Talk:World Almanac

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Books (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.


Are there already efforts to include almanac information within Wikipedia? It is frustrating I think that there is not a lot of choice for good on-line almanacs, and it seems to me this kind of information, if it is not copyrighted already, should be made freely accessible on the internet with all of its search capabilities. Granted, it may be better at Nupedia given that you probably don't exactly want everybody and anybody to fumble around with pages full of statistics (nor is there any need for that part of the page at least to be modified), but I think an almanac is definitely something which should be freely available, and it would seem logical to me that Wikipedia could house it. What do you think? Brettz9 18:08 Mar 5, 2003 (UTC)

There's no organized effort to do so, really, but see List of reference topics for a collection of links to almanac-type info. Tuf-Kat
Thanks for the link, but I presume you meant List of reference tables? That does look pretty cool. It'd be nice to know what items within our existing Almanacs are public domain content... - Brettz9 20:59 Mar 5, 2003 (UTC)

Bold text

Can others check pages 617-680?[edit]

In my almanac, the pages 617-680 are all upside down and backwards. In other words, everything is fine up to and includingpage 616 (US Populations), but the next page is 680 and it is upside down (World History). The page after this is 679 and is upside down, and it goes on like this until page 617, which is the last upside down page. The page after this is 681, which is correct.

Can anyone else check their book and tell me if they have the same issue?

Do you think this printing error makes the book mroe valulable?

Thanks in advance, Andrew

"The World Almanac and Book of Facts 2007" "The World Almanac 2007"

ISBN 10: 0886879957 ISBN 13: 9780886879952

Includes color pictures —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 02:24, 25 December 2006 (UTC).

This isn't Yahoo! Answers.

Bwryan2006 (talk) 23:40, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

NPOV dispute[edit]

I'm a newbie, but I just noticed this today and had to comment. This article seems to be an ad for The World Almanac rather than a NPOV description of it. This entire article seems to come straight from [| The World Almanac site] itself. I immediately guessed this when I discovered that THE WORLD ALMANAC was italicized many times...more like what you'd find in an advertisement than in an encyclopedia entry. Certainly this information should be used but I'm worried what is currently here is borderline plagiarism and biased to boot.

Arenasnow 21:14 December 26, 2006

That's exactly what I was thinking, too. I added a NPOV dispute banner and changed the title of this section. I suggest as a first step we change the names to a regular font style. Deivo 12:15, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
It was a plain copyright violation that had occurred on November 15, 2006. I've reverted back to the last version before that. Lupo 09:21, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
I loved the World Almanac as a child, but I was always bothered by the many inconsistencies and obvious errors in its information. In some cases, it seemed like simply bad sources; in others, like poor copy editing. This seems to be confirmed by the small editorial staff that is mentioned in this article.Bostoner (talk) 23:35, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Propaganda Criticism[edit]

I've heard that this book was criticised for giving out biased information on various things, could you name some? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by (talk) 18:26, 28 April 2007 (UTC).

I was always perturbed by the World Almanac's listing the form of government for the United States as "federal republic with a strong democratic tradition." It is not that I dispute that the US is a genuine democracy. It's just that such a description, by its very nature, sounds more like a matter of opinion than a matter of objective fact. No other country is described this way, and I find it hard to believe that are no other countries in the world, esp. in Europe, that are not equally democratic.Bostoner (talk) 23:35, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Effect of the Internet on Sales?[edit]

I originally looked up this article to see if the World Wide Web had any effect on sales of the World Almanac. The Web contains more up-to-date information and more information. This is not to discourage people from using the World Almanac, just to see what today's perceptions are, and to see if there is some continued justification for it that I might have overlooked. Does anyone know?Bostoner (talk) 23:35, 25 January 2009 (UTC)


Why was my edit undone, the World Almanac is not tolerant towards other peoples cultures.

--Heart Like a Wheel (talk) 00:27, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

For future reference, this is the edit to which HLaW is referring. - dcljr (talk) 22:14, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Why is my edit removed[edit]

Just why? -- (talk) 17:40, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

For reference, this is the edit to which the anon editor is referring. - dcljr (talk) 22:12, 9 September 2009 (UTC)


What is the section Sports even trying to say? I can't understand the relevance to this article. - dcljr (talk) 22:08, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Washington Star?[edit]

Did it used to have the Washington Star in the branding? (I seem to dimly recall this.)TCO (talk) 15:25, 30 May 2013 (UTC)