Talk:Christmas

Christmas Non-Observance Text/Graphic Conflict for Japan

In the celebration section text, it says "Notable countries in which Christmas is not a formal public holiday include China, (excepting Hong Kong and Macao), Japan..." However, in the graphic to the left, Japan is gray, signaling that Christianity is a public holiday. Does this indicate a difference between "public holiday" and "formal public holiday"? Or should Japan be "not a public holiday but given observance"? Am I missing something else? Thank you to the authors of this comprehensive article. Robigus (talk) 08:51, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Christmas may be observed in Japan in the same way as Hallowe'en, Saint Valentine's Day and the like are observed in various countries, but it is not a public holiday in Japan. Period. Esoglou (talk) 10:03, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

This seems like an biased article for Christmas by the Christians

I wanted to read about the ACTUAL history of Christmas which as I recall was NOT a Christian holiday but a Pagan one. Can we get some more honesty in this article please? Eric Saunders March 8, 2012 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.190.60.1 (talk) 22:49, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, you "recall" incorrectly; Christmas is in no way a pagan holiday. You might be referring to the fact that it was (arguably) placed on December 25 to intentionally absorb pagan festivals that were already occurring at that time, but that doesn't make it a pagan holiday. Many of the modern customs of Christmas do have origins in certain varying pagan traditions, because those festivals were absorbed into Christmas as Christianization was implemented across Europe. That is all already covered in the article. If you have reputable sources that Christmas is a "pagan holiday", please put them forward. — FoxCE (talk • contribs) 22:55, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Well actually, I would say that "Christmas *was* in no way a pagan holiday". A significant part of the discussion that went on on this page until it was archived at the beginning of the year, was basically about the question of whether Christmas has become a pagan holiday. I totally agree that Christmas was originally a Christian holiday, deliberately linked to earlier pagan festivities, and that it has been so for centuries. However, even the Pope acknowledges nowadays that many people celebrate Christmas purely as a pagan holiday or he would not be complaining about it like he did in his Christmas speech. AlexFekken (talk) 11:20, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Merge from Noel

This article is simply a wiktionary-like entry on the French name for Christmas. It should be merged here, if not deleted outright (transwikied to wiktionary, perhaps). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 19:59, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Agreed, I think a redirect to Noel (disambiguation) works nicely. — FoxCE (talk • contribs) 08:24, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Agreed. Makes sense to redirect to dab page. Why have you tagged it as a page move after you had set it up for a redirect? It's not going to be moved anywhere so that template doesn't seem correct. --HighKing (talk) 11:34, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

It was to have an administrator delete the Noel page so that Noel (disambiguation) could be moved to its place. It has now been done by an administrator, all is complete. — FoxCE (talk • contribs) 20:56, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Xmas in infobox

Would it be OK to add Xmas to the nicknames section of the infobox? --HighKing (talk) 18:18, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

I think "Xmas" is a shortened way of writing "Christmas", not a distinct a.k.a. name. Esoglou (talk) 20:33, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

For some, it's an informal shortened name. I realize sometimes it is frowned upon, but that doesn't make it invalid as a nickname. For example, most dictionaries include the term and provide an explanation. --HighKing (talk) 21:38, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

I don't see a problem with including it. It is as appropriate as any of the other entries in that list. — FoxCE (talk • contribs) 01:39, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Unlike "Noel" and "Yule", "Xmas" is not another name for Christmas, but only a different way of writing the same word. "And" and "&" are the same word written differently. The same holds for other examples given in the Xmas article: "Xtianity" a variant representation of "Christianity"; "Xtina" and "Christina" the same word; even "xtal" representing "crystal" and "xant" "chrysanthemum". However, as long as the majority of editors are in favour of treating "Xmas" as a distinct name for Christmas, I will of course let Wikipedia go its own way. Esoglou (talk) 07:24, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

You are correct in that the origins of Xmas stem from representing the word "Christ" with an "X". But "only" a different way of writing the "same" word glosses over the fact that it also has a different pronunciation, and also has different uses (more commercial, and frowned upon a religious setting). --HighKing (talk) 12:42, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Also, is the infobox the correct place to qualify various terms? Shall we add "Most Common" to "Christmas", and "Archaic, rarely used today" to "Yule", and "French derivative" to "Noel"?? --HighKing (talk) 12:46, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Come to think of it, does anyone actually call it "Nativity"??? Why is that linked in that way? --HighKing (talk) 12:49, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

(Sticking to the point under discussion). There are those who, when they meet spellings such as "Xtianity" will say "Ekstianity", "Ekstina", "ekstal", "eksant", "Eksmas", while recognizing that the words are really "Christianity", "Christina", "crystal", "chrysanthemum", "Christmas". The source that in your view shows that "most" dictionaries include the term and provide an explanation does give "kris-muhs" as a pronunciation of "Xmas", indeed as the primary pronunciation. The other dictionary that you cite expressly says that the idea that people unaware of the Greek origin of the "X" in "Xmas" often have of "Xmas" as an informal shortening pronounced "eksmas" is mistaken. Esoglou (talk) 06:45, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Sure, I agree. The teeny point I'm making (and apologies if I'm repeating) is that mistaken or not, the reality is that the "eksmas" pronunciation is also used by some, hence the pronunciation provided. The Xmas article provides an excellent summary.

The qualification after "Xmas" is unnecessary now that I've linked to the Xmas article. --HighKing (talk) 11:50, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Dates of celebration

There was never any issue of celebrating Christmas on May 28, April 18 or the other dates given. Some early writer proposed that Jesus was born on one of these dates. Christmas is by definition on December 25. If John Chrysostom said Jesus was born on some other date, why is that relevant? No modern scholar thinks that the date of Christmas has anything to do with the actual date Jesus was born on. Including this material just confuses the issue. Kauffner (talk) 04:00, 8 April 2012 (UTC)