Talk:1913

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Years Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Years, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Years on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.YearsWikipedia:WikiProject YearsTemplate:WikiProject YearsYears
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Format

[See: Talk:1950#Format. -Wikid77 13:52, 22 December 2006 (UTC)][reply]

"Black Chamber" reference

In the Undated section there was mention that the MI-8 organization, also called the Black Chamber (predecessor of the NSA) was founded. Since I find no other reference to the Black Chamber being founded in 1913, and numerous sources citing post-WWI, I deleted the mentioning of it. Kirkesque 21:36, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Stamp-ctc-armory-show.jpg

The image Image:Stamp-ctc-armory-show.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --07:52, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

January edits

All entries for January were removed as obvious vandalism. This isn't an area I know, and wasn't sure what to restore from pre-vandalism entries. I didn't see anything else clearly wrong, but this article should be checked for other nonsense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Augwhite (talk • contribs) 21:18, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Ongoing" Events?

The First Balkan War is listed as an "ongoing" event. Ongoing means that it is still continuing today, right? But since the war lasted from 1912-1913, should it really be listed in "ongoing"? W M 2 16:49, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Year articles are written in the present tense. It means they were ongoing during that year. Jim Michael (talk) 17:04, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned references in 1913

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of 1913's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "CBH":

From 1856: Palmer, Alan (1992). The Chronology of British History. London: Century Ltd. pp. 276–277. ISBN 0-7126-5616-2. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
From 1857: Palmer, Alan (1992). The Chronology of British History. London: Century Ltd. pp. 277–278. ISBN 0-7126-5616-2. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
From 1823: Palmer, Alan (1992). The Chronology of British History. London: Century Ltd. pp. 252–253. ISBN 0-7126-5616-2. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
From 1845: Palmer, Alan (1992). The Chronology of British History. London: Century Ltd. pp. 267–268. ISBN 0-7126-5616-2. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
From 1867: Palmer, Alan (1992). The Chronology of British History. London: Century Ltd. pp. 287–288. ISBN 0-7126-5616-2. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
From 1913 in the United Kingdom: Palmer, Alan (1992). The Chronology of British History. London: Century Ltd. pp. 348–349. ISBN 0-7126-5616-2. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)

Reference named "Pocket On This Day":

From 1838: Penguin Pocket On This Day. Penguin Reference Library. 2006. ISBN 0-14-102715-0.
From 1913 in the United Kingdom: Penguin Pocket On This Day. Penguin Reference Library. 2006. p. 94. ISBN 0-14-102715-0.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 23:38, 8 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bias

There is a systemic bias towards events in US history. For the page to be unbiased some balanced set of criteria needs to be established for an event to meet the basic guidelines of being of global significance. I would have thought that it was clear that a 50th year anniversary/commemmoration of a Civil war battle is not of lasting significance to the state of the world.

Neither is the opening of buildings, minor weather events, small changes in the bureaucracy of the us government, minor acts of legislation, murders, some one winning a golf event, a tax cut (!) and probably best of all the event that the number of workers on the Panama canal reaches its highest level. Not the completion of the canal or even its' commissioning, but the point with the highest number of workers! A school being opened somewhere in the world is an event that probably on average occurs a few times a week, the number of industrial accidents in the US is no more significant than the rest of the world and so on.

The additions that I put in I believe ARE important - Irish home rule bill was an important step in the conflict, the Chelsea flower show is the most prestigious in the world, the aquitania was one of the 'grand trio' of Cunard ocean liners and served in the wars, stainless steel was an important invention as was the first oil-fired battleship.

You can disagree with some of the additions, but to revert my attempts to make the page fairer and more objective does not strike me as balanced and impartial.Noodleki (talk) 11:02, 11 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sweeping changes often necessitate consensus, especially when other users have displayed their disagreement with the above. Additionally, continuing to edit war over this from multiple IPs won't win any converts to the above rationale.... 76.248.149.47 (talk) 23:46, 15 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with User:Noodleki . As per WP:YEARS:

The events section is divided into months, each month has a calendar at the beginning and lists any important events that occurred. The month header once linked to the particular month in the year (e.g. January 2004), but no longer does. Each item links to the day.

Note that the word "important" is emphasised in the original. Given the existence of sub articles (by country and topic) it would seem obvious that only the most internationally important entries belong in the parent Year article the rest belong in the appropriate sub article. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 23:41, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 1913. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:52, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]