Talk:December 8

message: If John Lennon's assassination is considered an event, why isn't Dimebag Darrell's?  Three people were killed before the gunman himself was shot.  Just a thought.  I'm not going to add it, but I thought I'd at least put it up for discussion.
Stupid5pin 18:46, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: First, I don't think that the murder of John Lennon should be included as a globally notable event.  A listing under deaths is sufficient.  But if I were to argue why John Lennon should be included and Dimebag Darrell shouldn't, the simple answer is that nobody knows who Dimebag Darrell is.  His name and the news of his murder were not known and talked about worldwide by people who were not fans. John Lennon was one of the Beatles and influential in the rock and roll culture, blah, blah, blah.  You'll also see a lot more "on this day" news stories about John Lennon than about this other guy.   In ten years, no one will know who Dimebag Darrell was, but a lot of people will know the name John Lennon. Actually, ten years is overkill - ask 100 people between the ages of 18 and 50 today who Dimebag Darrell is and I would estimate that less than 5% would know while I'd bet greater than 75% would know who John Lennon is. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 20:43, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

text: While this may have been a traumatic experience for you, it is not a notable event for the rest of the world.  My argument above says all that needs to be said on the topic.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 14:39, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

text: I would also like to point out that other highly notable musicians don't even have their deaths as an event on Wikipedia. If this is the case, then why is John Lennon on it and not others? It shouldn't be labeled as an event at this point, but left in the death listing. Ledgo (talk) 12:52, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Wikipedia has regarded the death of John Lennon as a notable event for the past four years. WP also regards the death of Michael Jackson as a notable event (hence the unique article space), rather than as just a duly noted detail in his biography (as one might find in a "Death" section of an article). If you feel that somebody else's death had repercussions that could not adequately be noted in the person's bio article, you are welcome to create the "Death of X" article. It may or may not end up getting nominated for WP:AFD, and it may or may not survive an AFD discussion. But even if the deaths of many people could be framed as notable events, very few of them would merit mention on an international article such as this. Lennon (like Jackson) was a global superstar. Everybody recognized him everywhere. The same cannot be said about very many other people, no matter how they died. Cosmic Latte (talk) 15:51, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
replies: text:  A death has to me especially notable to be included in Events: John F. Kennedy, Lennon, Diana, Princess of Wales, Michael Jackson. They all have articles about the death itself, as well as an article about the person. Most people, including millions of people who were not fans of them, can tell you where they were when they heard about each of those deaths. Try asking 100 people at random where they were when they heard Dimebag Darrell had died. About ninety-nine will say "who?" If you say "you know, the musician?", they will say "no, never heard of him". None of the other people killed in the same incident as Darrell were notable; hence it was not a world event. It was only relevant to the people at the event, the authorities who investigated it and the people who knew of those present. That adds up to less than 1% of the population. Remember how everyone was talking about the deaths of JFK, Lennon, Diana & Jackson just after they happened and at that time they were on the front pages of hundreds of newspapers and magazines across the world? Darrell's death only made mainstream news locally. 109.249.241.1 (talk) 05:20, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Dimebag Darrell

message: In Portugal, November 8 commemorates Mary as a Mother (Our Lady of Conception), not the Immaculate Conception (that is, the idea that also Mary was conceived without sexual intercourse between her parents). The Immaculate Conception dogma is recent (late 19th century) and has nothing to do with older festivities related with Motherhood. No one in Portugal calls this holiday "Immaculate Conception" ("Imaculada Conceição"), but "Our Lady of Conception" ("Nossa Senhora da Conceição"). Several civil parishes in Portugal are called Nossa Senhora da Conceição -- none is called Imaculada Conceição. Gazilion (talk) 15:15, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Immaculate Conception vs. Our Lady of Conception 

message: I heard on the radio today that on this date in 1709, coke was used to smelt iron by Abraham Darby.  I don't have time to add it but it.  This may not sound like a very big event but it allowed iron to be produced in much larger furnaces.  This created a lot of problems which in turn created many more inventions and lead to the industrial revolution in Europe. OlYellerTalktome 15:05, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Coal used with iron ore 

message: Isn't the 8th pretend to be a time traveler day? 64.53.185.0 (talk) 14:29, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Pretend to be a time traveler day

message: Why have his killer's name highlighted, or even mentioned? It's not as if he was a person of note prior to committing his crime.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Phil5775 (talk • contribs) 02:17, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  John Lennon 

message: I'm moving the Umbanda celebration outside the sublist of Christian celebrations for this date. --Haruo (talk) 03:05, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Umbanda is not Christianity