Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/December 7

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for making suggestions or discussing improvements to Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/December 7.

To report an error when this list is currently on the Main Page, see Main Page errors. Please remember that this list defers to the supporting articles, so it is best to achieve consensus and make any necessary changes there first.
Before making a suggestion, please read the selected anniversaries guidelines. Please remember that this list usually defers to supporting pages when there is disagreement, so it is best to achieve consensus and make any necessary changes there first.
To discuss improvements to the corresponding December 7 article, see Talk:December 7 instead.

Frequently asked questions

Q1: Why is [Insert event here], an event that is "more important and significant" than all the others that are currently listed, not posted?: A1: Relative article quality along with the mix of topics already listed are often deciding factors in what gets posted. Any given day of the year can have a great many important or significant historical events. The problem is that there is generally only room on the Main Page to list about 5 events at a time, so not everything can be posted.

As stated on Wikipedia:FAQ/Main Page, the items and events posted on the Main Page are chosen based more on how well they are written, not based on how much important or significant their subjects are. It is easier for admins to select a well-written, cited, verifiable article over a poor one versus trying to determine objectively how much a subject is important or significant.

Keep in mind that the quality requirements only apply to the selected bolded article, not the other links. Thus, an event may qualify for multiple dates in a year if there is an article written in a summary style and an article providing detailed content; if one of those pages have cleanup issues, the other page can be bolded as an alternate.

Another criterion is to maintain some variety of topics, and not exhibit, just for example, tech-centrism, or the belief that the world stops at the edge of the English-speaking world. Many days have a large pool of potential articles, so they will rotate in and out every year to give each one some Main Page exposure. In addition, an event is not posted if it is also the subject of this year's scheduled featured article or featured picture.

Q2: There are way too many 20th-century events listed. Why aren't there more events from the 19th century and before?

A2: The short, basic reason is the systemic bias of Wikipedia. There are not enough good, well-written articles on 19th-century and earlier events for all 365 days in the year. Currently, a majority of users seem to be generally more interested in writing articles about recent events. If you would like to further help mitigate the systemic bias in Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias.

Q3: This page seems to be biased toward events based in [Insert country or region here]. What can be done about it?

A3: This again is attributed to the systemic bias of Wikipedia. Many users are generally more interested in working on good, well-written articles pertaining to their home country. Since this is the English Wikipedia, there will be more English-speaking users, and thus more articles pertaining to English-speaking countries. And if there are more users who are from the United States, there will probably be more well-written articles about events based in the United States. Again, if you would like to further help mitigate the systemic bias in Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias.

Q4: Why is the birthday/death anniversary of [Insert name here] not listed?

A4: There are only four slots available for birth and death anniversaries. As with the events, article quality and diversity in time period, geography, and reason for notability are all contributing factors in whether an article gets selected for inclusion.

Q5: Are the holidays/observances listed in any particular order?

A5: Yes, there is a specified order: International observances first, then alphabetically by where observed.

Q6: Some of the holidays/observances that are listed have dates in parentheses beside them. What do they mean?

A6: There are two reasons that some holidays/observances have dates next to them:

Non-Gregorian-based holidays/observances are marked with the current year as a reminder to others that their dates do in fact vary from year to year.
National Days, Independence Days, and other holidays celebrating the nationhood of a country are generally marked by the year of the significant historic date being observed.

Today's featured article for December 7, 2024
Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 7, 2024 create – talk – watch
Picture of the day for December 7, 2024
The featured picture for this day has not yet been chosen. In general, pictures of the day are scheduled in order of promotion to featured status. See Wikipedia:Picture of the day/Guidelines for full guidelines. create

← Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/December 6 * Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/December 8 →

Two executions may be a bit too much. Surely we can replace one with something else... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 06:46, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pearl Harbor[edit]

I think we may need to remove an event or two from this page anyways. The Pearl Harbor anniversary, although listed on this page, does not appear on the main page. While I understand that well-written articles take precedence over important ones, the Pearl Harbor article is written well and the event is far too important to ignore. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.23.253.72 (talk) 09:19, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree...it had far more significance than the other five, and lends credence to the "Wikipedia is too liberal" argument. Smarkflea (talk) 00:33, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Err, have you not noticed that USS Arizona – sunk during the Pearl Harbour attack – is Today's Featured Article, to mark the 70th anniversary? It's standard procedure not to repeat in "On this day" an event marked in the Featured Article section. Bencherlite ^Talk 00:39, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The featured article is a ship, not the actual attack...Smarkflea (talk) 00:50, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Read the blurb (above). It's largely about the attack and subsequent events. The photograph is of the attack. The article was chosen to mark the 70th anniversary of the attack. Pearl Harbour is not going to be added to "On this day" this year. Bencherlite ^Talk 00:55, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, how autocratic of you, "Bencherlite". Although the featured article is the USS Arizonia, nonetheless it's still not obvious enough that today is an important anniversary. The actual date (December 7, 1941) is crammed into a large body of text already filled with numbers, and will not be seen at a casual glance. Moreover, people who are not already versed in WWII history will not realize what the article is about. I can assure you most people do not know the names of the ships sunk that day. The "on this day" section is an opportunity to call to mind important events that otherwise might slip by unnoticed, especially by the younger generation, which is most of our demographic here.

So this is not an optimal solution. While I agree that we don't need both a featured article AND a bullet point in the anniversary section, there is overall no indication that an extremely important event in world history happened today. A short blurb in the holidays strip up top might remedy this. In any case, omitting any direct reference to the date will surely seem like a slap in the face to many users, which seems to me like pretty poor policy/approach on Wikipedia's part. GrimmC (talk) 14:38, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The box at the top of Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/December 7 says this: Please note that the events listed on the Main Page are chosen based more on relative article quality and to maintain a mix of topics, not based solely on how important or significant their subjects are. Only 5–6 events are posted at a time and thus not everything that is "most important and significant" can be listed. In addition, an event is not generally posted this year if it is also the subject of the scheduled December 7, 2011 featured article or the December 7, 2011 featured picture. So it's not some rule I'm making up of my own initiative. I'm not even the one who hid Pearl Harbor from the anniversaries box; that was another editor (in fact, the one who is the most experienced custodian of the "On this day" pages on the main page). Quite why you think that someone would miss the Pearl Harbor detail on a casual glance of the TFA but yet see it by scrolling down the page to a different section... no, I'm afraid I just don't understand your implication that someone would only start paying attention and reading properly at the bottom of the page. The TFA blurb is less than 200 words, and 7 December 1941 is the only date there. It's not hard to notice. You say "There is overall no indication that an extremely important event in world history happened today". No, that's simply not right. The TFA blurb says "During the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941..." and I fail to see why that isn't enough. There obviously IS a direct reference to the date on the main page - in fact, you contradict yourself because you mention it in your first paragraph! Perhaps you would like bells, whistles and BIG BOLD TYPE for that, but that's not how the main page works. No-one is slapping anyone in the face: in fact, on the contrary, a lot of people went to a lot of trouble to make sure that the most important slot on the main page could be about the USS Arizona on this day of all days and so a little thank you to them (I wasn't one of them) wouldn't go amiss. Perhaps these hypothetical users of whom you speak would be more offended by your inability to spell the name of the ship correctly. Bencherlite ^Talk 14:55, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As the primary editor on the Arizona article, I think that it suffices to commemorate the attack this year. Hopefully, the main article on the attack will be a FA in time for the 75th anniversary. There's a tremendous amount of competition for space on the front page and I don't think that Pearl Harbor was so important that it should be commemorated each and every year. It looms large in recent history, but not so much in world history. Hell, I'm not even sure that it was more important than the other major Japanese sneak attack; the one on the Russian Fleet in Port Arthur in 1904. That started the Russo-Japanese War which was the first defeat of an Western nation by an Asian one in the Industrial Age.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:57, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The facts remain that many people will not notice the commerative aspect of the article. I use wikipedia every day, but I generally don't give the featured article more than a cursory glance. On the other hand, I do thoroughly the "on this day..." section every time I log on. Some people are just more date-oriented; some enjoy straight history, such as myself.

Moreover, you may notice that only one other person in this discussion agrees with you, and that person has a vested interest in this discussion. You can be sure many other people disagreed with the situation but didn't take the time to get the talk page, or were unable to find it in the first place. Do you the think the average user/viewer of wikipedia knows how to find this page? It certainly took me awhile. I'm sure certain demographic segments of wikipedia's audience (particularly elderly) are unable to navigate to this section.

Finally, it is not your place to determine whether certain users are "hypocritical", nor is my typo of "Arizona" in any way relevant. It is simply a fact that many people are likely to be unhappy/offended/whatever that Pearl Harbor is not noticeably commemorated in the section that commemorates historical events. Even the guidelines you quoted allow for it to displayed. This is basic public relations. Have a good one. GrimmC (talk) 18:00, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Hypocritical"?! No, I said "hypothetical". Please don't misquote me. And it's not just me + Sturmvogel (who hardly has a vested interest in the "On this day" section even today) vs you and Smarkflea: Howcheng made the edit hiding the Pearl Harbor anniversary, so that's one more, and Howcheng's edit was in accordance with the long-established consensus that we don't duplicate material in "On this day" if it's in "Today's featured article". You plus Smarkflea plus your complete guess that "many" other people are likely to be offended does not amount to consensus to overturn the standard approach to such matters. As for finding the venue to complain, lots of people are able to find WP:ERRORS on a daily basis - I should know, I'm one of the admins regularly keeping an eye on it. It's even linked from the top of this page when you try to edit: "Are you here to report an error while this is on the Main Page? Not many administrators are watching this talk page, so you'd be better off telling someone at WP:ERRORS. Thanks!" I can't say that WP:ERRORS has been exactly flooded with complaints that Wikipedia has made them unhappy or offended them by not mentioning the Pearl Harbor attack twice. Tell you what - I'll complain there for you, linking to this discussion and setting out your main points. That way you have more chance of your complaint being seen. Bencherlite ^Talk 19:03, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is a long-established practice to omit an event from OTD when it (or a related article) appears as Today's Featured Article or Today's Featured Picture. To wit: Pearl Harbor was taken off in 2009; September 11 attacks was hidden in 2008, 2009 (it was later restored as it turned out to be not the subject of TFA), 2010 and 2011; the Hiroshima bombing was taken off in 2010; Hurricane Katrina was taken off in 2008. There are a bunch of other examples but I don't have time to hunt them down now. howcheng {chat} 19:52, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2012 notes[edit]

Omitted: Cicero; Michel Ney; The Blue Marble; 2007 South Korea oil spill
Included: Delaware (2nd appearance, last in 2009; rescued from Ineligible); Attack on Pearl Harbor (6th appearance, last in 2010); 1988 Spitak earthquake (4th appearance, last in 2009; rescued from Ineligible); Ante Gotovina (first appearance)
Repeats: Tumult of Thorn (Toruń) (2nd consecutive appearance, 5 total)

—howcheng {chat} 01:08, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2013 notes[edit]

Omitted: Tumult of Thorn (Toruń) (ineligible—maintenance); Delaware; Attack on Pearl Harbor (ineligible—POTD for 2013); Ante Gotovina
Included: Day of the Little Candles (5th appearance, last in 2011; rescued from Ineligible); Cicero (4th appearance, last in 2011); Jesse James (7th appearance, last in 2010); Jack Fingleton (2nd appearance, last in 2010); Taipei (4th appearance, last in 2010)
Repeats: 1988 Spitak earthquake (2nd consecutive appearance, 5 total; 25th anniversary)

—howcheng {chat} 06:35, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

2014 notes[edit]

Moved to Ineligible: Delaware (ineligible—maintenance)
New articles (unused): Indonesian invasion of East Timor/Indonesian occupation of East Timor
Omitted: Jesse James; Jack Fingleton; Taipei; 1988 Spitak earthquake
Included: Michel Ney (7th appearance, last in 2011); The Blue Marble (4th appearance, last in 2011); Napster (first appearance); 2007 South Korea oil spill (3rd appearance, last in 2011)
Repeats: Cicero (2nd consecutive appearance, 5 total)

—howcheng {chat} 08:14, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

2015 notes[edit]

Omitted: Cicero (ineligible—maintenance); The Blue Marble; Napster; 2007 South Korea oil spill
Included: Jesse James (8th appearance, last in 2013); Attack on Pearl Harbor (7th appearance, last in 2012; rescued from Ineligible); Indonesian invasion of East Timor/Indonesian occupation of East Timor (both: first appearance; 40th anniversary); Ante Gotovina (2nd appearance, last in 2012; 10th anniversary)
Repeats: Michel Ney (2nd consecutive appearance, 8 total; 200th anniversary)

—howcheng {chat} 08:00, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

2016 notes[edit]

Omitted: Attack on Pearl Harbor (ineligible–Pearl Harbor item is TFA for 2016); Indonesian occupation of East Timor; Ante Gotovina
Included: Jack Fingleton (3rd appearance, last in 2013; 80th anniversary); Winecoff Hotel fire (first appearance; 70th anniversary); 1988 Armenian earthquake (6th appearance, last in 2013)
Repeats: Michel Ney (3rd consecutive appearance, 9 total); Jesse James (2nd consecutive appearance, 9 total)

—howcheng {chat} 22:51, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

2017 notes[edit]

Moved to Ineligible: Taipei (maintenance)
New articles (unused): Akatsuki (spacecraft); Barbara Howard (artist)
Omitted: Michel Ney (ineligible—maintenance); Jesse James (ineligible—maintenance); Jack Fingleton (ineligible—maintenance); Winecoff Hotel fire (ineligible—maintenance); 1988 Armenian earthquake
Included: HMS Spiteful (1899) (first appearance); Attack on Pearl Harbor (8th appearance, last in 2015); Indonesian invasion of East Timor/Indonesian occupation of East Timor (both: 2nd appearance, last in 2015); Pacific Southwest Airlines Flight 1771 (first appearance; 30th anniversary); 2007 South Korea oil spill (4th appearance, last in 2014; 10th anniversary); Charles Saunders (Royal Navy officer) (first appearance); Willa Cather (first appearance); Martha Layne Collins (first appearance)

—howcheng {chat} 16:58, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

2018 notes[edit]

Omitted: Attack on Pearl Harbor; Indonesian invasion of East Timor/Indonesian occupation of East Timor; Pacific Southwest Airlines Flight 1771; 2007 South Korea oil spill; Charles Saunders (Royal Navy officer); Willa Cather; Martha Layne Collins
Included: Cicero (6th appearance, last in 2014; rescued from Ineligible); Jack Fingleton (4th appearance, last in 2016; rescued from Ineligible); 1988 Armenian earthquake (7th appearance, last in 2016; 30th anniversary); 1993 Long Island Rail Road shooting (first appearance; 25th anniversary; finally made it in after having been added way back in 2007!); Richard Bellingham (first appearance); Hamilton Fish III (first appearance); Barbara Howard (artist) (first appearance)
Repeats: HMS Spiteful (1899) (2nd consecutive appearance, 2 total)

—howcheng {chat} 17:05, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

2019 notes[edit]

Moved to Ineligible: Pacific Southwest Airlines Flight 1771 (maintenance)
New articles (unused): Upper Canada Rebellion
Omitted: Cicero; HMS Spiteful (1899); Jack Fingleton; 1988 Armenian earthquake; 1993 Long Island Rail Road shooting; Richard Bellingham; Hamilton Fish III; Barbara Howard (artist)
Included: Tiberius II Constantine (2nd appearance, last in 2017; previously appeared on August 14, his death anniversary); Jesse James (10th appearance, last in 2016; rescued from Ineligible; 150th anniversary); Operation Frankton (first appearance); Indonesian invasion of East Timor/Indonesian occupation of East Timor (both: 3rd appearance, last in 2017); Akatsuki (spacecraft) (first appearance); Abd al-Rahman al-Sufi (first appearance); Charles Garnier (missionary) (first appearance); Noam Chomsky (first appearance)

2020 notes[edit]

New articles (unused): Ambrose
Moved to Ineligible: Attack on Pearl Harbor (maintenance)
Omitted: Tiberius II Constantine; Jesse James; Operation Frankton; Indonesian invasion of East Timor/Indonesian occupation of East Timor; Akatsuki (spacecraft); Abd al-Rahman al-Sufi; Charles Garnier (missionary); Noam Chomsky
Included: Cicero (7th appearance, last in 2018); Battle of Montgomery's Tavern/Upper Canada Rebellion (both: first appearance); Jack Fingleton (5th appearance, last in 2018); Ante Gotovina (3rd appearance, last in 2015); Theodor Schwann (first appearance); Joseph Cook (first appearance); Jeane Kirkpatrick (first appearance)

—howcheng {chat} 07:13, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2021 notes[edit]

Moved to Ineligible: HMS Spiteful (1899) (maintenance)
New articles (unused): Nicholas Hoult
Omitted: Cicero; Battle of Montgomery's Tavern/Upper Canada Rebellion; Ante Gotovina; Theodor Schwann; Joseph Cook; Jeane Kirkpatrick
Included: Tiberius II Constantine (3rd appearance, last in 2019); Battle of Prairie Grove; Indonesian invasion of East Timor/Indonesian occupation of East Timor (both: 4th appearance, last in 2019); Galileo (spacecraft); Abd al-Rahman al-Sufi (2nd appearance, last in 2019); Willa Cather (2nd appearance, last in 2017); Robert Graves (2nd appearance, last in 2021; also appeared on July 24, his birthday)
Repeats: Jack Fingleton (2nd consecutive appearance, 6 total)

—howcheng {chat} 08:35, 8 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]