Talk:May 10
 | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Selected anniversaries for the "On this day" section of the Main Page
|
| Please read the selected anniversaries guidelines before editing this box. |
 One World Trade Center
|
Explanation
[edit]I just wanted to explain my recent edit war with myself. I was informed by a collegue of mine that she had put my name into the page, and that it had been promptly deleted. I was looking through the history for IP edits, followed by a reversion. I clicked one such entry, and saw that someone had entered an obviously fictitious birth. I promptly realized I had to delete the vandalism, and did so. Fifteen seconds later, I realized what I'd done. Hope that clears it up. --Milton 04:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
Problem
[edit]What on earth is wrong with this page? The births section refused to appear, certain changes made from yonks ago won't appear either... Any ideas? --User:MellonCollie 19:37, 30 September 2006
Removal of entries
[edit]In accordance with the guidelines, I've started weeding the Births and Deaths sections by removing entries for celebrities with 0-4 articles in other languages. Where possible, these have been transferred to the relevant Year in Topic articles. As well as making the lists more manageable, this will help with the globalization effort.Deb (talk) 06:52, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
- I don't think entries should be added or deleted by any human exercising judgment. There's no such thing as a human exercising judgment without unforgivable bias. Let the computers do their job. If the computers find a person who is the subject of a Wikipedia article who died on a May 10 of any year, let the computer add that name to this list. This isn't an article about May 10th. No good moving the data to the YEAR of death, because the user may not remember which year it was. Nobody's coming here to see what makes May 10 interesting in terms of who died. The way that users use this page is the only thing that they can remember about someone is that their death occurred on May 10th and the decedent was noteworthy enough to have a Wikipedia article. If you don't include ALL such persons, this page doesn't serve its purpose. When you talk about making the lists more "manageable", it's laughable. This isn't reading-material. It's not SUPPOSED to be a manageable read to a human reader. This page exists only to be searched. It's a database, not a narrative, not a story being told about an event. Nobody's writing a book "They All Died May Tenth" and lamenting that they can't find the stellar highlights of those who died on May 10th on this page because they're buried amongst EVERYONE who died May 10th. Think of this page as being like the lists of names maintained by genealogists or the keepers of Medal Of Honor recipients or names of immigrants passing through Ellis Island. Nobody will ever be interested in THE story of ALL such names. They want ONE quantum of data, never the list as a whole. There is no characteristic which unifies people who died on a date (unless it's D-Day or September 11, 2001). Dates of death are mostly random and of no interest of themselves. This is DATA, not an article. You just don't get it.74.64.104.99 (talk) 14:14, 27 October 2019 (UTC)Christopher L. Simpson
- I would, personally, not object if you created categories for "People who died on May 10" and "People who were born on May 10", which would fulfil your purpose without making this article even more difficult to browse than it currently is. You could then "let the computer do its job" and cross-refer to that category and we wouldn't need to include any births and deaths in this article at all. Deb (talk) 19:16, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
- I don't think entries should be added or deleted by any human exercising judgment. There's no such thing as a human exercising judgment without unforgivable bias. Let the computers do their job. If the computers find a person who is the subject of a Wikipedia article who died on a May 10 of any year, let the computer add that name to this list. This isn't an article about May 10th. No good moving the data to the YEAR of death, because the user may not remember which year it was. Nobody's coming here to see what makes May 10 interesting in terms of who died. The way that users use this page is the only thing that they can remember about someone is that their death occurred on May 10th and the decedent was noteworthy enough to have a Wikipedia article. If you don't include ALL such persons, this page doesn't serve its purpose. When you talk about making the lists more "manageable", it's laughable. This isn't reading-material. It's not SUPPOSED to be a manageable read to a human reader. This page exists only to be searched. It's a database, not a narrative, not a story being told about an event. Nobody's writing a book "They All Died May Tenth" and lamenting that they can't find the stellar highlights of those who died on May 10th on this page because they're buried amongst EVERYONE who died May 10th. Think of this page as being like the lists of names maintained by genealogists or the keepers of Medal Of Honor recipients or names of immigrants passing through Ellis Island. Nobody will ever be interested in THE story of ALL such names. They want ONE quantum of data, never the list as a whole. There is no characteristic which unifies people who died on a date (unless it's D-Day or September 11, 2001). Dates of death are mostly random and of no interest of themselves. This is DATA, not an article. You just don't get it.74.64.104.99 (talk) 14:14, 27 October 2019 (UTC)Christopher L. Simpson
first recorded sun spot vs one of the earliest recorded
[edit]The link on the word "observed" goes to an article that says "the first precisely dated sunspot observation in China occurred on May 10, 28 BCE." Likewise this talk page is firmer than the article. I suggest the article be changed to correspond with the way it is phrased here on the talk page. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 19:28, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 10 May 2020
[edit] | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change the "Mother's Day (Guatemala, and Mexico)" line in the "Holidays and observances" section to "Mother's Day (Guatemala, Mexico and India)". Potential sources for the following changes are:
https://indianexpress.com/article/lifestyle/life-style/mothers-day-2019-date-when-is-mothers-day-in-india-2019-5716402/ https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/life-style/parenting/moments/mothers-day-kab-hai-when-is-mothers-day-2019-date-significance-history-and-importance-of-mothers-day/articleshow/69250764.cms
The sources above are also used in another Wikipedia section which states that India's mother day is May 10th: https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Mother%27s_Day#India UbiquitousName (talk) 11:59, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
- @UbiquitousName:
Not done: The Indian Express article you provided from 2019 states "This year it will be observed on May 12." GoingBatty (talk) 18:02, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
