Jump to content

Talk:2012 phenomenon

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:2012 millenarianism)
Featured article2012 phenomenon is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on December 20, 2012.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 20, 2009Peer reviewReviewed
November 2, 2009Peer reviewReviewed
January 29, 2010Good article nomineeListed
September 22, 2010Peer reviewReviewed
October 23, 2010Featured article candidateNot promoted
April 3, 2011Peer reviewReviewed
May 27, 2011Featured article candidatePromoted
December 27, 2012Articles for deletionSpeedily kept
On this day... A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on December 21, 2017.
Current status: Featured article

Past Tense?

[edit]

Why does the article begin by referring to the subject in the past tense? Is it because the beliefs have lost their significance despite existing in words or otherwise? MS2P (talk) 15:46, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The article says, "The 2012 phenomenon was a range of eschatological beliefs that cataclysmic or transformative events would occur on or around 21 December 2012." It's past tense because those people who formerly held the mistaken and unscientific belief that world-changing events would occur on that date were forced to abandon those ideas when that did not in fact occur. So, the 2012 phenomenon is something that happened in the past, so to speak. Mudwater (Talk) 18:39, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2012 movie

[edit]

This is just a thought, but shouldn’t the movie “2012” be in here? Like a “dramatization” section? 2601:246:900:1E20:387E:28B4:ABCE:A779 (talk) 16:09, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is. In the "Cultural influence" section. Serendipodous 18:04, 24 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

I'm new here, but I believe footnote 135, the Ipsos poll, has suffered from link rot. The cited study can be found at this URL.

https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/one-seven-14-global-citizens-believe-end-world-coming-their-lifetime

If someone can tell me what I should do when suggesting these kinds of things, I would appreciate it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Togekiss157 (talkcontribs) 23:10, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Togekiss157, in the future, don't hesitate to make that type of change yourself. --McSly (talk) 00:05, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article

[edit]

This article was promoted to featured before the date it talks about. I think it should get some re-assessment. PhotographyEdits (talk) 12:50, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article review is an established process on Wikipedia. If you feel it needs to be reassessed, then nominate it. Spaking as the original nominator and one with quite a few successful FAs to my name, I would say that we adequately addressed the events of the day. Serendipodous 13:31, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

citation no. 61

[edit]

Isn't ref no 61 (Arguelle 1975) incorrect? There are only 1987 and 1992 books of Arguelles listed in references section Archiwald (talk) 22:30, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect header

[edit]

It says that "21 December 2012" redirects here. So does "December 21, 2012". Please add that in, as I can't figure out how to do it myself. IPs are people too 🇺🇸🦅 13:11, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]