Talk:March 15
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Julius Caesar?
Shouldn't Caesar go under March 14? Mattman00000 04:20, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
- Why March 14? He was assassinated on the Ides of March, March 15. -- Borameer ™ 14:27, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- Apparently if you convert the calendar they used then to the calendar we use now the March 15 of 44 BC becomes March 14, but he died on the ides of March (March 15) so I don’t see why it should be changed.--ChesterMarcol 16:18, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] March 15
What about under Holidays and observances? It doesn't happen that often, and should be noted somehow on the page. I would think this would be a natural place for it. Chris (クリス) (talk) 17:59, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
- It's only a one time occurrence, so it wouldn't really go under holidays either. It really only affects those religious folks who pay attention to the events of holy week. The world will still celebrate St. Patrick's Day on March 17. Whether the church says it is on March 15 this year or not, it is on March 17 - and it is celebrated as a secular observance more than a religious one. In ten years no one will care that this happened. Maybe it should just go on the St. Patrick's Day article? -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 18:28, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Scientology event
Please establish the notability of the Scientology protest here before adding it to the article. Like the event that took place on February 10, this second protest did not have any impact on anything. It was a low-turnout event that was nothing more than an unsuccessful attempt at disruption. Just because it was covered in some of the mainstream media does not indicate long term global notability of the event. Unless this event sparks major changes in Scientology, it will not rise to the level of global notability required for inclusion. This was not a social milestone or a mass movement for change. All cited sources that I've seen suggest a lower turnout for this event compared with the first one and that indicates that the novelty of the idea is wearing thin. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 17:27, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
wait what.... . This protest happened in hundreds of cities across the globe. Also you state that it was'nt a "mass movement for change"! That is all this is a global protest for change in the church. With that all I have to say is see you at the next protest.
-Anonymous —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anonymous520 (talk • contribs) 17:18, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
- It may have happened in many cities (no evidence of hundreds of cities that I've seen) but interest is certainly waning and it has had no real impact on the church. With a month's notice, I could get 50 people in 20 cities to gather and protest the color blue. This is not notable. A few people who are not willing to admit who they are (anonymous) won't be taken seriously by anyone. If the church is forced to make a change in policy as a direct result of this, then it might be notable. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 17:28, 23 March 2008 (UTC)