Jump to content

Talk:2020

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 92.14.210.62 (talk) at 20:39, 3 April 2022 (→‎Nominated for deletion back in 2007). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconHistory: Contemporary C‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
This article is supported by the Contemporary History Task Force (assessed as Top-importance).
WikiProject iconYears C‑class High‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Years, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Years 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.
CThis article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
HighThis article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Scheduled event(July 17 - Planned launch of NASA's Mars 2020 mission) contradicts with cited source

On NASA's website it is said that the launch window is scheduled between July the 22th and August the 11th, yet on Scheduled it is written that the launch is scheduled for July the 17th. I want to fix that, but I don't know if the launch window should be written on there or a single date, since every other event on that article is a single date.

The statement that "2020 has been a highly disruptive year that has been heavily defined by the COVID-19 pandemic and Death of Chadwick Boseman, which has led to global social and economic disruption, mass cancellations and postponements of events, worldwide lockdowns, worldwide protests, and the largest economic recession since the Great Depression of the 1930s." seems inappropriate at best, and an act of vandalism at worst.

There is no equivalence between the COVID-19 pandemic and the Death of Chadwick Boseman. And that's aside from the fact that none of the things it "has led to" can actually be attributed to his death.

Please remove.

Nominated for deletion back in 2007

I know this has no relevance, but can anyone tell me why this was nominated for deletion 14-15 years ago in May of 2007? If nobody responds I can get that you would think a lot of people wouldn't stay on Wikipedia for that long but they do but maybe I'm just wrong sorry 68.50.116.194 (talk) 17:42, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know, the following is speculation: I guess in 2007 someone said: "Oh, that's 13 years in the future, there is nothing we can know about 2020. Let's delete it." and they then discussed it at the nomination page, and someone said "there is a Great_conjunction#2020 in 2020, we certainly know that." and then it wasn't deleted. I guess if you create an article for 2036 today, something similar would happen, were it not for the smart people who created 2030s and 3rd millennium and preempted such problems by redirecting future years to these articles. Once again, I do not know, the above is purely speculation. 91.65.158.14 (talk) 19:56, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And as to staying on WP for that long, I am in my 18th year on here and not planning on leaving.... :-) 91.65.158.14 (talk) 20:01, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

>smart >2030s Okay, bud, lol...

Hanau terrorist attack

Germany had a terrorist attack with 11 dead, I'd guess that is worthy of inclusion: Hanau_shootings But I don't know the exact criteria used here, so I am not WP:BOLD but instead ask for your help and opinion.--91.65.158.14 (talk) 16:42, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just need a reference from a reliable source. Deb (talk) 18:12, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
hey Deb, thanks for your reply. The Associated Press generally is considered reliable: https://apnews.com/article/shootings-turkey-germany-international-news-cultures-b5736c3dba1d677e89ef947bcf5ab213 - If there is a problem with that, the article Hanau_shootings has 43 other references. --91.65.158.14 (talk) 19:46, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, done. Deb (talk) 19:53, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot! 91.65.158.14 (talk) 19:57, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]