Talk:April Fools' Day
|April Fools' Day has been listed as a level-5 vital article in Society. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as C-Class.|
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the April Fools' Day article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|Archives: 1, 2|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day... section on 12 dates. [show]|
|Today's articles for improvement|
|The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:|
- 1 List o jokes
- 2 Chaucer and April 1
- 3 Bad News
- 4 Origins
- 5 From Prank to Fun
- 6 Origins
- 7 April Fools Importance to the world
- 8 Additional sources
- 9 Semi-protected edit request on 11 January 2017
- 10 Date
- 11 Semi-protected edit request on 1 April 2017
- 12 April Fools & Noah (of Ark fame)?
- 13 As a custom
- 14 Maintenance Template
List o jokes
- What jokes? 18.104.22.168 (talk) 17:46, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Chaucer and April 1
The section on Chaucer ate pupicks aka chicken gizzerds in the main article fails to mention that Chaucer provides TWO pieces of information that tell readers when the Nun's Priest's Tale is set. First he says that the tale is set "Syn March bigan thritty dayes and two", i.e. March 32 or April 1. But he then goes on to write, in the same sentence, that it's set when the sun "in the signe of Taurus had y'runne Twenty degrees and one, and somewhat more." That second piece of information requires an understanding of the Zodiac calendar, which may be why wikipedia has so far overlooked it. But if you understand the Zodiac calendar, which Chaucer certainly did, then the meaning is unambiguous. It has to mean that the tale is set on May 2 or 3. It's not clear why Chaucer provides two seemingly contradictory dates. However, to never mention the second date reference makes the idea that the tale is set on April 1 seem stronger than it actually is. The existence of the second, unambiguous date is the reason why many Chaucer scholars think that the first phrase (Syn March bigan thritty days and two) must have resulted from a copying error.
Also, the claim that there's a connection between April Fools day and the Nun's Priest's Tale — either that Chaucer intentionally set the tale on April Fool's Day or that the celebration somehow originated from the belief that the tale was set on April 1 — appears to trace back to wikipedia itself. In other words, I can't find any scholarly articles that endorse these claims. I've explored the Chaucer/April Fool connection in more detail here: http://hoaxes.org/weblog/comments/chaucer_april_fools. --Alexboese (talk) 15:59, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
- Sorry, it looks like all the editors of this article are useless and will have to be topic-banned. Dwpaul Talk 18:13, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
One of the cited sources for the origins of April Fools' Day makes reference to the new year starting March 25th. It should be noted that the source is a children's book of questionable reliability and there appear to be numerous sources that counter the claim of "most" parts of Europe following this standard. I would recommend this section be revised until a credible source can support the claim. I just don't want to be the one to do it in case I somehow mess something up (as I'm really just a novice with this). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sophomoric (talk • contribs) 04:28, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
- Which source are you referring to? (None appear to me to obviously be a children's book.) Dwpaul Talk 21:00, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
- [Later] I found it. But see our article here on New Year's Day, specifically on the history of that holiday, and you will see that the information about the celebration of the new year on March 25 (before the adoption of the Gregorian calendar) is correct (or at least also supported by that article's references). "Medieval Europe was never quite sure when the New Year began: the most common dates were 25 December (Nativity Style), 1 January (Circumcision style) and 25 March (Annunciation style)..." (Sacred Folly: A New History of the Feast of Fools) Dwpaul Talk 21:05, 2 April 2015 (UTC)
From Prank to Fun
It seems these days that many websites (with Google leading the charge) do things on April Fools Day that are no longer "pranks." They are now just fun ways to mess with their site that are no longer trying to "fool" anybody. It might be interesting to have some info on how this has evolved (first instances, etc.). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 13:31, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
- I THINK YOU'RE SPLITTING HAIRS. 126.96.36.199 (talk) 20:03, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- I agree. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 01:34, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
April fool unlike what the article alludes to, did not originate from the West but is cross cultural. It was part of the new years festival or Spring equinox celebrations. Sizdah Be-dar in Iran as part of Nowruz festivities every first or second of April is also called the Lie of the Thirteen. Also the Assyrian Kha b-Nisan (April 1). Some of the local myths claims it might be in celebration of Fool April because the weather fluctuate between the previous season and Spring before settling. Fool because [end of march ad beginning of] April can not make its mind and misleads. Yaḥyā (talk) 04:09, 31 March 2016 (UTC) I have seen it in China before. DatNuttyWikipedian (talk) 22:47, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
April Fools Importance to the world
Happy April Fools Day!!!!!
- Watts, Linda S. Encyclopedia of American Folklore. New York, N.Y.: Facts on File. pp. 21–22. ISBN 0-8160-5699-4.
- Brunvand, Jan Harold, ed. (1996). American folklore : an encyclopedia. New York, N.Y.: Garland Publishing. pp. 77–78. ISBN 0-8153-3350-1.
Semi-protected edit request on 11 January 2017
|This edit request has been answered. Set the |
The passage under India does not make sense. This may me due to poor use of language, or a deliberate prank. The passage should be checked to see which parts are real, and the wording should be clarified. 184.108.40.206 (talk) 00:25, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
- Note: Made two minor changes and removed the unsourced sentence. DRAGON BOOSTER ★ 09:06, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
The day actually reffers the syrian 1st day of the year .then the romans changed the date to 1st of jan as syria was under the roman empire that date, and the remaining people who were celebrating the old date were refferd as fools. Wessam hazim (talk) 08:24, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 1 April 2017
|This edit request has been answered. Set the |
Please add the following to the article since it is widely followed tradition and people should be aware of it : According to tradition April fool day comes to a halt after noon. AnkitNandanwar (talk) 18:42, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
- Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. ChamithN (talk) 19:50, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
April Fools & Noah (of Ark fame)?
That Wiki mentions the possibility of April Fools' Day originating in Noah's day. First, there's no non-Biblical evidence of a "Noah". Second, did an "April" exist 4,500 years ago (or whenever Noah is supposed to have lived?) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 21:17, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
- That's an interesting hypothesis that I didn't know. I'm more used to similar customs of ancient Greece and Rome. This 18th century claim seems to be about a 17th century claim about a relation to an iron age myth. It's possible that the story is notable enough, I have no idea without further research. The paper from which it came apparently also had humor sections, perhaps that it then would be a joke too... If it's notable, it's probably worth keeping, but I agree that their claim must be erroneous. If the tradition was an important one in the iron age Levant, it would most probably also be mentioned in the Torah. As for Noah's bird tale, it has precedents like Utnapishtim's bird. Although for centuries many people believed they were Noah descendents... PaleoNeonate (talk) 00:52, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
As a custom
The sentence "The custom of setting aside a day for the playing of harmless pranks upon one's neighbor is recognized everywhere." is quite probably the most dubious sentence I've seen on Wikipedia, and I've been on this website for over a week. (The cited Harper's Weekly from 1908 doesn't exactly have the anthropological competence to make such a statement.) Switched it to "The custom of setting aside a day for the playing of harmless pranks upon one's neighbor is recognized widely throughout the world." which is pretty clunky but not wildly misleading. Thanks, Abeg92contribs 06:46, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
- Also see the previous section on this talk page, about the same reference. It seems to have other dubious claims. Maybe we should check if the source is notable enough to be mentioned at all, and if so (maybe for historical reasons), we could move or reword the paragraph about it, and quote its claims. We could present them as what they are (outdated claims, possibly trivia today), and another paragraph could follow with more reliable information of better sources... It may even be possible to eliminate this source, despite notability, if there is no reason for it to be a particularily good source about the subject (i.e. it may be taken out of context, just because somewhere it makes claims about April's Fools origins). PaleoNeonate (talk) 07:02, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
- It seems that this reference was just added April 1 by Anupam. I'm pinging this editor so we can also obtain input for consensus before making important changes. I also verified and the archives of this paper seem to be freely available. Thanks, PaleoNeonate (talk) 07:13, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
- I can't seem to find information about who Bertha R. McDonald ate pupicks aka chicken gizzerds, other than family tree sites. She does not seem to be a notable historian or similar, and we have no article about her. PaleoNeonate (talk) 07:34, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
- The anecdote was fine, even if it is from a time and place that is overrepresented in this encyclopedia, it's relevant/important enough to put in the article as phrased (and thanks Anupam for doing so recently). The citation (and dubious first sentence in question) had been in the article since at least April of 2015 - two years ago. Abeg92contribs 14:06, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
- The "Geoffrey Chaucer's The Canterbury Tales" in the lead seems to lack a citation, and the paragraph we are discussing about seems to be out of order chronologically. Possibly that fixing these minor issues will allow to give this paragraph better due weight. —╰]PaleoNeonate█ ⏎ ?ERROR╮ 13:11, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
- I'm not sure if the tag is justified either. It may perhaps have to do with the "Long standing customs" section which is mostly about Europe except for India... —╰]PaleoNeonate█ ⏎ ?ERROR╮ 14:25, 5 April 2017 (UTC)