Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/March 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Frequently asked questions (FAQ)
Q1: Why is [Insert event here], an event that is "more important and significant" than all the others that are currently listed, not posted?
A1: Relative article quality along with the mix of topics already listed are often deciding factors in what gets posted. Any given day of the year can have a great many important or significant historical events. The problem is that there is generally only room on the Main Page to list about 5 events at a time, so not everything can be posted.
As stated on Wikipedia:FAQ/Main Page, the items and events posted on the Main Page are chosen based more on how well they are written, not based on how much important or significant their subjects are. It is easier for admins to select a well-written, cited, verifiable article over a poor one versus trying to determine objectively how much a subject is important or significant.
Keep in mind that the quality requirements only apply to the selected bolded article, not the other links. Thus, an event may qualify for multiple dates in a year if there is an article written in a summary style and an article providing detailed content; if one of those pages have cleanup issues, the other page can be bolded as an alternate.
Another criterion is to maintain some variety of topics, and not exhibit, just for example, tech-centrism, or the belief that the world stops at the edge of the English-speaking world. Many days have a large pool of potential articles, so they will rotate in and out every year to give each one some Main Page exposure. In addition, an event is not posted if it is also the subject of this year's scheduled featured article or featured picture.
Q2: There are way too many 20th-century events listed. Why aren't there more events from the 19th century and before?
A2: The short, basic reason is the systemic bias of Wikipedia. There are not enough good, well-written articles on 19th-century and earlier events for all 365 days in the year. Currently, a majority of users seem to be generally more interested in writing articles about recent events. If you would like to further help mitigate the systemic bias in Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias.
Q3: This page seems to be biased toward events based in [Insert country or region here]. What can be done about it?
A3: This again is attributed to the systemic bias of Wikipedia. Many users are generally more interested in working on good, well-written articles pertaining to their home country. Since this is the English Wikipedia, there will be more English-speaking users, and thus more articles pertaining to English-speaking countries. And if there are more users who are from the United States, there will probably be more well-written articles about events based in the United States. Again, if you would like to further help mitigate the systemic bias in Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias.
Q4: Why is the birthday of [Insert name here] not listed?
A4: Births and deaths can only be used on centennials, etc. Exceptions can be made if they are directly related to assassinations, executions, natural disasters, civil accidents, genocide/extinction, or other historically significant topics that frequently appear on the Selected Anniversaries pages.
Q5: Are the holidays/observances listed in any particular order?
A5: Yes, there is a specified order: International observances first, then alphabetically by where observed.
Q6: Some of the holidays/observances that are listed have dates in parentheses beside them. What do they mean?
A6: There are two reasons that some holidays/observances have dates next to them:
  • Non-Gregorian-based holidays/observances are marked with the current year as a reminder to others that their dates do in fact vary from year to year.
  • National Days, Independence Days, and other holidays celebrating the nationhood of a country are generally marked by the year of the significant historic date being observed.
Today's featured article for March 2, 2018 Today's featured picture for March 2, 2018
NNC-US-1859-1C-Indian Head Cent (wreath).jpg

The Indian Head cent is a penny ($0.01) that was produced by the U.S. Bureau of the Mint from 1859 to 1909. It was preceded by the large cent (1793–1857), a copper coin about the size of a half dollar, and the Flying Eagle cent. The large cent was discontinued after a rise in the price of copper in the wake of the California Gold Rush (1848–1855). The 1857 Flying Eagle is identical in diameter to the modern U.S. cent, but thicker, with a composition of 12% nickel and 88% copper. The Indian head cent, designed by James Barton Longacre, the Chief Engraver at the Philadelphia Mint, was initially the same size as the Flying Eagle. Cents were hoarded during the economic chaos of the American Civil War, when nickel was in short supply, and privately issued bronze tokens began to circulate until Congress authorized a thinner cent of bronze alloy. After the war the cent became popular, and even more so with the advent of coin-operated machines in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. In 1909, the Indian Head cent was replaced by Victor D. Brenner's Lincoln cent. (Full article...)


Arthur Devis

Mr and Mrs Atherton, a conversation piece completed c. 1743 by the British painter Arthur Devis (1712–1787). A student of the Flemish painter Peter Tillemans, Devis began his career as a landscape artist but had gravitated to portrait painting and established a studio in London by 1737. After a period of some success, he was unable to compete with fellow portraitists such as Joshua Reynolds and Johan Zoffany and focused on restoring paintings.

Painting: Arthur Devis
ArchiveMore featured pictures...
view - edit - create protected version To create the protected version, replace the first line with {{subst:POTD row and save it.

Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/March 1 * Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/March 3

Nevada Territory is a stub. If and when it is expanded, it can be part of the rotation on this page.

First edition of Time Magazine

Why does this anniversary appear on this day, when in the article itself (and on the cover of the first edition) the date is March 3? eman 01:44, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Dunno ... but many magazines and journals are published before the date of issue.... Anyway, I've moved it to March 3. -- PFHLai 11:13, 2005 Feb 27 (UTC)

2012 notes

howcheng {chat} 10:21, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

2013 notes

howcheng {chat} 23:36, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

2014 notes

howcheng {chat} 11:26, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

2015 notes

howcheng {chat} 11:57, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Nineteen Day Fast

  • Next year, the Nineteen Day Fast will start on March 1st, rather than on March 2nd. This is due to a change in the Baha'i Calendar that aligns the start of the new year to the equinox in Tehran rather than the Gregorian date of March 21st. I wonder if we should make the change now for March 1st and March 2nd, so that it is not mistakenly copied over from 2015. Regards, -- Jeff3000 (talk) 03:19, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
    • I would add a note to the talk page. Is this a permanent move, or a one-time deal? howcheng {chat} 06:12, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
      • It's going to be year by year. The Nineteen Day Fast will now start 19 days before the vernal equinox, not 19 days before March 21st. Some years it's going to start on March 2nd, some on March 1st, and I can imagine in some years it could even be February 28th/29th. Regards, -- (talk) 02:25, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

2016 notes

howcheng {chat} 11:09, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

League of Lezhë

"1444 – Skanderbeg organised the League of Lezhë, an alliance of Albanian principalities that is regarded as the first unified Albanian state."

This assertion is factually incorrect and violates NPOV. Multiple reliable sources used in the article explain that:

  • "Skanderbeg organised the League of Lezhë" - Skanderbeg did not organize the League of Lezhë. Venetians controlled Albania Veneta and organized this alliance in the Venetian-held town of Lezhë to create military alliance aimed against the Ottoman Empire. Skanderbeg was appointed as commander of this alliance, he did not organize it.
  • "an alliance of Albanian principalities" - This was not an alliance of Albanian principalities. Regional Albanian and Serbian chieftains concluded (along the Adriatic coast from southern Epirus to the Bosnian border) an alliance aimed against the Ottoman Empire.
  • "that is regarded as the first unified Albanian state" - Hipothesis about this alliance being a state has not received a significant scholarly support. Adjective "first unified Albanian" much less.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 21:36, 3 March 2016 (UTC)
@Antidiskriminator: Please suggest some replacement text, as you seem to know more about the subject than I do. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 05:31, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
@Howcheng: I would suggest completely neutral text only with information supported by scholarly consensus. That text should be quite sufficient without disputable assertions connected with Albanian nationalistic myth-making which insists that this alliance of pure Albanian regional chieftains was (first unified state) of Albanian nation, consisting of unified principalities that were also Albanian. My proposal is (please copy edit if necessary):

2017 notes

howcheng {chat} 08:01, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Retrieved from ""
This content was retrieved from Wikipedia :
This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article "Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/March 2"; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA