcheng {chat} 20:23, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

2011 notes[edit]

--howcheng {chat} 22:27, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

2012 notes[edit]

howcheng {chat} 12:49, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

2013 notes[edit]

howcheng {chat} 05:31, 8 December 2013 (UTC)