Template talk:SelAnnivFooter

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


Why is the current time and date included in this template? The user already knows the date because it's used at the top of the OTD template. The time is also at the bottom of their computer screens; is it really that necessary? --Dudemanfellabra (talk) 23:06, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

The current time was added as a temporary compromise based on the discussion now archived at Talk:Main Page/Archive 123#UTC vs. change for local time??. There have been various complaints/questions throughout the years by people wondering why "the Main Page has the wrong date", not realising that Wikipedia follows Coordinated Universal Time (UTC) – the Main Page always updates at 00:00 UTC. For most users, the time "at the bottom of their computer screens" is set to their local time zone were they live, not necessarily UTC.
For example, users in East Coast of the United States thus have their "Wikipedia midnight" at 8pm EDT (or 7pm EST when daylight savings time ends in a few days). Thus, at about 9pm Eastern Time, the main page will already be showing "tomorrow's version". Cheers. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 04:40, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
So how temporary is this? Is it still needed 7 years on? Because I think it's cuttering up the page, and the purge link is also redundant. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 13:53, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
I noticed the line's absence when I attempted to use the purge link, as I do whenever I've edited content currently appearing on the main page. (Previously, I used a gadget that no longer loads reliably on my end.)
Contextually, the line appears to have been "temporary" in the sense that it was intended to remain in place until a better solution was devised. To the best of my knowledge, this has not yet occurred.
You noted that both the date and the purge link are redundant. I'd appreciate an explanation as to how. —David Levy 06:23, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
The dat already appears two times prvious (making it three times), and the Main Page is purged automatically (as I understand) whenever it is updated. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 10:45, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
The dat already appears two times prvious (making it three times),
The purpose isn't to display the date; it's to provide an explanation of UTC, which is best mentioned in that context.
and the Main Page is purged automatically (as I understand) whenever it is updated.
Your understanding is inaccurate (unless you're referring to the 00:00 UTC changeover and possibly bot-generated edits, as opposed to any instance in which the page's content is updated). Regardless, most readers aren't even familiar with the concept of "purging". From their perspective, the link simply "reloads" the page (which may have been loaded in the browser window some time earlier). It also happens to purge the page, which is either useful or harmless. —David Levy 15:52, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
I am actually referring to bot updates; they are supposed to purge the main page automatically, making any reload/purge link redundant. And I still think it's a hack and a clutter. I'd like to keep things simple. I looked into moving the UTC link up, but each OTD page is a separate entity, requiring 365 edits. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 18:57, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
I regard the line as useful (for the reasons noted above), but I have no particular attachment to the specific layout/format currently in use. We could even consider relocating it to a different part of the main page.
Regarding the possibility of moving it up, perhaps a bot could handle the 366 edits (including the February 29 subpage). If not, I'd be willing to tackle the task manually. —David Levy 19:19, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

"More events and birthdays"[edit]

What is the basis of the change from "More events" to "More events and birthdays"? —David Levy 13:11, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

This is something I've had on my mind for the past year: Have you ever noticed for the past few years, people occasionally post on talk:Main Page "why is X birthday not included?" or "why aren't birthdays on the main page?" So now we explicitly show them that the birthdays are listed on the same page as the events. Zzyzx11 (talk) 14:57, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
That makes sense, but the wording strikes me as redundant (because a birth is a type of event). I realize, however, that the linked pages also draw such a distinction.
As people frequently complain about the lack of death reports on the main page, perhaps we could change the text to read "Births, deaths and other events".
There are a couple of simple ways to tweak the actual pages, but that's a separate discussion. —David Levy 22:16, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
I don't really care how it is specifically worded as long as it clearly conveys to people that more things happened on this day than just the 5 or 6 things posted on the Main Page. I was just looking at main page of imdb.com and they are using an "All birthdays" link for their birthdays section; here we could use "All/More births, deaths and other events" Zzyzx11 (talk) 22:44, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
How about "More events (including births and deaths)"? —David Levy 23:46, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
After looking at that suggestion, I'd prefer not to have parentheses like that for those links on the main page because it feels that it is more lengthy than it actually could be. In fact, I'd rather change it to just "More anniversaries" (because a birthday and a deathday can be considered types of anniversaries, and it seems to be a lot more clearer than "events") and then change the wording on the piped link of List of historical anniversaries to something else, or not even have a pipe link there at all. Zzyzx11 (talk) 02:09, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
I like this idea. —David Levy 02:18, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
Ok, we agree to use "More anniversaries" for the three linked page. What about the List of historical anniversaries link? Should it be a pipe link or not? Zzyzx11 (talk) 02:32, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
I think that unpiping that link probably is the best solution. —David Levy 02:39, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Ok, I've made the change. Zzyzx11 (talk) 02:44, 1 June 2009 (UTC)

Edit request from jcgoble3, 20 March 2011[edit]

{{edit protected}} Can somebody change It is now [[{{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTDAY}}]] [[{{CURRENTYEAR}}]] ([[Coordinated Universal Time|UTC]]) to It is now [[{{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTDAY}}]], [[{{CURRENTYEAR}}]] ([[Coordinated Universal Time|UTC]])? This would add a comma between the day and year to comply with Wikipedia:DATE#Full date formatting. Thanks. jcgoble3 (talk) 20:48, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

 Done. -- Mentifisto 21:27, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. jcgoble3 (talk) 03:24, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Edit request: The 'It is now...' date[edit]

There is no need to link the date. Can somebody change It is now [[{{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTDAY}}]], [[{{CURRENTYEAR}}]] ([[Coordinated Universal Time|UTC]]) to It is now {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTDAY}}, {{CURRENTYEAR}} (UTC) ? Lightmouse (talk) 13:28, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

I agree there is no need to link the date; however, I still think UTC should be linked, in case someone is reading it and doesn't know what it is.--Dudemanfellabra (talk) 13:44, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Because the rest of the dates on OTD are generally linked, included the "More anniversaries" line, they are subjected to being autoformatted according to the user's preference. For many users who have a specific date preference set, unlinking the It is now line will make the date format inconsistent with the rest of the dates on the OTD section. I will only support if either all dates on OTD are unlinked, or there is evidence that the date formatting and linking feature has been permanently disabled here on EN.wikipedia. Zzyzx11 (talk) 16:03, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
"I is now [current date]" is utterly superfluous as a link. There are links to adjacent dates and the full list of historical dates. In line with the overwhelming community consensus in the huge RfC in 2009, he current date elements (i.e., month day, and year) should not be linked for auto-formatting purposes. WP no longer uses date-autoformatting. Please remove the DA. Tony (talk) 03:53, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
Done per Tony1, but not the UTC link yet per Dudemanfellabra. Zzyzx11 (talk) 04:01, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. Lightmouse (talk) 09:58, 10 July 2011 (UTC)


Please add ko:틀:오늘의 역사 더보기 as interwiki. Thanks :) --kwan-in (talk) 02:11, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Done --Redrose64 (talk) 15:33, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Edit proposal: 'It is now'[edit]

Isn't it better to display it is today in stead of it is now. The day of today is displayed and now sounds to me like a time indication (if you understand what I mean). Sander.v.Ginkel (talk) 14:55, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Category:Selected anniversaries[edit]

Should this template be added to Category:Selected anniversaries? Have just added Template:SelAnnivFooter/sandbox to that category. Whizz40 (talk) 21:01, 7 February 2017 (UTC)