Talk:List of calendars
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Time, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Time on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project. |
| List | This article has been rated as List-Class on the quality scale. |
| Top | This article has been rated as Top-importance on the Project's importance scale. |
The following proposed calendars should be discussed: Bob McClenon's Reformed Weekly Calendar: (http://www.go2zero.com/rwc/rwc.html) and adapted from that: Common-Civil-Calendar-and-Time (http://henry.pha.jhu.edu/calendar.html)
These are just two of various proposed leap week calendars. I've listed, linked and discussed various proposals in (http://www.hermetic.ch/cal_stud/palmen/lweek1.htm).
The above proprosals suggest having months of 31, 30 and 30 days every three months and in 53-week years an additional one week month.
An alternative to this is to have months of 35, 28 and 28 days every three months and in 53-week years add a week to the last month. This is done by the Bonavian Civil Calendar in (http://personal.ecu.edu/mccartyr/bonavian.html)
Also 13 months of 28 days with the leap week as a separate 7-day month has been proposed (http://personal.ecu.edu/mccartyr/colligan.html).
Also there are numerous possible ways of defining which years have 53 weeks. Most of these make use of the fact that if there were 71 such years every 400 years, the 400 years would have exactly the same number of days as 400 Gregorian years. The only others actually proposed is 896 years with 159 years of 53 weeks and 834 years of 148 years of 53 weeks.
Karl Palmen 22 Dec 2004
Would this list make more sense as a category, so that it was always up to date? --Nantonos 16:58, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
- Multiple categories already exist: Calendars, which includes Specific calendars, Obsolete calendars, Fictional calendars, and Proposed calendars. List of calendars is in Calendars and in its subcategory Specific calendars (I'm changing that). — Joe Kress 07:46, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
I've added subheads to the "proposed" category clarifying the separate nature of the Darian Calendar (meant for far-future residents of Mars, Jupiter) and calendar reform proposals meant to be discussions about reforming the existing Gregorian calendar here on Earth in the here-and-now. The two subjects are clearly not the same, and the Darian calendar included with the others is confusing and tends to mislead readers about the nature of the others, since settlements on Mars and/or Jupiter's moons are required for the Darian Calendar to be worthwhile. Nhprman 02:44, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
What makes the discordian calendar fictional, exactly? Or any of them? If people use it, it's real... right? And I'm sure there are people out there who use star wars and middle earth calendars. PopeJaimie 23:50, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
I added the Non-Terrestrial and Universal Date (as a blank). I sadly had to use my own original research as an example external link for what such would be. Maybe the Non-Terrestrial category will be better served with a short category description of what a Non-Terrestrial date/calendar system is? If the example reference link is removed please add a category description instead and leave Universal Date if possible. And if any verifiable sources of universal and non-terrestrial calendars or date systems are found I'd appreciate if those are added. Surprisingly none exist (how can that be possible?), at least that I have managed to find so far, any assistance is welcome. And yeah, this is the original author of µDate in case you wondered. I'm fully ok if the external reference link to µDate is removed provided something else is put there instead. Trying to find more research info on calendar/date systems that are universal/non-terrestrial led me always back to my own site (frustrating), and even Wikipedia turned up nothing. (Non-Earth systems hardly count as Non-Terrestrial) I was hoping Wikipedia could provide research info and links to further improve my proposal before final submission to the scientific community, upon which time a proper entry for µDate (or maybe then named Universal Date if I'm lucky and it's accepted), a nice Catch-21 situation here, how to compare against other systems if none exist before?. Heh!-—Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.203.112.22 (talk) 20:42, 3 May, 2007
