Talk:Valentine's Day

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Holidays (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Holidays, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Holidays 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

This article has comments here.

WikiProject Saints (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Saints, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Saints and other individuals commemorated in Christian liturgical calendars 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.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
This article has an assessment summary page.

Edition request for Valentine's day in BRAZIL, it needs a correction[edit]

Please edit the part where it states that in Brazil there is Valentin's day, there is no suich a thing, it is called DIA DOS NAMORADOS (day of the of those in love, boyfriend/girlfriend) on June 12 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.32.151.166 (talk) 17:59, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

" For Brazil's Dia de São Valentim, see Dia dos Namorados." "In Brazil, the Dia de São Valentim is recognized on June 12." What's the issue? --NeilN talk to me 18:12, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Dia de São Valentim is on February 14 for brazilians, but we just don't celebrate it. Dia dos Namorados (Lover's day) is celebrated on June 12. Please edit it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.50.48.128 (talk) 09:35, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

Proposed move to "Saint Valentine's Day"[edit]

Throughout the article, "Saint Valentine's Day" is preferred over "Valentine's Day" therefore I propose that in accordance with the rest of the article the page "Valentine's Day" is moved to "Saint Valentine's Day". I ask an administrator to oblige and to move this page. Arfæst! 00:52, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

Oppose, as it is now commonly known at Valentine's Day. This is shown in the section covering current customs and practices. --NeilN talk to me 05:42, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
Oppose, Valentine's Day is the commonly used name. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:43, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
Totally agree. When I came here, I expected the article's first sentence as currently written, laying out all widely recognized forms of the name of the day. However, the English name of the holiday is its name, "Saint Valentine's Day," even in the Infobox, for example (looking at a mis-matched Infobox and title does strain the eyes a bit). I feel that colloquialisms do not belong in an article's title, but are very appropriate and helpful for re-directs (sometimes I think that is why they were born). I was wondering idly if I would make the same proposal when I came across Arfæst's.  —Aladdin Sane (talk) 23:01, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
I've changed those to comply with WP:LEADSENTENCE. --NeilN talk to me 21:05, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 27 January 2015[edit]

122.3.37.146 (talk) 06:04, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

X mark.svg Not done No request. --NeilN talk to me 06:16, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

book[edit]

valentines day is about love,and care. most people celibrate valentines day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.113.104.159 (talk) 19:57, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

This RfC was closed because nom's withdrawn. –Davey2010Talk 15:59, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Request for Comments[edit]

The question is whether or not the page should be known as Valentine's Day or Saint St Valentine's Day. A previous discussion was held on this page entitled 'Proposed move to "Saint Valentine's Day"'. Arfæst Ealdwrítere 23:27, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

  • Support Move - I think that since the day is referred to as "Saint Valentine's Day" throughout the article, it should also be named Saint St Valentine's Day. Arfæst Ealdwrítere 23:30, 12 February 2015
Also, note that this move would bring the article into line with the preferred naming conventions as shown by St. Patrick's Day, St. George's Day, St. Andrew's Day, St. John's Day etc. Arfæst Ealdwrítere 08:46, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Oppose as it is now commonly known at Valentine's Day. This is shown in the section covering current customs and practices. --NeilN talk to me 01:32, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Commonly known as merely 'Valentine's Day' by whom? It seems that only Americans remove 'St' from the name of the day (and depending on to whom you are talking within the US, a Catholic for instance, they also know it as St Valentine's Day or as the Feast of Saint Valentine). It seems toonly be American atheists who don't call it by its proper name. Arfæst Ealdwrítere 08:53, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Completely incorrect. See Valentine's_Day#Celebration_worldwide. --NeilN talk to me 13:34, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Valentine's Day is clearly the common name for the celebration. Check this Ngram result for English, and even specifically British English, Valentine's Day still wins out by a wide margin when compared to all Saint-named variants. Crumpled Fire (talk) 13:45, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Neither of those arguments are remotely convincing. The world-wide celebration is irrelevant because we are determining the English name of the day, not some other language's name for it. Also book results only reveal how common the usage is with the intelligentsia and authors who are typically atheists. To leave out "St" from the name of the article would give undue weight to the views of a very small minority of the anglo-sphere. Arfæst Ealdwrítere 20:26, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
You are aware that English is spoken worldwide, right? Notwithstanding your bizarre atheist assertion, which country's published sources commonly refer it to St. Valentine's Day? --NeilN talk to me 20:55, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
What's up with your sudden interest in what the published source's say? I thought your argument was about what the masses commonly called it? Arfæst Ealdwrítere 21:18, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Given your edits above I realized you might not be an experienced editor and might be unaware that while article content is built using published sources, the same goes for the title, per WP:COMMONNAME: "Wikipedia prefers the name that is most commonly used (as determined by its prevalence in reliable English-language sources) as such names will be the most recognizable and the most natural." --NeilN talk to me 21:35, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
Experience has nothing to do with it and does not grant you special authority over me, you should have already known that but I guess power mixed with arrogance gets to even the best of us. Arfæst Ealdwrítere 00:29, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
No idea how you managed to get that I was saying I have special authority over you from "hey, you might not be experienced here so you may not be aware of WP:COMMONNAME". --NeilN talk to me 00:34, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
Never mind, I withdraw the RfC. Arfæst Ealdwrítere 10:11, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hey, that went down fast. I slept and awoke and the RfC appeared and is no more. So I re-iterate my support of User:Arfæst Ealdwrítere, without doubting NeilN's skilled editing, but for this, the title I still agree with Arfæst and have his (her) argument for it,

"Totally agree. When I came here, I expected the article's first sentence as currently written, laying out all widely recognized forms of the name of the day. However, the English name of the holiday is its name, "Saint Valentine's Day," even in the Infobox, for example (looking at a mis-matched Infobox and title does strain the eyes a bit). I feel that colloquialisms do not belong in an article's title, but are very appropriate and helpful for re-directs (sometimes I think that is why they were born). I was wondering idly if I would make the same proposal when I came across Arfæst's."

Look, NeilN, editors as I ignore all rules, but we have no children: Our nieces and nephews, when I point them to an argument that will elucidate, we expect an educated article covering "Saint Valentine's Day." See? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aladdin Sane (talkcontribs)

@Aladdin Sane: The issue is that there is no policy based reason to change the name. The guideline we follow is WP:COMMONNAME. If you can show that St. Valentine's Day is more prevalent in reliable English-language sources I'll gladly change my !vote. --NeilN talk to me 04:46, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

"Historical facts"[edit]

Should this section be rewritten? For example, the skull at the Basilica of Santa Maria in Cosmedin is said to be St Valentine's, or that of one of the St. Valentines. But there is no proof: it is not historical fact. Is it part of the relics at the church of Santa Prassede, transferred later? Elsewhere in the section, a 'head of St Valentine' is referred to, at Winchester. Is this the same St Valentine or a different one, and if so, which?
Reading the article on St Valentine and some of the sources, it seems that almost all the facts are disputed or invented. This section confidently identifies as fact that St Valentine of Rome was a martyr in about 496, but also deals with him as a legend in the next section, where the facts are suggested to be later inventions.
As far as I can see the only historical facts are that certain artefacts were/are believed to be the actual remains of (one or other) St Valentines.
82.47.237.230 (talk) 11:26, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Conflict between Valentine's Day and Islam[edit]

Hello,

Why does the article highlight conflict between Valentine's Day and political Islam by creating a separate sub-heading for Islamic countries, when there are several examples noted in the article of non-Islamic political and other groups who are equally opposed to this holiday?

Heading 5, "Conflict with Islamic countries and political parties" needs to be changed to something like "Criticism of Valentine's Day" or "Political Opposition to Valentine's Day", or something similar that does not highlight one specific religion or group. Alternately, content from that section could be merged with country-specific discussions under Section 4.

For example, the article notes under India that both left- and right-wing groups have criticized the holiday. In fact, in the past there have been several incidents where Hindu conservative groups have aggresively and violently attacked both couples and stores associated with this suppposedly anti-Indian, anti-Hindu holiday. No such incidents have been noted in the article. See http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2015/02/14/a-short-history-of-valentines-day-in-india/ for a short discussion of some such incidents. Shouldn't we then create a separate sub-heading for "Right-wing Hindu Opposition to Valentine's Day"?

The article also notes that nationalist groups in Romania have criticized the holiday as "Western kitsch" among other things. One could argue that if there is a separate section for "Islamic" opposition, there should be a separate section discussing "Nationalist Opposition" to Valentine's Day.

And doesn't the fact that many Islamic countries oppose Valentine's Day also imply that there is a large population of Muslims within these countries (and all over the world) who are willing to embrace the holiday? Why then call attention to Islamic opposition in particular? This is not at all clear to me.

Perhaps there is a good reason for focusing on Islamic opposition; if so, it needs to be discussed and explained clearly. If not, the article should be edited as suggested above. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samirqadir (talkcontribs) 18:06, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Agreed. Look, Samirqadir, when I read your title, I didn't want a headache, which you gave, and a whine to be sure. Your first paragraph pissed me off. But by the second, you had me on your side. You argue well, Samirqadir (just don't start with a whine, OK?). I conclude that section 5 needs to be re-titled, without mention to Islam, to give it the broader character that it seeks, and include non-Islamic arguments against the holiday. Agreed, NeilN? Aladdin Sane (talk) 02:54, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
I definitely don't own this article so there's no need to check with me. If I specifically disagree or agree with something I'll make a comment. --NeilN talk to me 04:49, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 February 2015[edit]

There is a statement in here about China: "Valentine's Day on February 14 is not celebrated because it is often too close to the Chinese New Year, which usually falls on either January or February." This is completely invalid, many Chinese celebrate this holiday. I'm located in China and there were many places to buy flowers, and good restaurants/hotels were difficult to place reservations for... as an American, I celebrated it with a Chinese girl I met there. I think we should just remove the statement, it doesn't have a citation anyways. 223.223.218.36 (talk) 09:02, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done that statement does appear to be original research. -- Orduin Discuss 20:57, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 February 2015[edit]

Please let me help you with this page. 24.181.247.133 (talk) 23:10, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Hi there and thanks for your offer of help. This template is for requesting specific changes to articles (eg "Please change X to Y"). Stickee (talk) 23:21, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
This isn't the place to request additional user rights. You can try and request them at WP:PERM, but the easiest way to get additional user rights is to create an account and become a autoconfirmed user. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:30, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Celebration and conflict by country sections arrangement[edit]

One thing which would improve the structure would be rearranging these sections but I can't think of anything better. Nor is there in my mind any similar article which I can refer to, this may be the main topic of such a category. The current "Celebrations by country and another Conflict by country" format seems less than ideal. We are forced to repeat a few countries in both those sections.

Various arrangements could be:

  • Celebrations/situation by country
    • Country x
    • Country y
    • Faces opposition
      • Country a
      • Country b

or

  • Celebrations/situation by country
    • Country x
    • Country y
      • Opposition
    • Country a
      • Ban

Any better ideas? Or is it fine just the way it is? -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 15:34, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Done: I have finally clubbed them all together into "Celebration and status by country" and further added continent subheaders. The article structure looks decent enough now. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 12:18, 3 March 2015 (UTC)

"The Valentine"[edit]

The usage and primary topic of "The Valentine" is under discussion, see Talk:Valentine Richmond History Center -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 04:20, 21 April 2015 (UTC)