Talk:List of days of the year

message: __TOC__
1400 - According to the cited Wikipedia article itself, it wasn't John Holland, 1st Duke of Exeter, himself who died on 3 September, it was his eldest son and heir, Richard Holland.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.148.128.64 (talk) 06:59, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

message: Interestin info and links to this subject at this URL; http://personal.ecu.edu/mccartyr/calendar-reform.html
----
I can imagine how the name of this page came about, but at this moment it is a bit confusing; at least to a non-native speaker of the English language. Wouldn't it be better to change the name to something like "365 days of the year"? cf. the it: link right now, which is a completely different setup which fits more to the actual title of this article.... Rob Hooft 15:44, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Calendar Reform 

message: I'd like to propose getting rid of the "less condensed format" of the calendar.  I can't see what possible purpose it serves, and it makes the page much bigger, and doesn't look very good anyway.  It's not laid out like a "real" calendar, since the 1st is always in the first column, and so it's not like it's a helpful reference.  Anyone who wants to find a particular date should not have any difficulty using the condensed version.  Thoughts?  -- VV 21:19, 7 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Since there have been no comments on behalf of keeping the less condensed version in over two weeks, I've gone ahead and axed it. -- VV 21:40, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: That's OK for now, but I plan on creating a real calendar. In fact I've already done it for every day. See January 15. --mav 01:15, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm skeptical of this approach; one would have to replace all 365+ of them every year, no? -- VV 02:05, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Nope. Just 12: 
*Template:January calendar
*Template:February calendar
*Template:March calendar
*Template:April calendar
*Template:May calendar
*Template:June calendar
*Template:July calendar
*Template:August calendar
*Template:September calendar
*Template:October calendar
*Template:November calendar
*Template:December calendar --mav
Template:Calendar exists now as well. --mav 03:04, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Less condensed version 

message: "This is a partial list of historical anniversaries." No it isn't. It's a complete list of dates. There's not a single mention of a historical anniversary anywhere on the page. Shall we move it to List of dates...? -- Oliver P. 11:35, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  List of dates? 

message: Please excuse a query from a newbie, but is there any easy way I can a link to our 'Today in New Zealand History' to each anniversay day (like the BBC and others have)? The site is run by professional historians working for the Minsitry for Culture and Heritage so the information is reliable.
Many thanks, Jamie Mackay 21:43, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding external link to each page? 

message: Shouldn't the next day also be presented as well as the past 3 days? -- Cat chi? 04:32, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The next day 

message: I was wondering why on June 7th, no one else has notcied that the 2007 calendar on this page has the year beginning on a Sunday instead of a Monday?  GCW50 17:33, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Might the reason be that there is no 2007 calendar on that page, are you looking somwwhere other than June 7. --Drappel 19:24, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I was wondering why AS of June 7th, no one else has notcied that the 2007 calendar on this page has the year beginning on a Sunday instead of a Monday? in any event it's fixed now GCW50 14:22, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Wrong Year

message: I'm wondering why this page is called "List of historical anniversaries", when it's basically just a calendar. Why isn't it called "Calendar" of something similar, as it's not really a list..... ??? --217.154.124.195 (talk) 13:32, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's a good point.  Calendar of anniversaries might be a better name.  Note the "historical" is redundant also. Jimp 08:47, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name of page? 

message: Is there a policy on which calendar system to use (by default) in the reporting of historical dates in wikipedia articles?
Specifically, should events that occurred before the (gradual) adoption of the Gregorian calendar system be reported in wikipedia articles (unless otherwise specified) as having occurred on the dates according to the Julian calendar in effect at the time of their occurence, or according to the Gregorian date retroactively calculated for that day?
For example, the October Revolution is so-named because it began on the Julian date October 23, though it is discussed in the wikipedia article as having begun on the Gregorian date of November 7 (which is also when it is now officially commemorated in Russia, etc).
On the other hand, the Knights Templar article gives the traditionally understood date of "October 13, 1307" as the beginning of King Philip's persecution of them, without specifying that that is the date according to the Julian system in effect at the time (it occurred on October 21, 1307 according to the Gregorian system currently assumed (in the West, at least) to be the default).
(Please see Talk:Knights Templar#Friday the 13th revisited... and the October 13 talk page for further discussion of this issue).
I imagine that implementing a formal wiki-policy to report all pre-Gregorian dates retroactively according to the Gregorian system would have a wide-ranging impact affecting quite a number of wikipedia articles, but not having such a policy is potentially very confusing and seems quite arbitrary.  
So: should this issue be further addressed, or not?  --Wikiscient 15:00, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Moving discussion of this issue to: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Days of the year#Wikipolicy on dates? --Wikiscient 15:18, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Wikipolicy on historical dates? 

message: I feel like there should be a footnote for February 29 noting that this only appears in calenders once every four years. BD2412 T 19:38, 30 November 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Sounds reasonable to me. Tyrone Madera (talk) 17:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree it might be appropriate to mark February 29 with some kind of footnote, but not to remove it altogether.  I have reverted its removal.  --188.30.21.176 (talk) 20:03, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
replies: text:  I figured a footnote throw off the flow of the graph, so I added it in the box beside February 29. -- Johnson524 (talk) 19:07, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Footnote February 29