Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/September 18

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Today's featured article for September 18, 2024
Wikipedia:Today's featured article/September 18, 2024
Picture of the day for September 18, 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.

Chiropractic history[edit]

Moved from User talk:Zzyzx11#September 18[1]

My point is that I find it unacceptable to promote chiropractic on the front page. Find another event. DS (talk) 04:51, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why? And what should be the alternative? Zzyzx11 (Talk) 04:52, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There has been a few complaints for more non- 20th Century events. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 04:54, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In many ways, chiropractic is bullshit. How about the Treaty of Belgrade, or the Battle of Chojnice, or... ooh, the Panic of 1873, which seems particularly appropriate given recent economic turmoil in the US? And then we can replace the picture of Palmer with the one of Stolypin again. DS (talk) 04:57, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Treaty of Belgrade may be too stubby. Battle of Chojnice is tagged with {{unreferenced}}. And I am hesitant about Panic of 1873 because of complaints on Talk:Main Page#September 11 and Talk:Main Page#Rampant Pro-Rail bias on Main Page !!! for similar subjects on main pages as a whole. As for "chiropractic is bullshit", that is more an WP:POV or WP:OR opinion/complaint on your part than a legitimate reason, more like the opinions of users who I have to point to Wikipedia:FAQ/Main Page#I think that the articles listed on the Main Page are awful. Isn't the Main Page biased towards certain topics? What can be done about it?. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 05:01, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The consensus of the WP:OTD pages, and the articles featured on the main page in general, are based on how well the articles are written. The are NOT chosen based on how much their subjects are important or significant, or how one feels about the subject. I find that your unilateral edit, saying that "chiropractic is bullshit" was made solely based on your personal feelings on the subject! I will keep the item off because I wish to not edit/wheel war any further. Regards. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 05:21, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I'm only three-quarters awake at this time. DS (talk) 05:23, 18 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2012 notes[edit]

howcheng {chat} 05:44, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 18 September 2012[edit]

Please protect this page more thoroughly; while it tells me that I can't edit it, I'm given an "edit" button instead of a "view source" button.

2001:18E8:2:1020:B1B9:4E32:3CE8:AB45 (talk) 17:55, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Although the tab is indeed titled "Edit", you'll find that you can't make changes to the text. The page is cascade protected, which means that it inherits the strictest protection level of all of the pages that it's transcluded to. For example, it's transcluded in Wikipedia:Main Page/1, which is fully protected; therefore Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/September 18 is fully protected as well. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:35, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

2013 notes[edit]

howcheng {chat} 15:52, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

2014 notes[edit]

howcheng {chat} 07:11, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

2015 notes[edit]

howcheng {chat} 07:19, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

2016 notes[edit]

howcheng {chat} 06:39, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

2017 notes[edit]

howcheng {chat} 17:03, 18 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

2018 notes[edit]

howcheng {chat} 15:56, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

2019 notes[edit]

howcheng {chat} 16:03, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2020 notes[edit]

howcheng {chat} 20:23, 19 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2021 notes[edit]

howcheng {chat} 07:36, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

2022 notes[edit]

howcheng {chat} 17:40, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]