Talk:December 21

message: --mav 00:59, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't have any particular problem with removing events that aren't mentioned in any linked articles; if they weren't important enough to be listed in the article about the subject, why should they be here? Given Wikipedia's recent trouble with "facts" not backed up by verifiable sources, I'm not sure the benefit of the doubt should run in this direction. This is a more general question, however, that might be worth bringing up on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Days of the year. Also, see the note on that talk page about "this day in history" websites - I wouldn't be surprised if those are the questionable source of many of the entries here. CDC (talk) 19:52, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

text: responding to RfC: i think the user is removing too much information. the stuff he removed should probably be kept, like the mayan calendar thing and the vancouver thing.--BUF4Life 19:36, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

text: I wholeheartedly agree.--BUF4Life 03:27, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

message: It says that The World is going to die on 2012. I dont think this is appropriate to have here has it is not proven that this is going to happen. I'm removing it because of a false fact. --Striker1057 (talk) 18:49, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: No worries. It was probably just vandalism. –LAX 18:56, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed this from the Deaths section. --Master of the Aztecs (talk) 05:17, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There was another case of that with the birth this time, took care of it. Armachedes (talk) 01:21, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Deaths on this date 

message: I'm sick and tired of all people saying that Earth is going to die in December 21, 2012. We might have to protect this page. Somebody500 (talk) 21:01, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  December 21, 2012 vandalism 

message: Was commented out, but I really don't think it should be on there at all. Its ridiculous. Should it be removed every time its added? As the page is meant to be about dates that happened. Last time I looked at a calender, we were still in 2010. Arieas (talk) 20:59, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: It should be removed on sight.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 13:00, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  2012 date in events 

message: I spotted some more of this and deleted it. I recommend that this page be considered for protected status. Nekochan1973 (talk) 06:42, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It has been already protected. The protection doesn't expire until 23 of December this year. --Tyranitar Man (talk) 19:01, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Then everyone will be dead and no need for it to be protected! I do think adding "End of the world" linked to the supposed end of the world would be a good sentiment as we're only 3 days away. As unlikely as it would, be it's not harming anyone and is a factual event which the majority of people know. This isn't someone adding the world is going to end on a random date. To disagree with this is a little petty, especially if it's linked to an article on this myth, an article which already exists. 194.138.39.55 (talk) 09:41, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a future event, and those can't be added per WP:DOY.  You can add it after the world ends, otherwise it can never go here.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 10:19, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: So it can be added after as in "The world didn't end" or "Mayan Calendar ended" something to that affect? 194.138.39.61 (talk) 13:30, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope.  You can add it if, and only if, the world ends.  That would be notable.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 13:47, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, we won't die. We will live. --Tyranitar Man (talk) 04:47, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you sure? Dragonh4t (talk) 14:47, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Yet more 2012 vandalism

message: It states the suicide bomb attack was the most deadliest on US soldiers. The plane hitting the pentagon was a suicide bomb attack, surely that killed more US soldiers? I'm not American so I could be wrong, but I don't know how many people that plane killed, but I am under the impression it was a few hundred and the majority of people at the pentagon are soldiers. 194.138.39.60 (talk) 09:02, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Decided I'd have a look, 125 personnel were killed in the attack, there is no mention I can find how many were soldiers, however the majority of staff there are military. As only 1/5th would have to be military to beat this, should this be reworded?194.138.39.60 (talk) 09:13, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: 2004

message: I do not think that 21 December is seen as St. Thomas Day in just Anglicanism but in all Christian denominations. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 00:46, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: St Thomas' Day

message: Continuing the ongoing effort to reduce the size of the Births and Deaths sections to make them manageable, I'm removing some celebrities with few or no articles in other wikipedias, moving the entries to the appropriate Year in Topic article if they were not already present. This is in accordance with the guidelines. See discussions at Wikipedia_talk:Days_of_the_year.Deb (talk) 09:48, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Births and Deaths

message: I work for Wafic Saïd and would like to propose a correction to the entry concerning his birth on this page.  Given my professional role I understand that there may be a perceived conflict of interest so I am making this suggestion on the "talk" page for consideration.  I would like to replace the description of Wafic Saïd as a "Syrian-Monacan businessman and philanthropist" with "Syrian-Saudi Arabian financier, businessman and philanthropist".   Thank you.  Syadieh (talk) 10:20, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  1939 Wafic Saïd small correction