Talk:April 18

message: Does anyone else think 'Recorded this day' is a bad idea? 1) Most records are recorded over several days, if not months, nowadays. 2) It's going to swamp the rest of the information soon. DJ Clayworth 13:50, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Records 

message: Can anyone tell me why this particular abduction victim, Steven Stayner, is more significant than then 10,000s of other abduction victims? Kingturtle 05:44, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: question for rickk, What was improper about me removing Steven Stayner from the article? What action would be proper? Kingturtle 05:45, 7 May 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Stayner's case is much more significant than the vast majority of kidnappings. It is rare for kidnap victims to be held for years. His case received a huge amount of media coverage and a book and film were made about him and the case. I don't know if he should be included in the Births section, as his kidnapping and subsequent events are the focus of his life; he is not notable for his career, achievements or actions. Jim Michael (talk) 07:49, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Steven Stayner]] 

message: On April 18 1930, the BBC reported absolutely no news whatsoever; instead of the news, they played about 10 minutes of light piano music.  --163.1.165.116 01:13, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possibly not significant, but nevertheless interesting 

message: * Marie de l'Incarnation (1566 – 1618)
Removed from feast days: not designated as a Saint and has no article, so moving here. KillerChihuahua?!? 13:31, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Moved from article page

message: Uh... why does this page refer to Wayne Gretzky as a prostitute? Someone's bad idea of a joke that hasn't been reverted yet? --4.155.15.140 02:19, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Wayne Gretzky]] 

message: 1996 - In Lebanon, at least 106 civilians are killed when the Israel Defense Forces shell the UN compound at Quana. 
:This is feeble at best in terms of news, many more Jews were dying every day in the holocaust on this date between 1933 and 1945 AND NOTHING IS MENTIONED ON THIS PAGE AT ALL!!!! I'm removing it.ZionistLionist (talk) 10:37, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Please see WP:SOAPBOX --NeilN talk ♦ contribs 10:46, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is this doing in here? 

message: What about this earthquake makes it a globally notable event?  It is not the largest earthquake ever to occur in the region.  It only happened today so it is impossible to assess its long term impact on national building codes, etc.  From what I've read, no deaths were a result.  It is certainly newsworthy, but what global impact does it have?  See WP:DOY.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 15:53, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability of Illinois earthquake 

message: copied from my talk page
Please do not remove Jewish as an ethnic descriptor on daily birth lists, as you did with David Ricardo on April 18. "Jewish" is an ethnicity as well as a religion (see Ethnoreligious group). Ricardo not only is Jewish, but he's from a distinctive minority within the Jewish community itself; in that he is a Sephardi. The Sephardi are subjected to a great deal of erasure. Other ethnic descriptors are in the birth list so there is a well established precedent for it. Thank you. Asarelah (talk) 12:06, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a very appropriate thing to add to the article. In a date list, however, it is superfluous. As a economist, his 'Portugese Sephardic Jewish' heritage plays no role. If he were a Rabbi, the case would have been a good one, but the man was a politician and economist. Also, please take this to the appropriate talkpage, which is intended for discussions such as this. Kleuske (talk) 12:26, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: We include other ethnic descriptors such as "African-American", "Irish-American", and so forth on date pages where it is not of immediate relevance. It is routinely included in other date lists.  I see no reason not to include his ethnic descriptors. Asarelah (talk) 00:41, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: If there are no further objections by the 23rd, I'll reinstate the category. If you want to discuss this or offer a rebuttal, now is the time. Asarelah (talk) 14:30, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: There are. We shouldn't include those either, unless they not play a significant role in the persons career (quod non in this case). But the case is more extreme if someone is described as "Portugese" who does not have any real connection to Portugal, ethnically or otherwise. If "Portugese" is includeded, why omit "Dutch Unitarian"? Then we get "Dutch Portugese Sephardi Jewish-British Unitarian" economist and politician, which is overdoing it on the ethnic front, especially since Ricardo seems to have disavowed the "Sephardi Jewish"-bit by conversion to Unitarianism. First and foremost, he was a British politician and economist. The rest are side notes, relevant in his article, but not on a date list. Kleuske (talk) 08:25, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Portuguese [[Sephardi]] Jewish-English economist and politician 

message: The Compromise had two equally significant aspects; it counted a slave as 3/5 of a person for purposes of legislative representation and for taxation; U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 2, Clause 3to mention taxation and not legislative representation is a complete misrepresentation of the nature of the compromise because it ignores on-half of the compromise, i.e., the slave states received a concession in reduced taxation in exchange for a benefit, counting slaves (who could not vote at all) as if each of them was 3/5 of a voter.LankyYankee (talk) 18:51, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Three-Fifths Compromise