Knowledge talk:WikiProject Days of the year/Archive 8

930:

I do not know either way), but not because of "POV consistency". I don't know where you live, but in the US the holiday on July 4 is generally referred to as "the fourth of July", not US Independence Day. Similarly, "Cinco de Mayo" can clearly be confused with "May 5" (and if they commonly call it Quatorze Juillet in France there's confusion with Bastille Day). My question to you about Australia Day is not rhetorical. To your knowledge, is Jan 26th synonymous with Australia Day (i.e. do people in Australia not refer to this day as "Australia Day" but as "Jan 26th" or "26th of Jan")? --

1194:

redundancy in adding disambiguation or hat notes as necessary. This is unrelated to Wallie's particular hobby-horse, his solution-in-search-of-a-problem whereupon he imposes his personal opinion of what's important and elevating them--you'll recall that's what he started out doing, singling out certain historic events as 'most important'--all without the slightest evidence so far other than his vague feelings that there is a problem or that his claims regarding disambiguation are true. I find it hard to understand what, exactly, he is hoping to accomplish here other than scoring points. --

960:, but that doesn't mean it isn't important/used. In the US, I always thought that "Independence Day" was used a lot. There was even a film made about it! I am also definitely familiar with the fifth of May. In Switzerland, the national day is usually known as the first of August. The 15th of August is certainly used in India. The 9th of May is also widely used in Russia. President Bush also attended the ceremonies there. You just have to Google these to see. If any date means anything to me, it is probably the fifth of November - Guy Fawkes night. However, that is noy there either. 578:

have an article). Some cases are a little less obvious, like July 1 meaning Canada Day or July 14 meaning Bastille Day. If we phrase the rule as "for disambiguation only" I don't think we have to enumerate precisely what this does or doesn't include. It seems you want a strict rule that requires no judgment at all to apply. That might be nice in a way, but it's not really how things work here. Rules evolve from observing what people in the aggregate actually do, since if they're actually doing it there's clearly a

31: 1268:

you have no grounds to comment on whether a hatnote for this day should exist. The question is not whether you recognize that the date coincides with something, but whether the date is actually the name (e.g. "fourth of July" or "Cinco de Mayo" or "Quatorze Juillet"). If we're strict about this rule, I think we may be talking about only a handful of cases, actually fewer than the list I suggested above. Perhaps (ignoring the July 1 song):

298:

expect to find a disambiguation page for a date). Calling it (in the bullet) "disambiguation" carries the right connotation, implying a hatnote should be used only in cases in which a reasonable person might expect to arrive at the linked page when entering the date and pressing GO. This requires a bit of judgment, but I think better reflects current practice as it has evolved (which is always a good thing - creating rules to try to impose

1091:

do we need to disambiguate from a disambiguation page? The things that we would be disambiguating are already listed on the pages (with the exception of things like that July 1 song, which doesn't have an article and thus, does not need disambiguation). I can see the argument that the pages are too long to be effective dab pages, but there are some pretty long dab pages (e.g.

520:'s Independence Day. Mostly because I suspect we have very, very few readers from East Timor. This is the English language Knowledge, so there's certainly plenty of systemic bias toward English speaking readers. Including hatnotes for the convenience of English speaking readers seems to me no more biased than having the articles in English to start with. -- 873:--resolving ambiguity--not as some alternative way to elevate some dates or events above others. None of the new additions by Wallie are anywhere close to needing disambiguation, and I'm at a complete loss to understand the rationale--other than Wallie's personal opinion as to what constitutes 'important'. -- 365:

should make rules which suit everyone, not just the cultures of certain select Wikipedian authors. What goes in the intro and where it is linked to should be standardized. It could mean that every date has a disambiguation page (I hope not!). The 12 months seem OK. What have the days become so inconsistent?

2686:

As for animals. There is no explicit criteria for animals and they have been included in some cases, but if they are to be included at a minimum they need to be widely notable and be the subject of their own article. I personally think they should be excluded, but I'm not going to argue that point.

2660:

On the pages of dates is there a set convention on how the nationality of a person is given, because Russel Crowe was born in NZ, but claims himself Austrailian, and he is called a New Zealander on his birthday short. Meanwhile Keisha Castle-Hughes was born in Australia, but considers herself a Kiwi,

2429:

As for creating a more narrow criteria, I am opposed to any subjective means. If someone is notable enough for an article on Knowledge, then they are notable enough to be listed on a DoY page. These are encyclopedia pages, not synopses. Although, one non-subjective way to limit some names would be to

577:

The suggestion is to allow hatnotes only for disambiguation, i.e. only in cases in which a reasonable person might expect the article name to refer to a different article. Some cases are obvious - for example the song titled "July 1" (although even this one isn't that obvious, since the song doesn't

405:

EC: I'm not clear on what you are objecting to. POV and bias have nothing to do with coming up with a standard for introductions. The argument is very clear: If someone types in July 1 and it is reasonable for them to expect that they should find themselves at an article other than the date article

2349:

I've been skimming through the days of the year, and I've noticed something interesting (and a little sad). The listing of births is very long, and for little good reason. Does anyone else find it odd that for pre-1900 the majority of births listed are of scientists, politicians, kings, artists, and

1861:

I don't think that there is a problem using ddd in the case of leap years. February 29 always comes after February 28 and before March 1. The category just lists the dates without regard for whether it is a leap year or not. But I think Rick Block's point about knowing which number the date is is

1267:

If we keep the hatnote specifically for disambiguation, i.e. we're only talking about things that are known by the calendar date (syntactically, not semantically), I don't see any issues with this. If you don't know whether Australians refer to Australia Day by the calendar date , this simply means

1090:

So where does that leave us? Consider what a disambiguation page is: It is a list of things that have a common characteristic - usually a name. What is a date article? It is a list of things that occur on the same date. By my crack analysis, the date pages are just disambiguation pages. So why

1042:

It seems that the "reasonable expectation" theory isn't going to work mostly because reasonable people can disagree on just about anything. This is because, as an American, I cannot know how observances are perceived in other regions. I have my 10 or so holidays that I recognize by date, but it is

929:

instead". Does July 1 = Canada Day meet this criteria? Frankly, I don't know, but somebody, at some point, added it so I'm perfectly willing to accept it. I'm perfectly willing to accept a hatnote for Australia Day if "January 26th" is synonymous with Australia Day (which it may be in Australia -

297:

or similar disambiguation template"). I think the point is that the intro is for calendar-centric information as opposed to events or holidays, and there should be one and only one disambiguation line, making the criteria for what makes it to this line extremely exclusive (and I'd pretty much never

2354:

than anything else. I have to ask, without disrespecting these people, why are they listed? The lists are out of control. If a person is looking for notable people born on a specific day, are they looking to find the whole of the 2008 UK Cricketing roster and the stars of High School Musical 2? No,

2325:

I error checked every page after the change and fixed minor errors along the way. It is certainly possible that there are minor errors but I think my check was pretty thorough. One possible error that might have slipped by is if the date was formatted like (b. ]). My check would have removed the

1795:

My point is that the first character of the sort key becomes a sort of index in the category listing. Using numbers 000-366 or a four digit mm-dd key makes no particular difference to me (although what day number is Sept 30? - without looking it up I know the mm-dd would be 09-30). As long as we

1746:

rather than 0 in the cat listing). For the month category, the monthyear articles are using the year as the sort key. This clumps all months in years 1000-1999 together under 1 and all months in years 2000-2999 under 2. What you're suggesting would have the net effect of moving the days from the

1130:

Mufka. I think that I agree on the points you make here. So how do we move forward? Do we remove all the disambiguation notes and images? I think you are correct that due to the "dominant demographics of its editors, bias will always exist". That's where nasty foreigners like myself come in and try

734:

What these have in common is they all fall on a specific date, they're named, and they all have articles. They're either national days or widely recognized holidays, but that doesn't mean we need to include hatnotes for all national days and all widely recognized holidays. I'd be fine with adding

452:

Hopefully no one objects if I give my opinion on the question posed to Rick Block. Every national day of every country can theoretically be listed under Holidays and observances. A mention in the intro is purely to help a reader who typed in the name of an article and expected to end up somewhere

2603:

three important factors that need to be considered up front though (IMO). First, you can't argue for their existence on the basis of notability as I would envision that they are just lists. Second, level of interest is important in building them to a point where they are useful (and include more

2489:

Do I understand that these pages are filled by individual editors who add all of these various items? Might I ask what could be your reasons for doing so? And how do you go about it? These pages seem a little silly to me, but of course I can be persuaded otherwise. Yours in puzzlement, a friend to

1193:

Meanwhile, I'd say that no, date pages are not disambiguation pages in any meaningful sense of the term, since there's no ambiguity involved in the entries. Rather, they're consolidation and organisation pages, revolving about the organising principle of chronology, so there's no contradiction nor

364:

This goes right to the heart of what I was objecting to. It is called political bias. Most countries have a National Holiday. However, very few call it "Independence Day". This is very very POV to my mind. We should allow ALL national days, or none of them, irrespective of what they are called. We

2682:

For the most part the country of birth is listed unless the individual has moved and become a citizen of another country. Russell Crowe, for example could be listed as "New Zealand-born Australian actor", but since he moved to Australia at age 4, he is Australian IMO. There is no hard rule, and

1450:

Rick. From what you are saying, this whole episode is becoming a farce. It is so UK and US biased it isn't even funny. If this sort of bias continues on Knowledge, then only people from the US and UK will treat it seriously. Others will recognize it as a marketing tool to promote UK/US interests.

1011:

Yes. I am very concerned at the cultural bias. I think it is obvious. I think that you could say that for "31st of October parties" as opposed to "Halloween parties". I can see the case for the Fourth of July but most of the others are known by their day name, not the calendar date, this includes

832:

The other (main) criteria is that such hatnotes are only for disambiguation, i.e. provided in cases in which a reasonable person might expect the article name (the date) to refer to a different article. Just to clarify, are you saying that you think there's a reasonable chance someone looking up

336:

template so it wouldn't go away (should it?). But some leeway on which template to use is reasonable and expected. I think what our goal should be is to prevent free-form intro writing. I think it is an especially important criteria that one should reasonably expect to find the linked page on

982:

As far as I know, in the US it's hardly ever called "Independence Day". Do you go to "5th of November parties" (meaning "Guy Fawkes night parties")? I have an Indian friend at work and he said he calls Aug 15 "Independence Day" (India has sort of a lot of people, so this may very well vary).

1501:

Yes. CW does have an opinion of what is acceptable. He does not want any rules, only his rules. It is clear that he has personal dislikes, like me, and will immeditely revert anything any such person writes. His actions are clearly supported by Knowledge. So I guess I will have to accept that.

1064:

Due to the nature of the encyclopedia and the dominant demographics of its editors, bias will always exist. Bias cannot be eliminated, but in order to keep the utility to the average user as high as possible, concessions need to be made that, unfortunately, reduce the flavor of the articles -

2386:

specifically points out that "being the subject of a Knowledge article is only a minimum requirement for inclusion in a Wikicalendar article. Not all people meet the more stringent notability requirements for Wikicalendar articles." The problem with this is that it leaves a lot to subjective

2253:

I'm not able to figure out how to do this easily with AWB. I could do it manually while doing other AWB fixes over a few days, so long as that isn't seen as disruptive. The alternative is a bot. For consistency sake, we should probably add defaultsort to all of the pages - but leave it as

841:, etc.? The proposed rule (which I think is still proposed, not agreed on) is "if disambiguation is needed, then add a hatnote" not "if it's a national day or widely recognized holiday that falls on a specific date, is named, and has an article then add a hatnote". -- 1095:). In this case, hat notes would be used for things that are not events or observances. If this is the solution, we also need to address the unwritten rule about images in the date articles. If the articles are to be completely objective, that means no images. -- 983:

Specifics aside, are we now talking about the same thing? Does the proposed rule convey this meaning (at the risk of speaking for Mufka, I think this is what he has in mind)? Are you still concerned that this is POV or culturally biased? --

1832:

problem, Mufka's ddd solution is troublesome; do we want it to be the index in leap years, or the index in non-leap-years (with February 29's index being 0595, rather than the correct 060). On the other hand, this only has to be done once. —

1429:

by CW - is the issue the form rather than the substance, i.e. would you be OK with mentioning India's Independence Day as text in the intro as opposed to a hatnote? Please elaborate what you both mean - examples would help as well. --

1369:, all for the sake of fixing firm black-and-white boundaries to rein in one specific editor's eccentricities--eccentricities which, based on some of his assertions about events and names, don't even seem particularly well-founded. -- 899:

Be honest, Rick. Are you really trying to say that Canada Day is more important than Australia Day. Your purpose IS to elevate some dates, but only if they are in certain countries. I just want a level playing field, minimizing POV.

2145:

should work well. It can cover all months and days. The odd dates like January 0 are not in the cat, and I don't think they should be. The next question is how. I don't think I can do it with AWB. A little complex for me. --

480:

For the Canadian holiday... is biased. As you mentioned, it should be listed under Holidays and observances (I think that means not in the intro). For example, August 1 is not listed, and it has been a national holiday since 1291.

2179:

You can append that using AWB. However, I can't figure out how to substitute it. Changing "#time" to "subst:#time" doesn't seem to work. (The "2008" may be necessary to prevent February 29 from becoming converted to 03-01.) —

2254:{{DEFAULTSORT:January 01}} because it might not be appropriate for it to sort by month in an unrelated cat (few as they are). This shouldn't cause a problem with the days cat because the custom sort will override the default. 2121:

The count on Category:Days of the year is always wrong. Has something to do with page blankings, etc. and it not refreshing properly. I've been tracking to be sure that all 366 are in there. It's easy to check with AWB. --

2598:

We've swatted that idea around before as a way to trim the content of the current DOY articles. I'm in favor of doing so for that reason (and generally not opposed even if that is just an unintended consequence). There are

1402:

I agree with that. I tried putting in dates from other cultures and was very quickly reverted. If the "special dates" are to be limited to the UK and the US, then the impact should be limited as much as possible to my mind.

511:

from mention in a hatnote. I wouldn't go out of my way to add them all either. I don't think of this as political bias, but practicality. I'd venture a guess that there aren't any readers of en.wikipedia who would expect

2222:

template. Someone added it to a chunk of the articles, but not all. Should we add it to all, or remove it from all? I also notice that not all are move protected so they should all be protected to keep it consistent. --

1862:

important. Using 02-29 is simpler than using 060 if you're passing by and trying to fix it if it gets messed up. One question I have is can the cat be sorted so that January shows up under 1, February under 2, etc.? --

2023:

I don't know how to do any custom index voodoo so unless someone has experience with that, we could just go with the 01-01 format with the space index (if that's the correct term). This will all work well for the

1131:

to bring in other perspectives. I think it is important to bring in other viewpoints. It is a pity that certain people from the "dominant demographics" may also have closed minds (not your good self of course).

2326:]] and [[but it would not have picked up the |. I didn't search for the | in my error checking because I saw and fixed very few of these along the way and in my experience, that format was not widely used. 1979:(or "*"). Since the month name is part of the article name, they'll be grouped by month anyway. We could create a custom category index that would link directly to the first day of each month as well. -- 1633:

Sounds like a good idea. If there is no fierce objection, I'm going to finish them all the way they are (doing more than just add the cat), then we can get a real bot to change them however we decide. --

1167:

Given your obsession and edit-warring, I'd say that your referring to the 'closed minds' of others is more than a little hypocritical. Nor does draping yourself in the shawl of martyrdom make you look any

926:

It's not about importance. Again, it's still a proposal, but I think the idea is that the hatnote is not saying "in our editorial opinion the most important thing that happens on this date is <blarg:

1978:

Kind of extremely geeky, but we could use hex digits for October-December, i.e. A for October, B for November, and C for December. I don't think it would be bad to put them all under <blank: -->

1473:

I'm trying to find out what CW and KT are suggesting. From what I've heard they don't seem to want any rules, but at least CW clearly has an opinion on what he thinks is and is not acceptable. --

1421:

I'm not sure I understand CW's and KT's views on this topic. Are you both saying no particular rules are necessary for the intro section? For example, are you both OK with the current intro to

2544:. I would note that having DoY pages for individual sports would eliminate some of the issues addressed above concerning latter years on regular DoY pages having so many athletes on them. 151:

template does not infer that a disambiguation page that does not currently exist should be created. There are options to the template that allow it to be used to point to existing pages.

2319:- In the process of unlinking the years, I made the format of the (b. YYYY) etc. consistent. Some were (born. 1900), (B. 1900), (b. circa 1900), (b 1900), (b. ca. 1900), {b. 1900}, etc. 120:

The best approach I think is to clear the intro part, and use the "disambiguation page" approach. If there is one and only one link, this could be used instead of a disambiguation page.

2635: 2629: 2541: 94: 86: 2404: 2400: 1069:, you ask? Because if we say that we will make an effort to be inclusive, we couldn't argue against 20 hat notes on the top of every date article - and that would be disruptive. 379:

Rick. A question for you. Please tell me if you can think of ANY country's national day which is not "significant". A country's national day is always important for the country.

215: 81: 69: 64: 59: 2424:

There really weren't many (if any) professional athletes until the 1870s, that would explain why there aren't many (if any) birthdays of professional athletes back in the day.

587:

We may want a short list of examples - actually are there so many that we can't just list them here for future reference? The ones that immediately come to mind for me are:

117:

Everyone has a POV of particular dates, and any other subject for that matter. I may think that one particular date is important - you another. It is just an opinion.

1703:. (Is there a template to generate modified cattoc's? I just copied the template and edited it, although perhaps the centered-dot-template should be added.) — 2355:

they want to find world leaders, inventors, prize-winning authors, i.e. people of worthwhile fame. There are also a lot of issues of people on the list that are

1747:

first letter of the month (J for January) to 0. If we want the monthday and monthyear articles all clumped together the sort key could start with <space: -->

1425:

which mentions the 2001 terrorist attacks and the 1973 coup in Chile (effectively elevating these events to "most important on this date" status)? I notice

47: 17: 243:

would go away. I know this is different from my first thought on this (now archived), but in this case (and I'm not Canadian) I'd actually be OK with:

560:

I still think that it becomes very subjective. I think it is more to do with a person's age rather than their English speaking or even nationality.

2396: 2392: 2261:

bug (on the suggestion of brion) that points out the problem with articles falling out of cats for longer than they should after a blanking. --

1796:

prefix either of these with the same character (space or "*" or whatever) then either of these will make the days show up in calendar order. --

2540:

I did not see a specific DoY articles for deletion subpage, but commentary and opinions by members of this wikiproject would be welcome:

2545: 2350:

noteworthy people, but the post-1900 (especially post-1960) listings are only actors and atheletes? We have more listings for european

2448:

I agree that some objective criteria needs to be established - our problem always ends up being a lack of interest. We had suggested

406:

July 1, then disambiguation is necessary. I cannot think of any example where a dedicated disambiguation page should be necessary.

2105:

The count for months in the month categories was 9 "*", 1 " ", 1 unsorted, 1 missing, so I changed the remaining ones to "*". —

1365:

What bothers me is the requirement here of jettisoning flexibility and common sense in favor of drawing up stricter and stricter

1314: 667: 2580: 2407:) and general consensus is that there should be some limitation. No real consensus exists, though, on what limitations. -- 114:

We need a consistent approach with these Calendar Day artices. A consistent approach is taken with Calendar Month articles.

141:

I propose that the following bullet be considered as the standard going forward. It should be noted that the use of the

2695: 2620: 2513: 2460: 2415: 2337: 2269: 2246: 2231: 2154: 2130: 2070: 2040: 1870: 1780: 1684: 1642: 1103: 461: 433: 345: 226: 207: 2382:

You won't hear any argument from me. I'm all for increasing the real utility of the date articles. As you can see,

2697: 2676: 2647: 2622: 2592: 2553: 2530: 2515: 2499: 2479: 2462: 2439: 2417: 2376: 2339: 2271: 2248: 2233: 2207: 2187: 2156: 2132: 2112: 2072: 2042: 1990: 1949: 1872: 1840: 1807: 1782: 1759: 1730: 1710: 1686: 1667: 1644: 1627: 1511: 1484: 1460: 1441: 1412: 1393: 1378: 1359: 1342: 1203: 1140: 1105: 1021: 994: 969: 941: 909: 882: 852: 819: 746: 571: 531: 490: 463: 435: 388: 374: 347: 313: 228: 209: 135: 38: 2683:

each case can be judged individually. What would the individual say if asked? That is usually a good way to go.

2316:- Added default sort to all of the categories for the first nine days of the month (to be addressed again above). 2300: 2079: 2025: 1898: 1769: 1742: 1657: 1589: 1374: 1199: 878: 801:

All of the above are as important days, as all have articles and fall on a specific date as mentioned by Rick.

123:

Yes, it may be viewed as "consistent foolishness", but what other way is there? We must have some rules here.

2672: 2549: 2356: 1715:

As far as I know there isn't a template for creating cattoc templates but there are quite a few examples in

2430:

dis-allow any stubs, with the understanding that once the article is no longer a stub, it can be included.

2452:

at one point. Excluding stubs seems reasonable. Or maybe some other article-class related criteria. --

2216: 2204: 2184: 2109: 1946: 1837: 1716: 1707: 1664: 1624: 550:

Lets allow national day hatnotes (is this one per country?) - whether they celebrate independence or not.

2526: 2495: 1672:

It was my intention to exclude the pseudo-dates (February 30, January 0, etc.) limiting the cat to the

2664:

Also are famous animals given space on the lists of birthdays, or is this considered too unimportant?

2391:

is attempting to go, there would be significant resistance. This has been discussed in the past (see

1560:, so that it's mm-dd, for sort order. The second one has an additional 0, to prevent the order being: 1348:

Does silence mean folks agree with the above, and can't think of any other cases? Please comment. --

621: 265:

There are two points. First, I don't see any particular need to limit the disambiguation to just the

2643: 2588: 2475: 2435: 1985: 1802: 1754: 1725: 1479: 1436: 1389: 1370: 1354: 1337: 1195: 989: 936: 874: 847: 741: 526: 308: 2387:

interpretation. I agree that the lists should be somehow limited, but I think if we went as far as

2372: 579: 2668: 2296:- Unlinked the dates of birth in the deaths section and the dates of death in the births section. 1384:

There should be flexible. The reader should be able to learn about cultures other than his own.

869:

The very reason for having hat notes (where DID that term come from?) in the first place is for

1287: 630: 2449: 2201: 2181: 2106: 1943: 1834: 1704: 1661: 1621: 1043:

reasonable that someone in Australia has 10 different holidays, some that I've never heard of.

928:", but "many readers, when they arrive here, are expecting to see <this other article: --> 2522: 2491: 2470:

Another way to approach this is to have other DoYs suck up some of these births and deaths.

2029: 1614: 1507: 1456: 1408: 1136: 1017: 965: 905: 815: 603: 567: 508: 486: 384: 370: 276: 131: 2693: 2639: 2618: 2584: 2511: 2471: 2458: 2431: 2413: 2335: 2267: 2244: 2229: 2152: 2128: 2068: 2038: 1980: 1868: 1797: 1778: 1749: 1720: 1697: 1682: 1640: 1600: 1474: 1431: 1385: 1349: 1332: 1278: 1101: 984: 931: 842: 736: 725: 694: 594: 521: 459: 431: 343: 303: 224: 205: 582:

to do it (it's sort of like the development of a scientific theory based on observation).

698: 2661:

and is refered to as Australian/New Zealand actress. Should Russel Crowe's be changed?

2609: 2368: 2306:- Removed unnecessary, inconsistent comments (e.g.  252: 2383: 1305: 1235:

template except in cases of days having specific calendar-related significance (e.g.

838: 648: 612: 166:

template except in cases of days having specific calendar-related significance (e.g.

1768:

Am I silly for thinking that we could just number them 001-366? Just in the case of

2605: 2505:

Every page on Knowledge is filled by individual editors. That's how it works. --

2388: 2364: 2165: 1610: 1579: 1569: 1422: 1323: 1255: 1244: 1229: 676: 330: 291: 269: 186: 175: 160: 145: 547:

Let's allow hatnotes/disambiguations only, for anything not directly date related.

2360: 2329:

Now I'm going to go soak my eyeballs in something cold and made with yeast. --

2257:

BTW, in further response to Arthur Rubin at 23:35, 9 February 2009, I submitted

1825: 1653: 1593: 1503: 1452: 1404: 1240: 1132: 1013: 961: 901: 811: 721: 712: 703: 690: 599: 563: 482: 380: 366: 326:

No disagreement from me. By the way, the Canada Day link on July 1 is using the

239:

July 1 is actually an interesting case. I think this is saying the dab link to

199:

Let us move forward by discussing why this bullet is or is not appropriate. --

171: 127: 46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

1901:, but that leaves the question open of how October through December are sorted. 2691: 2616: 2509: 2456: 2411: 2351: 2333: 2265: 2242: 2227: 2150: 2126: 2066: 2036: 1866: 1776: 1680: 1638: 1574: 1564: 1296: 1099: 834: 765: 758: 716: 681: 657: 639: 517: 457: 429: 414: 341: 248: 240: 222: 203: 1829: 1609:

It would also lead to the days being "featured" in the month categories, as

1531: 1274: 1236: 786: 707: 685: 590: 284: 167: 2604:

than a handful of entries). Third, there is the potential for creating a

2638:

has been extended to get more input. Please chime in with your opinions.

2310:- Made the headings all the same format (e.g. ==Events== with no spaces). 1557: 779: 772: 617: 608: 418: 256: 2258: 2085:

Simplest approach would be to tag days of the year such as January 1 as

1319: 1283: 672: 626: 280: 2290:

I have completed the cleanup on the date pages. I did the following:

2212:

While we're doing this, we should also decide on what to do with the

1331:

Are there any other specific cases anyone thinks meet this rule? --

1310: 1248: 957: 663: 653: 513: 179: 2521:

OK. Everybody has his own idea of Internet fun. Yours faithfully,

1301: 1292: 644: 635: 2313:- Removed spaces between the heading and the first item below it. 1219:

There's a proposal on the table that we add a rule of the form:

1092: 287:). I'm not sure the wording would need to change (perhaps "the 1247:). In cases in which other articles need disambiguation (e.g. 178:). In cases in which other articles need disambiguation (e.g. 735:

more, but wouldn't expect there to be lots and lots more. --

25: 1592:

being in chronological order (with some exceptions, such as

1225:

The introduction for date pages should consist only of the

553:

What about events (which ones, if they are to be included?)

275:

template. Second, I don't see a need to exclude national

156:

The introduction for date pages should consist only of the

776:

Anzac Day/Remembrance Day, Turkey, Australia, New Zealand

2563:

What are the opinions here of having other DoYs such as

1426: 755:

Fair enough. I have added some more national days too.

2636:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/February 7 in baseball

2630:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/February 7 in baseball

2542:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/February 7 in baseball

1261:

template may be used as the first line of the article.

192:

template may be used as the first line of the article.

2200:if the StringFunctions extension is available. — 2171:template, I think the following code should work: 507:Direct answer - I would not exclude any country's 1528:Yes, back to the perennial sort tag question.... 279:and other holidays of similar significance (e.g. 2238:Protection has been fixed on all but June 9. -- 1534:, for example, presently has the category tags: 2367:. I would like to begin paring the lists down. 1741:I'd prefer adding a space before the mm-dd for 8: 2095:And days and pseudo-days (January 0, etc) as 2028:but what, if anything, should be done about 1676:dates of the year that currently occur. -- 1745:(so they'll be indexed under <space: --> 18:Knowledge talk:WikiProject Days of the year 2612:or another topic specific project? -- 2078:We might as well. I also noticed that 2583:to create such a series for baseball. 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 2062:Should we do anything with this? -- 1596:), although we still need a modified 7: 417:. For the Ayumi Hamasaki song, see 2345:Listings for Birth on any given day 1897:You could have January under 1 in 1613:already has a sort key of 2007 in 810:All these fill the above criteria 24: 2608:. Would it fall primarily under 516:to take them to an article about 107:Could be resolve this logically? 2192:The month tags might be done by 1693:Also, I've already modified the 1315:Independence Day (United States) 668:Independence Day (United States) 29: 2573:Days of the year in art history 1748:for these as well (or "*"). -- 1660:. It's not obvious to me.) — 337:visiting the date article. -- 302:behavior rarely goes well). -- 2581:Knowledge:WikiProject Baseball 2569:Days of the year in television 413:For the Canadian holiday, see 247:For the Canadian holiday, see 1: 2249:22:11, 10 February 2009 (UTC) 2234:21:55, 10 February 2009 (UTC) 2208:00:55, 10 February 2009 (UTC) 2188:00:23, 10 February 2009 (UTC) 2043:15:14, 16 December 2008 (UTC) 1991:19:39, 15 December 2008 (UTC) 1950:18:02, 15 December 2008 (UTC) 1873:16:51, 15 December 2008 (UTC) 1841:03:34, 12 December 2008 (UTC) 1485:01:16, 28 December 2008 (UTC) 1461:21:01, 27 December 2008 (UTC) 1442:16:34, 22 December 2008 (UTC) 1413:21:06, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 1394:15:40, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 1379:15:30, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 1360:15:07, 19 December 2008 (UTC) 1343:01:26, 13 December 2008 (UTC) 1204:00:31, 13 December 2008 (UTC) 1141:20:56, 12 December 2008 (UTC) 1106:15:34, 12 December 2008 (UTC) 1022:08:55, 12 December 2008 (UTC) 1012:Christmas and Christmas Eve. 995:01:12, 12 December 2008 (UTC) 970:18:39, 11 December 2008 (UTC) 942:18:26, 11 December 2008 (UTC) 910:15:40, 11 December 2008 (UTC) 883:14:52, 11 December 2008 (UTC) 853:14:14, 11 December 2008 (UTC) 820:11:01, 11 December 2008 (UTC) 2577:Days of the year in baseball 2340:15:40, 5 December 2008 (UTC) 2157:23:45, 9 February 2009 (UTC) 2133:23:39, 9 February 2009 (UTC) 2113:23:35, 9 February 2009 (UTC) 2073:15:45, 9 February 2009 (UTC) 1808:23:36, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 1783:19:52, 6 December 2008 (UTC) 1760:21:05, 4 December 2008 (UTC) 1731:21:05, 4 December 2008 (UTC) 1711:19:25, 4 December 2008 (UTC) 1687:19:29, 4 December 2008 (UTC) 1668:19:23, 4 December 2008 (UTC) 1645:19:20, 4 December 2008 (UTC) 1628:18:40, 4 December 2008 (UTC) 747:20:42, 4 December 2008 (UTC) 572:07:58, 4 December 2008 (UTC) 532:22:31, 3 December 2008 (UTC) 491:20:31, 3 December 2008 (UTC) 464:19:58, 3 December 2008 (UTC) 436:19:52, 3 December 2008 (UTC) 409:What is biased or POV about: 389:19:43, 3 December 2008 (UTC) 375:19:37, 3 December 2008 (UTC) 348:02:54, 3 December 2008 (UTC) 314:02:09, 3 December 2008 (UTC) 229:01:32, 3 December 2008 (UTC) 210:01:04, 3 December 2008 (UTC) 136:09:35, 1 December 2008 (UTC) 1512:11:25, 1 January 2009 (UTC) 2714: 2698:12:34, 29 April 2009 (UTC) 2677:05:01, 29 April 2009 (UTC) 2516:12:19, 31 March 2009 (UTC) 2500:05:20, 31 March 2009 (UTC) 2463:20:14, 19 March 2009 (UTC) 2440:19:43, 19 March 2009 (UTC) 2418:17:12, 19 March 2009 (UTC) 2377:16:26, 19 March 2009 (UTC) 1649:No problem. (By the way, 412: 246: 110:My take on the situation: 2648:14:42, 6 April 2009 (UTC) 2623:13:02, 3 April 2009 (UTC) 2593:01:48, 3 April 2009 (UTC) 2579:? I've been working with 2565:Days of the year in China 2554:13:53, 1 April 2009 (UTC) 2531:04:12, 1 April 2009 (UTC) 2480:12:21, 3 April 2009 (UTC) 2301:Category:Days of the year 2272:14:05, 6 March 2009 (UTC) 2080:Category:Days of the year 2026:Category:Days of the year 1899:Category:Days of the year 1770:Category:Days of the year 1743:Category:Days of the year 1658:Category:Days of the year 1590:Category:Days of the year 956:OK. I am unfamiliar with 2559:Potential for other DoYs 2082:only has 361 entries.... 1556:The first one is pseudo 837:is actually looking for 2357:famous for being famous 1717:Category:TOC templates 1545:Perhaps it should be: 660:(and the song I guess) 103:Introduction revisited 556:What about songs etc? 42:of past discussions. 1931:February 1 having ] 1588:This would lead to 1065:especially lists. 622:Saint Patrick's Day 1937:October 1 having ] 1928:January 1 having ] 1524:Category sort tags 2485:How is this done? 2286:Date page cleanup 2161:From parsing the 1989: 1806: 1758: 1729: 1483: 1440: 1358: 1341: 993: 940: 851: 745: 530: 312: 277:Independence Days 218:for history. -- 100: 99: 54: 53: 48:current talk page 2705: 2690: 2615: 2508: 2455: 2410: 2332: 2264: 2241: 2226: 2221: 2215: 2170: 2164: 2149: 2125: 2065: 2035: 2030:Category:January 1983: 1865: 1800: 1775: 1752: 1723: 1702: 1696: 1679: 1656:to be placed in 1637: 1615:Category:January 1605: 1599: 1477: 1434: 1352: 1335: 1288:April Fools' Day 1260: 1254: 1234: 1228: 1098: 987: 934: 845: 739: 631:April Fools' Day 524: 509:Independence Day 456: 428: 340: 335: 329: 306: 296: 290: 274: 268: 221: 202: 191: 185: 165: 159: 150: 144: 78: 56: 55: 33: 32: 26: 2713: 2712: 2708: 2707: 2706: 2704: 2703: 2702: 2688: 2658: 2633: 2613: 2561: 2538: 2506: 2487: 2453: 2408: 2347: 2330: 2288: 2262: 2239: 2224: 2219: 2213: 2168: 2162: 2147: 2123: 2063: 2033: 1863: 1824:Because of the 1773: 1700: 1694: 1677: 1635: 1603: 1597: 1526: 1371:CalendarWatcher 1258: 1252: 1232: 1226: 1196:CalendarWatcher 1096: 875:CalendarWatcher 695:Remembrance Day 604:Valentine's Day 454: 426: 422: 338: 333: 327: 294: 288: 272: 266: 260: 219: 200: 189: 183: 163: 157: 148: 142: 105: 74: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 2711: 2709: 2701: 2700: 2684: 2657: 2654: 2652: 2632: 2627: 2626: 2625: 2560: 2557: 2537: 2534: 2519: 2518: 2486: 2483: 2468: 2467: 2466: 2465: 2443: 2442: 2426: 2425: 2421: 2420: 2363:'s father and 2346: 2343: 2323: 2322: 2321: 2320: 2317: 2314: 2311: 2308: 2304: 2297: 2287: 2284: 2283: 2282: 2281: 2280: 2279: 2278: 2277: 2276: 2275: 2274: 2255: 2236: 2198: 2197: 2196: 2190: 2177: 2176: 2175: 2143: 2142: 2141: 2135: 2116: 2115: 2102: 2101: 2100:] (note space) 2097: 2096: 2092: 2091: 2087: 2086: 2083: 2060: 2059: 2058: 2057: 2056: 2055: 2054: 2053: 2052: 2051: 2050: 2049: 2048: 2047: 2046: 2045: 2006: 2005: 2004: 2003: 2002: 2001: 2000: 1999: 1998: 1997: 1996: 1995: 1994: 1993: 1963: 1962: 1961: 1960: 1959: 1958: 1957: 1956: 1955: 1954: 1953: 1952: 1940: 1939: 1938: 1935: 1932: 1929: 1913: 1912: 1911: 1910: 1909: 1908: 1907: 1906: 1905: 1904: 1903: 1902: 1884: 1883: 1882: 1881: 1880: 1879: 1878: 1877: 1876: 1875: 1850: 1849: 1848: 1847: 1846: 1845: 1844: 1843: 1815: 1814: 1813: 1812: 1811: 1810: 1788: 1787: 1786: 1785: 1763: 1762: 1738: 1737: 1736: 1735: 1734: 1733: 1691: 1690: 1689: 1583: 1582: 1577: 1572: 1567: 1554: 1553: 1550: 1543: 1542: 1539: 1525: 1522: 1521: 1520: 1519: 1518: 1517: 1516: 1515: 1514: 1492: 1491: 1490: 1489: 1488: 1487: 1466: 1465: 1464: 1463: 1445: 1444: 1418: 1417: 1416: 1415: 1397: 1396: 1363: 1362: 1329: 1328: 1327: 1326: 1317: 1308: 1299: 1290: 1281: 1279:New Year's Day 1265: 1264: 1263: 1262: 1217: 1216: 1215: 1214: 1213: 1212: 1211: 1210: 1209: 1208: 1207: 1206: 1180: 1179: 1178: 1177: 1176: 1175: 1174: 1173: 1172: 1171: 1170: 1169: 1154: 1153: 1152: 1151: 1150: 1149: 1148: 1147: 1146: 1145: 1144: 1143: 1117: 1116: 1115: 1114: 1113: 1112: 1111: 1110: 1109: 1108: 1079: 1078: 1077: 1076: 1075: 1074: 1073: 1072: 1071: 1070: 1053: 1052: 1051: 1050: 1049: 1048: 1047: 1046: 1045: 1044: 1031: 1030: 1029: 1028: 1027: 1026: 1025: 1024: 1002: 1001: 1000: 999: 998: 997: 975: 974: 973: 972: 951: 950: 949: 948: 947: 946: 945: 944: 917: 916: 915: 914: 913: 912: 892: 891: 890: 889: 888: 887: 886: 885: 871:disambiguation 860: 859: 858: 857: 856: 855: 825: 824: 823: 822: 805: 804: 803: 802: 796: 795: 794: 793: 792: 791: 784: 777: 770: 763: 750: 749: 731: 730: 729: 728: 726:New Year's Eve 719: 710: 701: 688: 679: 670: 661: 651: 642: 633: 624: 615: 606: 597: 595:New Year's Day 584: 583: 558: 557: 554: 551: 548: 541: 540: 539: 538: 537: 536: 535: 534: 498: 497: 496: 495: 494: 493: 473: 472: 471: 470: 469: 468: 467: 466: 443: 442: 441: 440: 439: 438: 423: 410: 407: 398: 397: 396: 395: 394: 393: 392: 391: 377: 355: 354: 353: 352: 351: 350: 319: 318: 317: 316: 263: 262: 261: 253:Ayumi Hamasaki 234: 233: 232: 231: 197: 196: 195: 194: 193: 125: 124: 121: 118: 115: 104: 101: 98: 97: 92: 89: 84: 79: 72: 67: 62: 52: 51: 34: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2710: 2699: 2696: 2694: 2692: 2685: 2681: 2680: 2679: 2678: 2674: 2670: 2669:ScribbleStick 2665: 2662: 2655: 2653: 2650: 2649: 2645: 2641: 2637: 2631: 2628: 2624: 2621: 2619: 2617: 2611: 2607: 2606:walled garden 2602: 2597: 2596: 2595: 2594: 2590: 2586: 2582: 2578: 2574: 2570: 2566: 2558: 2556: 2555: 2551: 2547: 2546:69.68.238.142 2543: 2535: 2533: 2532: 2528: 2524: 2517: 2514: 2512: 2510: 2504: 2503: 2502: 2501: 2497: 2493: 2484: 2482: 2481: 2477: 2473: 2464: 2461: 2459: 2457: 2451: 2447: 2446: 2445: 2444: 2441: 2437: 2433: 2428: 2427: 2423: 2422: 2419: 2416: 2414: 2412: 2406: 2402: 2398: 2394: 2390: 2385: 2381: 2380: 2379: 2378: 2374: 2370: 2366: 2362: 2358: 2353: 2344: 2342: 2341: 2338: 2336: 2334: 2327: 2318: 2315: 2312: 2309: 2305: 2302: 2298: 2295: 2294: 2293: 2292: 2291: 2285: 2273: 2270: 2268: 2266: 2260: 2256: 2252: 2251: 2250: 2247: 2245: 2243: 2237: 2235: 2232: 2230: 2228: 2218: 2217:pp-move-indef 2211: 2210: 2209: 2206: 2203: 2199: 2194: 2193: 2191: 2189: 2186: 2183: 2178: 2173: 2172: 2167: 2160: 2159: 2158: 2155: 2153: 2151: 2144: 2139: 2138: 2136: 2134: 2131: 2129: 2127: 2120: 2119: 2118: 2117: 2114: 2111: 2108: 2104: 2103: 2099: 2098: 2094: 2093: 2089: 2088: 2084: 2081: 2077: 2076: 2075: 2074: 2071: 2069: 2067: 2044: 2041: 2039: 2037: 2031: 2027: 2022: 2021: 2020: 2019: 2018: 2017: 2016: 2015: 2014: 2013: 2012: 2011: 2010: 2009: 2008: 2007: 1992: 1987: 1982: 1977: 1976: 1975: 1974: 1973: 1972: 1971: 1970: 1969: 1968: 1967: 1966: 1965: 1964: 1951: 1948: 1945: 1941: 1936: 1933: 1930: 1927: 1926: 1925: 1924: 1923: 1922: 1921: 1920: 1919: 1918: 1917: 1916: 1915: 1914: 1900: 1896: 1895: 1894: 1893: 1892: 1891: 1890: 1889: 1888: 1887: 1886: 1885: 1874: 1871: 1869: 1867: 1860: 1859: 1858: 1857: 1856: 1855: 1854: 1853: 1852: 1851: 1842: 1839: 1836: 1831: 1827: 1823: 1822: 1821: 1820: 1819: 1818: 1817: 1816: 1809: 1804: 1799: 1794: 1793: 1792: 1791: 1790: 1789: 1784: 1781: 1779: 1777: 1771: 1767: 1766: 1765: 1764: 1761: 1756: 1751: 1744: 1740: 1739: 1732: 1727: 1722: 1718: 1714: 1713: 1712: 1709: 1706: 1699: 1692: 1688: 1685: 1683: 1681: 1675: 1671: 1670: 1669: 1666: 1663: 1659: 1655: 1652: 1648: 1647: 1646: 1643: 1641: 1639: 1632: 1631: 1630: 1629: 1626: 1623: 1618: 1616: 1612: 1607: 1602: 1595: 1591: 1586: 1581: 1578: 1576: 1573: 1571: 1568: 1566: 1563: 1562: 1561: 1559: 1551: 1548: 1547: 1546: 1540: 1537: 1536: 1535: 1533: 1529: 1523: 1513: 1509: 1505: 1500: 1499: 1498: 1497: 1496: 1495: 1494: 1493: 1486: 1481: 1476: 1472: 1471: 1470: 1469: 1468: 1467: 1462: 1458: 1454: 1449: 1448: 1447: 1446: 1443: 1438: 1433: 1428: 1424: 1420: 1419: 1414: 1410: 1406: 1401: 1400: 1399: 1398: 1395: 1391: 1387: 1383: 1382: 1381: 1380: 1376: 1372: 1368: 1361: 1356: 1351: 1347: 1346: 1345: 1344: 1339: 1334: 1325: 1321: 1318: 1316: 1312: 1309: 1307: 1306:Cinco de Mayo 1303: 1300: 1298: 1294: 1291: 1289: 1285: 1282: 1280: 1276: 1273: 1272: 1271: 1270: 1269: 1257: 1250: 1246: 1242: 1238: 1231: 1224: 1223: 1222: 1221: 1220: 1205: 1201: 1197: 1192: 1191: 1190: 1189: 1188: 1187: 1186: 1185: 1184: 1183: 1182: 1181: 1166: 1165: 1164: 1163: 1162: 1161: 1160: 1159: 1158: 1157: 1156: 1155: 1142: 1138: 1134: 1129: 1128: 1127: 1126: 1125: 1124: 1123: 1122: 1121: 1120: 1119: 1118: 1107: 1104: 1102: 1100: 1094: 1089: 1088: 1087: 1086: 1085: 1084: 1083: 1082: 1081: 1080: 1068: 1063: 1062: 1061: 1060: 1059: 1058: 1057: 1056: 1055: 1054: 1041: 1040: 1039: 1038: 1037: 1036: 1035: 1034: 1033: 1032: 1023: 1019: 1015: 1010: 1009: 1008: 1007: 1006: 1005: 1004: 1003: 996: 991: 986: 981: 980: 979: 978: 977: 976: 971: 967: 963: 959: 955: 954: 953: 952: 943: 938: 933: 925: 924: 923: 922: 921: 920: 919: 918: 911: 907: 903: 898: 897: 896: 895: 894: 893: 884: 880: 876: 872: 868: 867: 866: 865: 864: 863: 862: 861: 854: 849: 844: 840: 839:Australia Day 836: 831: 830: 829: 828: 827: 826: 821: 817: 813: 809: 808: 807: 806: 800: 799: 798: 797: 788: 785: 781: 778: 774: 771: 767: 764: 760: 757: 756: 754: 753: 752: 751: 748: 743: 738: 733: 732: 727: 723: 720: 718: 714: 711: 709: 705: 702: 700: 699:Veterans' Day 696: 692: 689: 687: 683: 680: 678: 674: 671: 669: 665: 662: 659: 655: 652: 650: 649:Cinco de Mayo 646: 643: 641: 637: 634: 632: 628: 625: 623: 619: 616: 614: 613:Ides of March 610: 607: 605: 601: 598: 596: 592: 589: 588: 586: 585: 581: 576: 575: 574: 573: 569: 565: 561: 555: 552: 549: 546: 545: 544: 533: 528: 523: 519: 515: 510: 506: 505: 504: 503: 502: 501: 500: 499: 492: 488: 484: 479: 478: 477: 476: 475: 474: 465: 462: 460: 458: 451: 450: 449: 448: 447: 446: 445: 444: 437: 434: 432: 430: 424: 420: 416: 411: 408: 404: 403: 402: 401: 400: 399: 390: 386: 382: 378: 376: 372: 368: 363: 362: 361: 360: 359: 358: 357: 356: 349: 346: 344: 342: 332: 325: 324: 323: 322: 321: 320: 315: 310: 305: 301: 293: 286: 282: 278: 271: 264: 258: 254: 250: 245: 244: 242: 238: 237: 236: 235: 230: 227: 225: 223: 217: 213: 212: 211: 208: 206: 204: 198: 188: 181: 177: 173: 169: 162: 155: 154: 153: 152: 147: 140: 139: 138: 137: 133: 129: 122: 119: 116: 113: 112: 111: 108: 102: 96: 93: 90: 88: 85: 83: 80: 77: 73: 71: 68: 66: 63: 61: 58: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 2666: 2663: 2659: 2651: 2634: 2600: 2576: 2572: 2568: 2564: 2562: 2539: 2520: 2488: 2469: 2365:Paris Hilton 2348: 2328: 2324: 2303:to them all. 2299:- Added the 2289: 2202:Arthur Rubin 2182:Arthur Rubin 2107:Arthur Rubin 2061: 1944:Arthur Rubin 1835:Arthur Rubin 1705:Arthur Rubin 1673: 1662:Arthur Rubin 1650: 1622:Arthur Rubin 1619: 1611:January 2007 1608: 1587: 1584: 1580:January 2000 1570:January 1999 1555: 1544: 1530: 1527: 1423:September 11 1366: 1364: 1330: 1324:Bastille Day 1266: 1245:September 22 1218: 1066: 870: 677:Bastille Day 562: 559: 542: 299: 176:September 22 126: 109: 106: 75: 43: 37: 2656:Nationality 2523:GeorgeLouis 2492:GeorgeLouis 2361:Jackie Chan 2352:footballers 1826:February 29 1654:February 30 1594:February 30 1427:this revert 1241:February 29 783:Switzerland 769:New Zealand 722:December 31 713:December 26 704:December 25 691:November 11 600:February 14 251:. For the 172:February 29 36:This is an 2640:Kingturtle 2585:Kingturtle 2472:Kingturtle 2450:WP:COREBIO 2432:Kingturtle 2032:etc.? -- 1981:Rick Block 1798:Rick Block 1750:Rick Block 1721:Rick Block 1575:January 20 1565:January 19 1475:Rick Block 1432:Rick Block 1386:Kingturtle 1350:Rick Block 1333:Rick Block 1297:Labour Day 985:Rick Block 932:Rick Block 843:Rick Block 835:January 26 766:February 6 759:January 26 737:Rick Block 717:Boxing Day 682:October 31 658:Canada Day 640:Labour Day 522:Rick Block 518:East Timor 453:else. -- 415:Canada Day 304:Rick Block 255:song, see 249:Canada Day 241:Canada Day 95:Archive 14 87:Archive 10 2369:Peabody80 1830:Leap year 1532:January 1 1275:January 1 1237:January 1 787:August 15 762:Australia 708:Christmas 686:Halloween 591:January 1 580:consensus 285:Christmas 216:Archive 7 168:January 1 82:Archive 9 76:Archive 8 70:Archive 7 65:Archive 6 60:Archive 5 2137:I think 1558:ISO 8601 780:August 1 773:April 25 618:March 17 609:March 15 419:H (song) 283:or even 257:H (song) 2610:WP:DAYS 2359:, like 1320:July 14 1284:April 1 1168:better. 673:July 14 627:April 1 281:May Day 39:archive 2384:WP:DOY 2205:(talk) 2185:(talk) 2110:(talk) 1947:(talk) 1838:(talk) 1772:. -- 1708:(talk) 1698:cattoc 1665:(talk) 1625:(talk) 1601:cattoc 1504:Wallie 1453:Wallie 1405:Wallie 1322:-: --> 1313:-: --> 1311:July 4 1304:-: --> 1295:-: --> 1286:-: --> 1277:-: --> 1251:) the 1249:July 1 1133:Wallie 1014:Wallie 962:Wallie 958:July 1 902:Wallie 812:Wallie 789:-: --> 782:-: --> 775:-: --> 768:-: --> 761:-: --> 724:-: --> 715:-: --> 706:-: --> 693:-: --> 684:-: --> 675:-: --> 666:-: --> 664:July 4 656:-: --> 654:July 1 647:-: --> 638:-: --> 629:-: --> 620:-: --> 611:-: --> 602:-: --> 593:-: --> 564:Wallie 514:May 20 483:Wallie 381:Wallie 367:Wallie 182:) the 180:July 1 128:Wallie 2689:Mufka 2614:Mufka 2507:Mufka 2490:all, 2454:Mufka 2409:Mufka 2389:WP:RY 2331:Mufka 2263:Mufka 2240:Mufka 2225:Mufka 2148:Mufka 2124:Mufka 2064:Mufka 2034:Mufka 1864:Mufka 1774:Mufka 1678:Mufka 1636:Mufka 1585:etc. 1367:rules 1302:May 5 1293:May 1 1243:, or 1097:Mufka 790:India 645:May 5 636:May 1 543:OK. 455:Mufka 427:Mufka 339:Mufka 220:Mufka 201:Mufka 174:, or 16:< 2687:-- 2673:talk 2644:talk 2589:talk 2575:and 2550:talk 2527:talk 2496:talk 2476:talk 2436:talk 2405:this 2401:this 2397:this 2393:this 2373:talk 2259:this 1986:talk 1803:talk 1755:talk 1726:talk 1674:real 1508:talk 1480:talk 1457:talk 1437:talk 1409:talk 1390:talk 1375:talk 1355:talk 1338:talk 1200:talk 1137:talk 1093:Sage 1018:talk 990:talk 966:talk 937:talk 906:talk 879:talk 848:talk 816:talk 742:talk 568:talk 527:talk 487:talk 385:talk 371:talk 309:talk 214:See 132:talk 2601:two 2536:AfD 2166:Day 1719:-- 1617:. 1256:for 1230:Day 1067:Why 927:--> 425:-- 331:for 300:new 292:for 270:for 187:for 161:Day 146:for 2675:) 2667:-- 2646:) 2591:) 2571:, 2567:, 2552:) 2529:) 2498:) 2478:) 2438:) 2403:, 2399:, 2395:, 2375:) 2307:). 2220:}} 2214:{{ 2174:] 2169:}} 2163:{{ 1942:— 1701:}} 1695:{{ 1651:is 1620:— 1606:. 1604:}} 1598:{{ 1510:) 1459:) 1411:) 1392:) 1377:) 1259:}} 1253:{{ 1239:, 1233:}} 1227:{{ 1202:) 1139:) 1020:) 968:) 908:) 881:) 818:) 570:) 489:) 387:) 373:) 334:}} 328:{{ 295:}} 289:{{ 273:}} 267:{{ 190:}} 184:{{ 170:, 164:}} 158:{{ 149:}} 143:{{ 134:) 91:→ 2671:( 2642:( 2587:( 2548:( 2525:( 2494:( 2474:( 2434:( 2371:( 2195:] 2140:] 2090:] 1988:) 1984:( 1934:… 1828:/ 1805:) 1801:( 1757:) 1753:( 1728:) 1724:( 1552:] 1549:] 1541:] 1538:] 1506:( 1482:) 1478:( 1455:( 1439:) 1435:( 1407:( 1388:( 1373:( 1357:) 1353:( 1340:) 1336:( 1198:( 1135:( 1016:( 992:) 988:( 964:( 939:) 935:( 904:( 877:( 850:) 846:( 814:( 744:) 740:( 697:/ 566:( 529:) 525:( 485:( 421:. 383:( 369:( 311:) 307:( 259:. 130:( 50:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Knowledge

talk:WikiProject Days of the year/Archive 8 - Knowledge

Index