Talk:September 8/Archive 1

Archive 1

Aimee Mann

Is Aimee Mann born on both September 8 and August 9 as Wikipedia now claims ? --FvdP 19:21 24 May 2003 (UTC)

Barn fire

Would the Barn Fire (which killed 78) detailed in the article at Burwell, Cambridgeshire be of enough significence to make the list? - JVG 17:24, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

Wouldn't have thought so - what effect did that have on history as a whole? Maybee it would be better and more appropriate to include that it is the 40th anniversary of Star Trek today as it was and is somewhat of a cultural icon - as opposed to some guy being crowned king in serbia.

Calendar change

Is it true that this day didn't occur in 1752 as a result of a calendar change? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.31.20.199 (talk) 23:54, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Paragraph four of the Adoption in Protestant countries section of the article Adoption of the Gregorian calendar states:

“Through enactment of the Calendar (New Style) Act 1750, Britain and the British Empire (including the eastern part of what is now the United States) adopted the Gregorian calendar in 1752, by which time it was necessary to correct by 11 days. Wednesday, 2 September 1752, was followed by Thursday, 14 September 1752.”

So that would be true for British Empire locations, but not for the rest of the world. — Caveman Chuck (talk) 05:26, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Date more likely to fall on Tuesday, Thursday or Saturday

In the page introduction it states: “This date is slightly more likely to fall on a Tuesday, Thursday or Saturday (58 in 400 years each) than on Sunday or Monday (57), and slightly less likely to occur on a Wednesday or Friday (56).”

What is the source for this or how was it determined? — Caveman Chuck (talk) 05:26, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Dow Jones Industrial Average point changes

Regarding your blanket reversion of my additions to dates of record point changes in the DJIA with the comment "Regarding your comment that "Not every zig-zag of a single national stock exchange is worth noting," and, "Actually, it is (London, Tokyo, Paris?) and none of these are historic, merely transitory," I find your arguments to be disingenuous for the following reasons:

1. This is the English Language Wikipedia. A serious argument can be made that the Dow Jones Industrial Average is the single most monitored stock index in the world, not just in the English language, and it is therefore specious to maintain that it is just "a single national stock exchange".
2. The entries I've made were for days in which the DJIA had achieved a record point change. These records are set only very infrequently. It's not that the market hit a record high; that kind of information becomes non-notable usually after a short period of time. These weren't just ordinary "zig-zags". These were days of large consequence to the world of corporate finance.
3. Prior to my additions, there were existing precedences for inclusion of the same kind of material, including September 29, October 19, October 27, and October 13. Arbitrary inclusion of some of these and not others seems non-encyclopedic.
4. Just because these dates are not memorable for you now does not mean that they were not notable at the time.
5. Your actions are of someone who thinks they WP:OWN these articles. If you disagree with the change, it is more proper to talk about them prior to their removal unless the content addition blatantly doesn't belong.

—  X  S  G  10:03, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Since this issue is affecting multiple articles, for now the conversation is at User talk:XSG. —  X  S  G  10:57, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

Birth of Mary

September 8 is considered the birthday of Mary (at least by the Roman Catholic church). Should her birth be listed under "Births" in the "September 8" article (this article)? Is there any reason why it is not listed here? Thanks. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 13:49, 8 September 2014 (UTC)