Talk:Sweetest Day

Need more details

This article doesn't have nearly enough information. First of all, who celebrates the Sweetest Day and how do they celebrate it? Do people give candy, jewelry, flowers or other gifts? Is it mainly lovers that give these gifts or mainly family, friends, coworkers, etc.? Do people wear special colors on the Sweetest Day? Do they go on dates with their lover? Do they hold parties? In Pennsylvania we don't celebrate this holiday and I don't understand how it is celebrated. Please add more info!

Thanks!

Where is it celebrated?

Grew up in Indiana in the 60s and 70s and never heard of this holiday - moved away for 30 years and came back 10+ years ago and still don't hear about anyone celebrating it. In fact, have lived all around the country and the only place I've ever lived where it is conspicuously celebrated is Cleveland which just happens to be where apparently this thing started.

Comment from Miracleimpulse (talk · contribs)

I'm moving this here from Talk:Sweetest Day/Comments. ZimZalaBim (talk) 17:40, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

• This article should not be supported by WikiProject Holidays because Sweetest Day is not a holiday; it is an annual promotional event sponsored by industry. Sweetest Day has never occurred without first being promoted by industry. Miracleimpulse 05:39, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

• I wasn't aware there was a Holiday Wikiproject, or that they in anyway were supporting (or are even aware of) this article. It's never referred to as a "holiday" in the article other than when it is called a "Hallmark holiday". It is part of the Holiday category, but unless you take an extremely narrow definition of what "holiday" means, in reality most Americans don't make much distinction between holiday, observance, and celebration. If your problem is with the Holiday category I can point you to all sorts of "holidays" that don't meet the traditional meaning of holiday. Beyond that, what the observance is today is quite different from its apparent origins no matter what story you believe, much like St. Valentine's Day Valentines Day, Christmas, and St. Patricks Day are all considerably different today than their origin.--Isotope23 18:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
• I think "supported by" is the wrong wording. I changed it to "within the scope of", to match the other WikiProject banners. --Transfinite 19:00, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

The banner basically implies that the article will be monitored for improvement and/or vandalism by the project, with perhaps additional work on improvement, references, copyediting, and so on. The specific origins of any holiday are often open to question, and I very seriously doubt if this was the first "commercial" holiday. In fact, I'm virtually certain it isn't. Whether it is or isn't however, it would probably be a violation of NPOV to not include the article within the scope of the project, as it is included in the Category:Holidays and its subcategories, which are the scope of the project. And, it is only a recently revitalized project, so I can easily believe you hadn't heard of it before. Badbilltucker 19:14, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

To be honest I have not paid too much attention to most Wikiprojects outside of Wikiproject:Schools so there is probably a lot I don't know in that regard. Anyway, input on this article is always appreciated.--Isotope23 19:20, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

How does this then differ from Valentines Day and Mothers Day - two holidays that owe themselves to the greeting card industry. BTW, I was born in Detroit and grew up in Indiana, and I never even heard of this holiday (or whatever it is) until I lived in Cleveland and have never heard of it since moving from there.Jmdeur (talk) 20:44, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Comparison to Valentine's Day

isn't this kinda exactly like valentines day?24.144.137.244 19:04, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I think I commented about this earlier as well (might be in an archived talk page now). I had no idea Sweetest Day had anything to do with candy, aside from chocolate covered strawberries, until I read this article. Judging by all the red hearts and roses, I just assumed it was another excuse to buy cards and flowers for your "sweetie." --Birdhombre 04:45, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I've commented out the commons link for now

The commons site for Sweetest Day is being used to push the same original research that was rejected by consensus in this article. Sorry, but you can't use commons as a go around for consensus here Miracleimpulse (talk · contribs). You are trying to make the same arguments based on the same sources that were repeatedly rejected and disproven on this talkpage. Until this is resolved at commons, the link should stay out. I've commented out the link for the time being.--Isotope23 17:25, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Beyond that, commons links go at the bottom, where I commented out, not at the top where you keep adding it Miracle. As I said earlier, as long as you are pushing the same original research that was rejected here at the commons gallery, the link should not appear here. Commons isn't a way for you to circumvent the consensus against your version.--Isotope23 00:24, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

• The Commons Sweetest Day gallery is now protected. I am re-inserting the link. Miracleimpulse 23:43, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

As it's been stated numerous times before, Commons links go down in the external links section... I've uncommented the correct link at the bottom.--Isotope23 02:33, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Dead American Greetings Sweetest Day link

Why should a Wikipedia article contain a link to a cached version of an otherwise dead promotional link from American Greetings? Is this advertising at any cost? Miracleimpulse 23:43, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

It seems informative, and providing a link to the cache seems more valuable than just deleting it (especially since you seemed to revel in its going dead - POV????) Not a dog 00:10, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Suggested changes to the Sweetest Day article

The following changes should be made to the Sweetest Day article:

Removal of industry promotional statements

The following industry promotional statements should be removed from the Sweetest Day article:

• Sweetest Day is an observance celebrated primarily in the Great Lakes region and parts of the Northeast United States on the third Saturday in October.

• It is described by Retail Confectioners International, as "much more important for candymakers in some regions than in others (Detroit, Cleveland and Buffalo being the biggest Sweetest Day cities)" and an "occasion which offers all of us an opportunity to remember not only the sick, aged and orphaned, but also friends, relatives and associates whose helpfulness and kindness we have enjoyed."

• Sweetest Day now largely involves giving small presents such as greeting cards, candy, and flowers to loved ones. While it is not as large or widely observed as Valentine's Day, it is still celebrated in parts of the United States, despite persistent allegations of being a "Hallmark holiday."

These statements are all either direct quotes or are sourced to promotional or unsourced websites.

Also, the references to Bill Lubinger should be removed because first of all, the Bill Lubinger article is mostly misinformation and secondly because the article no longer appears on the internet and I don't believe it was actually published in the paper version of The Cleveland Plain Dealer. If it was, please provide the page number on which it was published. Miracleimpulse 20:33, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

• The article has to quickly say what Sweetest Day is. "Promotional event" is POV, you don't like the word "holiday", so it is an "observence".
• In order for the article to be NPOV, it has to include the quote from Retail Confectioners International, or something similiar. The article can't be an attack piece on the candy/greeting card industry.
• The last sentence states how the holiday/observence/promotional event/whatever is celebrated, and goes on to call it a "Hallmark Holiday", which is a fairly cynical turn of phrase.
• Are you sure you want to remove the Bill Lubinger article? That is where the "concocted promotion" quote in the lead section is sourced to. If the Lubinger article goes, that goes too.

--Transfinite 05:42, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Transfinite's comments * followed by my responses:

• The article has to quickly say what Sweetest Day is. "Promotional event" is POV, you don't like the word "holiday", so it is an "observence".

"Promotional event" is in no way POV. The phrase simply states what Sweetest Day is. "Deceptive promotional event" or "a promotional event marketed through mass deception or on false pretenses" would be POV, but simply calling Sweetest Day a "promotional event" is not POV. Sweetest Day has never occurred without first being promoted by industry. Therefore it is neither a holiday nor an observance. Sweetest Day is not recognized or observed by any state, local or federal government, nor is it recognized by any religion, faith or ethnic group. Sweetest Day is not even recognized by the City of Cleveland where it allegedly was founded. The only group which recognizes Sweetest Day are the industries which profit from it's promotion. I suppose we could call it an "industry observance" but "promotional event" is really more appropriate.

• In order for the article to be NPOV, it has to include the quote from Retail Confectioners International, or something similiar. The article can't be an attack piece on the candy/greeting card industry.

Take a closer look at the Sweetest Day page on Retail Confectioners International's website. Under "How It Started" Retail Confectioners International uses the standard verisimilitude to promote Sweetest Day. A verisimilitude is a highly deceptive cleverly-written statement which resembles the truth but actually is a replacement for the truth and intented to deceive. Inclusion of any industry verisimilitude in the Sweetest Day article without identifying it as such totally slants the article in favor of industry. All industry verisimilitudes should be immediately removed from the Sweetest Day article in order for the article to remain NPOV.

• The last sentence states how the holiday/observence/promotional event/whatever is celebrated, and goes on to call it a "Hallmark Holiday", which is a fairly cynical turn of phrase.

The term "Hallmark holiday" is actually a promotional term for Hallmark Cards. Again, to express this idea the term "promotional event" is more appropriate. The statement also includes buying suggestions, which again slants the article in favor of industry. Today Sweetest Day remains a promotional event sponsored by industry; it has not undergone some miraculous metamorphosis into a beloved holiday of any type.

• Are you sure you want to remove the Bill Lubinger article? That is where the "concocted promotion" quote in the lead section is sourced to. If the Lubinger article goes, that goes too.

Here is the Bill Lubinger article which was published online in October 2005. First of all, there was no 4-page Sweetest Day section included in The Cleveland Plain Dealer's October 8, 1921 issue. There was a 4-page Sweetest Day section included in the October 8, 1922 issue of The Cleveland Plain Dealer, however it made no mention of any of the things mentioned in Mr. Lubinger's article. Read it for yourself; it's right here in high-resolution. With this in mind, Mr. Lubinger's article can only be construed as being some sort of inverted promotion the purpose of which is to justify the observance of Sweetest Day. The article is 95% misinformation and deserves no mention in an encyclopedic article about Sweetest Day. During the Sweetest Day promotion of 2006 at least 3 internet websites quoted Mr. Lubinger's article because of it's inclusion in the Wikipedia article. Wikipedia should not be used to promote false information about Sweetest Day or anything else. As far as losing the phrase "concocted promotion" is concerned, that Sweetest Day is a "concocted promotion" will be evident to anyone who reads the Sweetest Day article once all the industry promotional phrases are removed.

Miracleimpulse 16:13, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Addition of facts

The following facts should be added to the article:

• 1) In 1922 Sweetest Day/Candy Day was also promoted in New York City, Chicago, Detroit, Buffalo, Cincinatti and other cities across America by the candy industry. (Note: was Herbert Birch Kingston involved in these other promotions of Sweetest Day?)

• 2) Sweetest Day was also referred to as "Candy Day," both in Cleveland and other cities where it was promoted.

• 3) Some candy giveaways for Sweetest Day were executed days before the event and then covered by local media.

• 4) All candy was not given to poor people. In 1921 Sweetest Day in the Year Committeeman L. E. Gruber presented the mayor of Cleveland with a 15-pound box of candy for the mayor's wife.

• 5) In 1922 82-year-old Vera Sissons was selected by the Sweetest Day in the Year Committee to be Queen of the Sweetest Day. Ms. Sissons resided at the Home for Aged Women. Include image of Vera Sissons.

• 6) A list of companies which participated in the first 2 Sweetest Days in Cleveland should be included in the article, in order to demonstrate the true scope of the first Sweetest Day promotions in Cleveland. That list includes:

The Cleveland Plain Dealer Newspaper, The Cleveland Business Exchange, The Cleveland Advertising Club, Hotel Statler, Whitman's Candies, Loew's Park Theater, Loew's State Theater, The Ohio Theater, Apollo Chocolates, F.H. Roberts Company, Crane's Party Box, Ohio Confection Company, Euclid's Chocolates, Nimburger Hahn (Louis Hahn?) Candies, Shoot's Chocolates, Thurston's Magic Box Candies, Johnston's Candies, Hoffman's Candy And Ice Cream Companies, H.M.D Candies, Midland Candy Boxes, Standard Drug Stores (16 locations), Troughton's Sugar Jar Candies, Weideman's Candies, Addison Pharmacy, Alpha Pharmacy, The Bank Lunch, Benfield And Benfield (Benfield Drug Company), Bruggator And Ripley, H.D. Butler, W.W. Brown Company, Buckstein Drug Company, Cleveland Pharmacy, Deklyn's Candies, Deutch And Rosengarten, Fischer Rohr Company, Cedar Drug Company, Geiger Moss Drug Company, Geraldine Ferrar Company, Gerson Drug Company, Glick's Candies, Gordon Square Pharmacy, Hough Avenue Drug Company, The J.M. Gasser Company, Kappus Drug Store, Lakewood Pharmacy, Lake Shore Pharmacy, Liggett's Pharmacy, Marshall's Drug Stores (26 locations), Maxixe Cherries, Miller's Drug Stores, Parkgate Pharmacy, Price Drug Company, J.G. Reed And Company, M. Rinzler, Ritter's Candies, Seltzer Drug Company, G. Schneider-Richards Company, The Superior Peanut Company, H.M. Stage Company, Andrew E. Walleck Company, Weinberger-Euclid Drug Company, J.L. Westaway Company, Winton Hotel Drug Company, W.L.Wilson Company, Wyandotte Pharmacy, Wrigleys Gum, Reymer's Chocolates and BonBons, Edwards Candies, MacDiarmids Candies, Phelp's Candy, Mary Lincoln Candy Company, The Cross Candy Company, Forbes Chocolate Company, M. S. Stores, Romance Chocolates by The Wynne Wood, The Orient Company (baskets for candy), The Geo. H. Bowman Company, The May Company, Bailey's Department Store, Benedict's (dancing), Huyler's Candies, Martha Washington Candies, Bordens Chocolates, Schrafft's Chocolates, Playhouse Chocolates, Stranahan Brothers Company, Jackson-Trace Company, Beeman's Pepsin Gum, The Handy Service Store, and Ex-Lax (The Sweet Chocolate Laxative), Fanny Farmer Candies, The Loft, Inc.

More to come! Miracleimpulse 21:35, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Removal of holiday infobox

Sweetest Day is not a holiday it is an annual promotional event. Addition of the holiday infobox is purely promotional. It contains buying suggestions for Sweetest Day. Miracleimpulse 21:47, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I think I'll comment on this, since I am the one who added the thing. The observence part I tried to make NPOV, by including what the "industry" said it was for ("Remembering friends and loved ones"), and what it seems to be actually about: buying cheap useless junk. The Valentine's Day article says the observences are "Sending greeting cards and gifts, dating". If you think the wording should change from "buying" to "sending", I have no problem with that. Besides that, I don't see the problem. It has the area it is celebrated/promoted in (which is sourced info), type (which is required for that template), and the date it happens on. --Transfinite 05:10, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Again, Sweetest Day is neither a holiday nor an observance anywhere. A promotional event does not warrant a holiday box, unless of course you are trying to deceive people into believing that the promotional event is in fact a holiday. Also, there is no referenced information stating that Sweetest Day is celebrated anywhere. That information is industry promotional hype and deserves no mention in an encyclopedic article. The holiday box has got to go! Miracleimpulse 16:16, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Um, Sweetest Day is observed by a large number of people, ergo, it is an observance. That's a neutral description of the event. ANd this citation confirms (from a reliable source) that the day is observed. Not a dog 16:42, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Your citation confirms that Sweetest Day was created by industry and is therefore a promotional event. The definition of observance states that an observance is "The custom of celebrating a holiday or similar occasion." Under "similar occasion" it states "An occurrence or condition of affairs which brings with it some unlooked-for event; that which incidentally brings to pass an event, without being its efficient cause or sufficient reason; accidental or incidental cause." This aptly describes the event called Sweetest Day. We have determined that Sweetest Day does not qualify as a holiday. The term which best describes Sweetest Day is event, and given that Sweetest Day has never occurred without first being promoted by industry, it is best referred to as a promotional event. I have no problem with the first statement in the article reading: "Sweetest Day is the observance of an industry-generated promotional event." Sweetest Day is a promotional event which masquerades as a holiday, and for the Wikipedia article to call it a holiday or an observance furthers this industry deception. In order for the Sweetest Day article to remain NPOV and not promote the industry agenda, Sweetest Day must be defined as an event only, specifically an industry-generated promotional event. Again, the holiday box should be deleted immediately. Miracleimpulse 17:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't think anyone here would deny that Sweetest Day was created by industry (it isn't a naturally occurring phenomenon). But that doesn't mean it isn't "observed" - just like President's Day is observed, or Martin Luther King day, or Boxing Day, or Dingus Day...all of which were created by some entity (whether industry, government, or religion is irrelevant to its social construction). As you say, it is an "event" - and event that is "observed". 'nuff said. Not a dog 22:53, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Plenty of events are observed. This does not mean they are categorized as "observances." Above all, Sweetest Day is a promotional event and should be categorized as such in this article. Categorizing Sweetest Day as either an observance or a holiday slants the article in favor of the industry agenda. Industry has been promoting Sweetest Day on false pretenses for over 80 years. Wikipedia should not be used (as it has been for the past several years) to promote Sweetest Day on these false pretenses. Sweetest Day is a promotional event. End of story. Miracleimpulse 23:29, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, and plenty of events are promoted, that doesn't mean they all should be categorized as "promotional events". Above all, Sweetest Day is a day that is observed, and should be categorized as such in this article. Categorzing Sweetest Day as an promotional event slants the article in favor of your anti-industry agenda. (right back at ya!). :) Not a dog 00:02, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

So: Sweetest Day is the observance of a promotional event sponsored by industry. Problem solved, compromise reached. Now let's change the article. Miracleimpulse 00:18, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Where is your evidence that it's not an observance? You keep going on and on at length about the origins of the so-called "event," but that has no bearing on how it's celebrated today. Come here to Cleveland on the third Saturday of October and you'll see plenty of Valentine's gunk rebranded for Sweetest Day at drug stores and floral shops. Other than maybe Malley's, I've not heard one peep from candymakers about Sweetest Day here. It's all the card and floral shops that jump into the marketing blitz. I've been to more than one restaurant that served free chocolate-covered strawberries on Sweetest Day. Or are you going to claim that American Greetings is in cahoots with the food service industry too? --75.117.252.7 03:25, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

The food service industry, the flower industry, the jewelry industry, the greeting card industry, the candy industry and others: all are promotors of Sweetest Day. Each and every year since 1921 the promotion of Sweetest Day has preceded the alleged "observance." World War II did not interrupt the promotion of Sweetest Day. Vietnam did not interrupt the promotion of Sweetest Day. Industry has now promoted Sweetest Day 7 times since the events of 9/11/2001. First and foremost, Sweetest Day is a promotional event and should be categorized as such by this Wikipedia article. Unless of course Wikipedia is also being used by industry as a tool for the promotion of Sweetest Day. Miracleimpulse 13:46, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

By that definition the Christian Churches are not an appropriate source for discussion of Christmas or Easter, because they are promoters of those holidays. Guy (Help!) 14:09, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello Guy! Why did you delete the Herbert Birch Kingston US census forms from Wikipedia without nomination or debate? What kind of impartial admin action was that?? Miracleimpulse 14:15, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

BOYS vs GIRLS As I write this, the article says "This holiday is celebrated by boys since girls mostly celebrate valentines day". As a person who observed this day growing up in Detroit, I have to say that the statement is not true. Furthermore, males and females both celebrate valentines day. In both cases candy and cards are given to loved ones of any gender. This sentence should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.9.198.83 (talk) 01:49, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

References

Detroit

Detroit attributes Sweetest Day to Fred Sanders. There's Freep articles to source from. MMetro (talk) 13:30, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't live in the area that observes "Sweetest Day", but my grandparents did. They also grew up in and around that era. I must agree, it may not seem deserving of recognition to some. But to those whom grew up with it and passed it down, it is a part of their memories and maybe some heritage. I say leave it be. It is as much a special day as some of the other days that are concidered "holidays"; only it is not nationally observed. So what. Like I said to someone or to someone's family memories, it is special. Let it stay where others, wheither they observe it or not, can stumble across a marking in history. Cheffy74 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cheffy74 (talk • contribs) 12:54, 11 March 2009 (UTC) This holiday is pretty strange.... seems to me like another excuse for Valentine's Day.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Sweetest Day. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070310152505/http://metromix.chicagotribune.com:80/localguide/suburbs/west/mmx-061018-west-suburbs-sweetest-day,0,7539245.story?coll=mmx-sgtop_promo to http://metromix.chicagotribune.com/localguide/suburbs/west/mmx-061018-west-suburbs-sweetest-day,0,7539245.story?coll=mmx-sgtop_promo

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 10:09, 19 October 2015 (UTC)