Talk:July 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.
This box: view • talk • edit
Selected anniversaries for this day
Please read the selected anniversaries guidelines before editing this box.

July 21: Marine Day in Japan (2008); National holiday of Belgium; Racial Harmony Day in Singapore

Leopold I of Belgium

More events: July 20 – July 21 – July 22

Archive – By email – More anniversaries...
It is now 18:23, June 14, 2008 (UTC) – Refresh this page

[edit] July 21 of a BC Date?

Come on, how can you have a July 21 of a date before the calendar was created? Not to mention which the adjustments to the Gregorian calendar which make it difficult to even suggest that this would've been the date had the calendar been in existance. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.102.126.97 (talk) 06:39, 6 April 2007 (UTC).

The Romans devised the basis for the modern calendar. July, for example, was named in honor of Julius Caesar, with its successor August after his heir Augustus. Tsunomaru 17:17, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Where's Hary Potter?

isn't the release of Harry Potter 7 important enough to appear here?

Correct, it isn't important enough. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 20:36, 22 May 2007 (UTC)
Maybe it will be after the fact when millions of people taking the day off causes the developed world's economies to collapse. Tsunomaru 17:28, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I think that Harry Potter has gotten enough attention to be worth putting up on the list.

Yeah. It was so widely read the NYT book folks created a new bestseller list to get Harry Potter off of their main list. All 6 of the released novels are in the top 20 most sold books of all time (Wpedia has a list). It will be the largest opening for a book ever and will remain that way into the forseeable future, probably for a generation. Guns & Roses' debut album release Appetite for Destruction is in the current list of events, and Harry Potter is certainly as important a cultural phenomenon as they were. 128.193.0.6 22:16, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Ventifact

I added Harry Potter and someone immediately reverted it without comment. I don't have time to learn enough Wiki to call for a vote or article protection. However, on the odd coincidence that the person responsible for the edits even reads the discussion page, I might suggest that if they're such a great Wikipedian that they enlighten us as to why Harry Potter is not important enough to be in the list (especially if we infer standards of entry by the events already present, including Guns n Roses). 128.193.4.98 23:11, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Ventifact

The entry could have been deleted for two reasons:
  1. It is a future event. Those are considered speculative and aren't allowed. For something to have historical significance, it has to be history.
  2. It is a book. It is not globally notable (and just because the world knows about it doesn't make it globally notable).
Take a look here for some help in identifying what is and is not notable for calendar entries. -- Mufka (user) (talk) (contribs) 23:27, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


(Edit conflict) I believe the rule from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Days of the year is that these pages aren't for future events. So it's not okay to add it now, but come 00:01 June 21st BST, I think it's fair game for inclusion. Actually, a question is if it should be added here, or to July 20... the book is actually coming out at 11:01 July 20 UTC, if I did the time zone math properly.

Mufka, it seems like the release of the new harry potter book will be instantly notable, once it happens. A few quick checks show that there's been more than 2 million pre-orders from Amazon alone, with another 1.2 million from Barnes and Noble. I think a book selling 3 million copies in a day is notable for that alone. — PyTom 23:35, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

If it breaks a record it might be notable. In that case the entry for the book released in 2005 will need to be removed. The accepted practice is that book releases are not notable for Wikicalendar articles. Any compelling argument will, of course, be evaluated. -- Mufka (user) (talk) (contribs) 00:18, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
I think this is as good a forum as any for that evaluation. I'd argue that the release of of a book that sells more than, say, 5 million copies on the first day is inherently notable, especially given the huge amount of media coverage that surrounded that first day alone. I believe that Half-Blood Prince is notable by this standard, and Order of the Phoenix and Goblet of Fire might be... the first three books certainly aren't, as they had relatively small first printings.
To put this in perspective, more people bought Half-Blood Prince on the first day than live in New Zealand. — PyTom 00:39, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Edited slightly... I always forget Order of the Phoenix. — PyTom 01:31, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
What you say might be true but generally the litmus test is whether the item would still be notable in 50 years. Take a look at WP:RECENT. The intent of these articles is to note historically significant events or events that have a significant cultural impact. Granted there are a lot of entries that do not qualify but we can only take one at a time. Another thing that I think is important is that some types of items simply need to be excluded. Books, especially fiction, is one. The gray area on the topic of notable books would be immense and inclusion would surely result in continuous edit wars. Where is the line drawn? Bestsellers? Bestsellers in certain categories? Oprah's book list? Today's record breaker; what happens to yesterday's? -- Mufka (user) (talk) (contribs) 01:40, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, I think WP:N is the relevant policy— and I believe that the release of the three most recent Potter books quality. I think the guideline should be that that the release of a work of fiction is notable if the release itself is notable, independent of the work of fiction itself. I think that's the case with this release, and the last three... there are plenty of articles in reliable sources (such as [1]) that speak to the notability of this release, independent of the book. — PyTom 02:42, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

There is one important difference between an article and a WikiCalender page. Articles do not have to be globally notable. You can apply WP:N directly to an article. Wikicalendar pages have the added burden of global notability and cultural pertinence. One reason for this is because calendar pages contain very little detail and no references - by design. I guess you could ask this: is anyone going to look at the world differently in 10 years because the Harry Potter book was released on this date? -- Mufka (user) (talk) (contribs) 03:03, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Hm... Well, I think global notability is given, see my reference to the Times of India article. Do I think people will look at the world differently because of it? Well, it certainly changes peoples perceptions of how successful a book can be. I think it's at least as notable as half the stuff on this page.
BTW, I encourage everyone to mind the WP:3RR. Remember, the exception is only for "simple and obvious vandalism", which I think good-faith contributions of content are. — PyTom 07:07, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

seriously, i think the hp7 release should be on this page. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.218.142.119 (talk • contribs) 15:01, July 20, 2007 (UTC)

Seriously, I think not. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 17:20, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree with the inclusion of the HP7 release. It was surely the most famous book release in publishing history and broke numerous records worldwide for book sales. It is a day that many people will remember for years to come, surely just as notable as the entries for 2004 and 2005. Timb66 04:16, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

I still don't think it's appropriate, but this last is a plausible reason for inclusion, unlike all the other comments made here. I can't say it's vandalism, so I won't revert for another 3 or 4 hours.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arthur_Rubin (talk • contribs) 13:46, 24 July 2007
See also [2], a CNN article pointing out the importance of this release to a generation. — PyTom 17:38, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

I think the release of HP7 is important enough to be listed in the calendar. The sales section of the article on this book summarizes the worldwide reach it had on release day. Lisatwo 15:08, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Every one on wikipedia hates Harry Potter. Go to Talk:HBP and see the fight I had to make to put Half-Blood Prince on the list. You'll have the same problem here. They'll delete because they can, even though it's wrong. Arry 09:34, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] the moon landing is wrong

Armstrong and Aldrin walked on the moon on July 20, not the 21st. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 198.66.88.225 (talk • contribs).

According to the article, which I believe is correct, they landed on July 20, but didn't exit the LM and walk on the moon until July 21 (UTC). — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 15:13, 1 June 2007 (UTC)