Talk:April 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Days of the year
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Days of the Year, a WikiProject dedicated to improving and maintaining the style guide for date pages.
This box: viewtalkedit
Selected anniversaries for the "On this day" section of the Main Page
Please read the selected anniversaries guidelines before editing this box.

April 3

Osborne 1 portable computer
Osborne 1 portable computer

Mary Carpenter (b. 1807) · Tony Benn (b. 1925) · Graham Greene (d. 1991)

More anniversaries:

Error? (moved from (Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/April 3)[edit]

Whoa... for April 3 it has "1968 - Elvis Presley sings "Heartbreak Hotel" on the Milton Berle Show, with an estimated 25% of the United States population viewing." That can't be right. I'm pretty sure that Elvis made his comback special in 1968; it couldn't have anything do with Milton Berle, whose show ended long before 1968. Maybe the person means 1958? And Ed Sullivan? (posted by User: at 06:35 UTC, 2005 September 22.)

Kamen Rider premier[edit]

--SB | T 23:59, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Star Trek is a bigger franchise,and it isn't listed in date articles, either.. Star Trek's cultural footprint is huge - with thousands of Wikipedia articles linking to the main Star Trek article. Here's another example, The Beatles have over 5,000 cross-links. In order to argue that a franchise beginning rates mention in a date article, it really should have a big cultural footprint. You've mentioned movies, and a couple of countries, but what's the actual impact? How does Kamen Rider compare? After checking "What links here", we can see that Kamen Rider has as about many cross-links as Elmo. And that's just not a big enough foot print. With Elmo as the standard, date articles would be flooded with such "events" and rendered nearly useless. There is talk of setting up additional types of date articles to cover entertainment, weddings, etc. So don't give up hope. Rklawton 00:02, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
The only thing the 'what links here" data indicates is that Wikipedia is lacking in coverage of Kamen Rider, which is something I already knew and am attempting to rectify. Please provide valid reasoning that actually make sense.--SB | T 17:23, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
I'd like to mention that the number of cross-links of an article does not provide credence to the cultural impact of something. It's evident, to me at least, that Kamen Rider has had something like the impact of Star Trek, albiet not in the United States. Bastiqueparler voir 17:31, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

What do you propose to use as a measure of impact? Rklawton 23:46, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I think, frankly, to continue to reject pure nonsense or complete non-notable events, and judge the remainder on a case-by-case basis, then everything will be all right. That's the way it's been done, correct?
I don't question your judgment Rklawton, you are a valuable contributor. I simply believe that leaving this item off may not adequately reflect a worldview. Bastiqueparler voir 21:22, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
I appreciate your concerns regarding world view. I used Google to support my conclusions. Unless there's something self-selecting about this particular fan-base that would preclude them from mentioning Kamen Rider on the web, then it's a reasonable measure. Of course, I've overlooked an important aspect. I've only searched on "Kamen Rider." Are there other permutations or character sets that should be included? After all, if this is a Japanese phenom, then it seems appropriate to search using the various Japanese character sets as well. Rklawton 21:38, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
I just checked "仮面ライダ" (from the article page) on Google and came up with only 86,000 hits. However, I think "Masked Rider" translates as "仮面". This returned 7 million hits. "Star Trek" returns 47 million hits - illustrating my point about footprint. If you can recommend a different search, that would be useful. Rklawton 21:44, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I actually watched this show when I was a kid growing up on the other side of the planet in the 1970s where it was and still is known as 幪面超人. It's very notable. 星空奇遇 (Star Trek) was not as popular back then. Both shows were dubbed in Chinese, in case anyone is wondering. I support the inclusion of the premiere in the events list, and even as a Selected Anniversary on MainPage, as long as the date & time is verifiable. -- PFHLai 04:57, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

BTW, language aside, I don't think checking the internet is that useful to determine the notability of things most popular before the internet age. The first 2 waves of 幪面超人-mania in the Far East (at least in Hong Kong & Taiwan) took place in the 70s and 80s (no internet), roughly the time between when Captain Kirk left and Captain Picard appeared on TV screens. Star Trek then kept going strong, with subsequent spin-offs and movies coming on as the internet grew. This may explain the big difference in Google counts. The numbers would be quite different if people were able to build websites and blogs in the 70s. -- PFHLai 06:53, 10 August 2006 (UTC) [P.S. Thanks for bringing back some interesting childhood memories. :-) ]

So the show was greatly popular during its run - in one country - and had minimal lasting impact afterwards. It sounds like you've got the makings for a great article, but not for any entry of events with a global historical magnitude. Rklawton 14:32, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
Rklawton, I hope this is just a careless mistake. But to lump China and Japan as one country (Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere???) is rather offensive. I'll apply WP:AGF, as I'm sure you didn't mean it.
I was refering only to Japan. Rklawton 19:36, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
While I was referring to Hong Kong and Taiwan, i.e. China. -- PFHLai 20:51, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
I can't say much about things after the 80s, as I've moved to the other side of the planet. But I'd say 幪面超人 is still a East Asian cultural phenomenon. (Ditto for Ultraman.) It's not Godzilla, but it's high up there in terms of notability.
Furthermore, please consider regional historical magnitude, instead of global. Back then, things didn't spread that widely. While the event lists are often loaded with non-notable items that deserve to be trimmed off, let's not over-do it with the trimming. The first appearance of 幪面超人 is a worthy item for the events list. --PFHLai 19:20, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
If you'll read the date articles' project page, you'll see we're trying to limit events to those of global significance. Rklawton 19:36, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
I know. I'm saying, in this case, you are cutting too much. -- PFHLai 20:51, 10 August 2006 (UTC) Especially with the first issue of the TV Guide still on the list. Who outside USA & Canada would read it ? -- PFHLai 21:02, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
The TV Guide is still there, so I've returned Kamen Rider to the list. --PFHLai 14:17, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

On a different note, I'm a big fan of Ultra Man, Godzilla, and Johnny Sokko and his Flying Robot. My poor parents had to contend with a kid who thought stomping on his toys was all part of the fun. I doubt they ever understood. They never ever considered helping me build a model train set. Just as well, I suppose. It wouldn't have lasted. I finally did learn how to fly, though. Rklawton 19:36, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Good for you. :-) BTW, I was never a fan of 幪面超人. But I have childhood friends who would jump off their bicycle, pretending to be 幪面超人 flying off his motorcycle. --PFHLai 20:51, 10 August 2006 (UTC)


Can we get a source cited for the death of Jesus Christ being dated at April 3, 33? 18:19, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

See Chronology of Jesus#Day of death. April 3, 33 is just one of several possibilities. -- 20:28, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
The webpage has been updated since 2007. This is because according to the 2011 book by Colin Humphreys, April 3 in AD 33 is the only possible crucifixion date compatible with all four gospels. Previously, AD30 (April 7) and AD33 (April 3) had both been frontrunners among scholars, based on Isaac Newton's method, developed in 1733, of calculating the Jewish Passovers during Pontius Pilate's time. Newton was a smart guy, but did not have access to supercomputers, which have allowed the modern calculations. Hence I suggest implementing the modern scholarly date of April 3, AD33. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:26, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Binghamton shootings[edit]

The Binghamton shootings, while newsworthy, cannot at this point be considered long-term globally notable events per WP:DOY. They fall under similar classification as most school shootings and should not be listed on this date page. If they turn out to have a widespread impact in a legal or cultural area, then we can begin to debate their notability for inclusion. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 16:22, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Birthday error? Mick Mars[edit]

Mick Mars is shown as birthday celebrant for April 3. However, his page lists his birth date as May 4, 1951. One of these is obviously incorrect???? Gaiamei (talk) 18:16, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Ice Cream Sundae invented[edit]

3rd April 1892: Ice Cream Sundae invented. The world-famous dessert, which is made using a combination of ice cream and syrup, was invented in 1892 by New York soda fountain proprietor Chester Platt.

birth year error[edit]

the birth year of Jaya Prada,indian actor is 1962. please change the year.Kvr.lohith (talk) 16:27, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Date of death of Jesus[edit]

Query to RMs125a in particular:

I have tried adding the calculated crucifixion date of Jesus as follows:

You have reverted my edit with the mysterious reason that it is "conjecture" and "speculation", and point to a Wikipedia link, but the Wiki link you provide does not work. So please explain.— Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:38, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

The point is that I understand you are editing in good faith but additions to DOY (days of the year) pages cannot have external links. That is why I suggested you include your sourced text in an appropriate standalone article (or articles) instead (i.e. Christ, etc). Quis separabit? 16:58, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
"You have reverted my edit with the mysterious reason that it is "conjecture" and "speculation" -- there is nothing mysterious at all about that -- by your own word it is only "possible" -- which therefore makes it speculative, and thus ineligible for inclusion on DOY (days of the year) pages and, if included in standalone articles, must be reliably sourced. The sourcing appears to be reliable, and, again, no one is questioning your good faith, so I see no problem including the text in a directly related standalone article, as pointed out above. Quis separabit? 16:58, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for answering Quis separavit. RMS125a seems to be offline, or on sleep duty. Yes, April 3 and April 7 are the two possible dates, with the former now receiving additional astronomical support, and the later being astronomically excluded, but nevertheless widely cited. Please let me know the Wikipedia guideline for such a situation - it is not mentioned on the DOY link you provide, as far as I can see. Imagine a similar situation where a famous mountaineer is killed while climbing Mount Everest, and his body is found later and his death is presumed to be April 3 or April 4, judging by his last diary entries. So does that mean a famous person like this imaginary mountaineer, with two widely cited death dates, cannot be mentioned in the Wiki DOY pages? If so, then you need to remove the Jesus date, but first you need to rewrite the DOY guidelines accordingly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:25, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
"Quis separabit" is the signature of RMS125a. Just so you know. -- The Voidwalker Discuss 22:23, 30 April 2016 (UTC)


  1. ^ Colin Humphreys, The Mystery of the Last Supper Cambridge University Press 2011 ISBN 978-0-521-73200-0, page 194
  2. ^ Blinzler, J. Der Prozess Jesu, fourth edition, Regensburg, Pustet, 1969, pp 101-126
  3. ^ Colin Humphreys, The Mystery of the Last Supper Cambridge University Press 2011 ISBN 978-0-521-73200-0, pages 14 and 62
  4. ^ Blinzler, J. Der Prozess Jesu, fourth edition, Regensburg, Pustet, 1969, pp101-126

Amccann421 contradicts other editors regarding refs[edit]

Amccann421 accuses me of edit-warring, saying "Please do not add or change content, as you did at April 3, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article."

However the other editors have pointed out today to me that in fact it is NOT permitted to cite references/sources in April 3 or in any other Date-of-Year pages. Hence I removed my references. Unfortunately, now Amccann421 has appeared on the scene and is criticising me for removing the refs and accusing me of edit warring. Please confirm, on the April 3 Talk page, that you have got it wrong. And please do not further disrupt the discussion and editing process unless you have a valid point to make. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 20:17, 30 April 2016 (UTC)