Talk:December 21

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject Days of the Year, a Wikiproject dedicated to improving and maintaining the style guide for date pages.
 
--mav 00:59, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
This box: view • talk • edit
Selected anniversaries for this day
Please read the selected anniversaries guidelines before editing this box.

December 21: December Solstice (12:04 UTC, 2008); Dongzhi, Yalda, Yule, and other winter solstice festivals (Northern Hemisphere, 2008); Midsummer festivities (Southern Hemisphere, 2008); Hanukkah begins at sunset (Judaism, 2008)

Rondane National Park

More events: December 20 – December 21 – December 22

Archive – By email – More anniversaries...
It is now 17:23, June 12, 2008 (UTC) – Refresh this page

Where's the evidence for the Isle of Man claim? The women's suffrage entry claims that that honor goes to New Jersey, albeit very briefly... --dcsohl

1861 event: " ... Confederate envoys James Mason and John Slidell, arrested by the United States Navy aboard the British mail steamer Trent in order to prevent war between the United States and the United Kingdom." Is this what is meant? That Mason and Slidell were arrested in order to prevent war? Or is it just bad grammar? The sentence is very long; I would edit but do not know the history at all. --alpheus

I notice that an anonymous user working from IP address 172.189.110.188 has been making aggressive edits: removing many events because (s)he could not find that info in related articles. Most of the deleted entries seem plausible, and if there is no clear evidence that the info that someone has bothered to enter is false, I would give it the benefit of the doubt and retain it: maybe the other articles are deficient. Wikipedia is suffering from a consistent method for referring to sources. What do y'all think? Tom Peters 19:34, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't have any particular problem with removing events that aren't mentioned in any linked articles; if they weren't important enough to be listed in the article about the subject, why should they be here? Given Wikipedia's recent trouble with "facts" not backed up by verifiable sources, I'm not sure the benefit of the doubt should run in this direction. This is a more general question, however, that might be worth bringing up on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Days of the year. Also, see the note on that talk page about "this day in history" websites - I wouldn't be surprised if those are the questionable source of many of the entries here. CDC (talk) 19:52, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
responding to RfC: i think the user is removing too much information. the stuff he removed should probably be kept, like the mayan calendar thing and the vancouver thing.--BUF4Life 19:36, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

I would be in favor of the questionable material being retained, since most of it seems likely to be true. This stuff needs a reference tag, not deletion KrazyCaley 05:56, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

I wholeheartedly agree.--BUF4Life 03:27, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Maya

Should the Mayan claim of the world ending in 2012 on Dec 21 be mentioned? Motor.on


Maybe technically the idea that the world will end is wrong, but that does not mean it won't have significance. My2K is fascinating whether it's true or not. People will be looking for info. So why would we not mention it? EdnaNetzke (talk) 20:44, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I think it should be mentioned, thats why i came to this page in the first place... Alexbrewer 13:45, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
Ditto Tayandre 06:34, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
That the world ends (actually is re-created) by the Maya on December 21, 2012 is not a Maya belief, but a deduction by former Maya scholars which is now solely advocated by New Age astrologers. Before 1975, it was assumed that the Long Count ceased or recycled when it reached 13.0.0.0.0 on December 21, 2012, beginning a new Long Count with the next baktun (after 400 years) being 1.0.0.0.0. When Maya glyphs could be read (after 1975), a Maya date more than two thousand years in the future was found which was stated by a Maya king to be his anniversary, hence the Maya did not cease their Long Count in 2012. The Long Count is now regarded as continuing endlessly, with the next baktun after 13.0.0.0.0 being 14.0.0.0.0, then the baktuns recycle at 20, not 13. Although the end of the world is recounted in the Popol Vuh, it never gave a specific Long Count date to it. New Age astrologers have linked the former end of the Long Count with the end of the world on this former hypothesis—Maya scholars no longer do that, hence it should not be listed as an anniversary in this article. — Joe Kress 21:30, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Actually writing 'humanity' under 'deaths' section may be funny, but it's not intelligent - beside fact, that it isn't in the page source!