Template talk:Calendars

This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Time This template is within the scope of WikiProject Time, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Time 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.TimeWikipedia:WikiProject TimeTemplate:WikiProject TimeTime History This template is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory Years This template 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

Want to help write or improve articles about Time? Join WikiProject Time or visit the Time Portal for a list of articles that need improving.
—Yamara ✉ 12:46, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

119192 test

17381 test

21768 test

dsvy2398vu98u

Accordning to the article on the islamic calendar: "Saudi Arabia is currently the only Muslim country to use the Islamic calendar as the calendar of daily government business". It does not seem that the islamic calendar is still in wide use, at least not more than, say, the chinese traditional / farming calendar. I'm moving the islamic calendar to the section of the other historic calendars. 89.253.122.71 (talk) 01:26, 27 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Selected use section: a number of entries in this section are actually historical. Having separate selected use and historical sections implies that the selected use entries are all current, but the Germanic, French Republican and Swedish calendars, for instance, are historical and disused. I think they should be moved to the historical section.

Julian calendar: this is used by some (not all) Orthodox Christians as a way of calculating the dates of certain feast days (see Julian calendar). The Julian system is also apparently observed in Berber culture, although Berber people live in countries in North Africa, Europe and North America where the Gregorian calendar is officially used, so I'm not sure in what way the Julian calendar is employed. And finally, the Julian calendar is used by a little over 2,000 people on Mount Athos in Greece. I think this entry therefore is a good candidate for the "Rarely used" section of the navigation box.

Darian calendar: this is a proposed calendar for use on the planet Mars. I think it should be at least in a "non-Earth" section, if not removed entirely. It certainly should not be described as "rarely used", for, erm, kind of the obvious reason.

Discordian calendar: this is another special case. While the Discordian calendar has an advantage over the Darian calendar in so far as it is designed for use on planet Earth, it is part of the Discordian religion which, in neutral point of view tradition, is described on Wikipedia as being subject to "some division as to whether it should be regarded as a parody religion", although the references given all apply words such as "mock religion" and "parody" to it. Either way, the Discordian calendar has "holydays" (one word, apparently) such as Mojoday, and Wikipedia gives referenced information about some new additions including Towel day, the day honouring Douglas Adams and his Hitchhikers' Guide to the Galaxy books. What does all of this mean for this template? I think it means that it is not a neutral point of view to include the Discordian calendar in a section with uncontroversially real calendars (even real calendars for other planets), and therefore it should be in an "alternative" or "invented", or if people want to argue about it, simply "controversial" section, or removed completely, which is my preferred option.

Depending on what if any responses I get here in the next few days, I will begin making changes based on my above comments. Robertbyrne (talk) 21:47, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why are there many historical calendars in the "Selected" section, when they reasonably should be in the "Historical" section? I'm "researching" calendars at the moment, and I find it hard to find the ones I want in the big "Selected" list. Moving the calendars that are not longer in use to the "Historical" section makes much more sense. --OpenFuture (talk) 13:51, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see the same thing was said in 2010, and no reply was made. I'll just move em. --OpenFuture (talk) 13:51, 26 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest to change the two term in the template into "major" and "regional". C933103 (talk) 04:46, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you can assume all "major" are not regional Karl (talk) 11:57, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The Calendars portal was recently deleted. I've removed the red link from the template. BlackcurrantTea (talk) 11:32, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]