Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/September 28

Skip to table of contents

This is the talk page for making suggestions or discussing improvements to Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/September 28.

To report an error when this list is currently on the Main Page, see Main Page errors. Please remember that this list defers to the supporting articles, so it is best to achieve consensus and make any necessary changes there first.
Before making a suggestion, please read the selected anniversaries guidelines. Please remember that this list usually defers to supporting pages when there is disagreement, so it is best to achieve consensus and make any necessary changes there first.
To discuss improvements to the corresponding September 28 article, see Talk:September 28 instead.

Frequently asked questions

Q1: Why is [Insert event here], an event that is "more important and significant" than all the others that are currently listed, not posted?: A1: Relative article quality along with the mix of topics already listed are often deciding factors in what gets posted. Any given day of the year can have a great many important or significant historical events. The problem is that there is generally only room on the Main Page to list about 5 events at a time, so not everything can be posted.

As stated on Wikipedia:FAQ/Main Page, the items and events posted on the Main Page are chosen based more on how well they are written, not based on how much important or significant their subjects are. It is easier for admins to select a well-written, cited, verifiable article over a poor one versus trying to determine objectively how much a subject is important or significant.

Keep in mind that the quality requirements only apply to the selected bolded article, not the other links. Thus, an event may qualify for multiple dates in a year if there is an article written in a summary style and an article providing detailed content; if one of those pages have cleanup issues, the other page can be bolded as an alternate.

Another criterion is to maintain some variety of topics, and not exhibit, just for example, tech-centrism, or the belief that the world stops at the edge of the English-speaking world. Many days have a large pool of potential articles, so they will rotate in and out every year to give each one some Main Page exposure. In addition, an event is not posted if it is also the subject of this year's scheduled featured article or featured picture.

Q2: There are way too many 20th-century events listed. Why aren't there more events from the 19th century and before?

A2: The short, basic reason is the systemic bias of Wikipedia. There are not enough good, well-written articles on 19th-century and earlier events for all 365 days in the year. Currently, a majority of users seem to be generally more interested in writing articles about recent events. If you would like to further help mitigate the systemic bias in Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias.

Q3: This page seems to be biased toward events based in [Insert country or region here]. What can be done about it?

A3: This again is attributed to the systemic bias of Wikipedia. Many users are generally more interested in working on good, well-written articles pertaining to their home country. Since this is the English Wikipedia, there will be more English-speaking users, and thus more articles pertaining to English-speaking countries. And if there are more users who are from the United States, there will probably be more well-written articles about events based in the United States. Again, if you would like to further help mitigate the systemic bias in Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias.

Q4: Why is the birthday/death anniversary of [Insert name here] not listed?

A4: There are only four slots available for birth and death anniversaries. As with the events, article quality and diversity in time period, geography, and reason for notability are all contributing factors in whether an article gets selected for inclusion.

Q5: Are the holidays/observances listed in any particular order?

A5: Yes, there is a specified order: International observances first, then alphabetically by where observed.

Q6: Some of the holidays/observances that are listed have dates in parentheses beside them. What do they mean?

A6: There are two reasons that some holidays/observances have dates next to them:

Non-Gregorian-based holidays/observances are marked with the current year as a reminder to others that their dates do in fact vary from year to year.
National Days, Independence Days, and other holidays celebrating the nationhood of a country are generally marked by the year of the significant historic date being observed.

Today's featured article for September 28, 2025
Wikipedia:Today's featured article/September 28, 2025 create – talk – watch
Picture of the day for September 28, 2025
The featured picture for this day has not yet been chosen. In general, pictures of the day are scheduled in order of promotion to featured status. See Wikipedia:Picture of the day/Guidelines for full guidelines. create

← Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/September 27 * Wikipedia talk:Selected anniversaries/September 29 →

2012 notes

Rescued from Ineligible (unused): Mohammad Najibullah
Omitted: Penicillin; Falcon 1 (ineligible—maintenance); 2009 Guinea protest
Included: Norman conquest of England (7th appearance, last in 2010; rescued from Ineligible); Summit Series (4th appearance, last in 2007; 40th anniversary); Pope John Paul I (4th appearance, last in 2010; rescued from Ineligible); MS Estonia (5th appearance, last in 2007)
Repeats: Balangiga massacre (2nd consecutive appearance, 2 total)

—howcheng {chat} 09:21, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Whaam!

I just noticed this edit. There are two schools of thought on main page presentation. People at DYK view the main page as a one time thing and make ITNs ineligible. People at ITN view DYK as something the constrains ITN only in the sense that they can't run at the same time. I.e., as soon as it is finished at DYK they could use it at ITN. This is probably because ITN views the main page appearance as something that can repeat. I have never seen the OTD and FAC issue come up, but since OTD appearance can repeat, I thought the view should be something like the ITN view where an appearance could occur right away after it finishes on another main page section. I had all along hoped that if Whaam! was not scheduled at FAC on the 28th that it be at OTD as the main image on the 28th. Is there an OTD rule that precludes Whaam! from runing at OTD after it finishes at FAC?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 08:11, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

- (ec)Further to this point, Whaam! lost out to H. C. McNeile at WP:TFAR. There was a 12-week TFA drive for Whaam! to get it to FA prior to its 50th annivesary on the 28th. This was after one of the most successful FA drives in terms of participation, with nearly 700KB of content at the article talk, PR, MILHIST ACR, FAC1 and FAC2 (counting talk pages) during the FA drive to perfect the article for FA. Thus, I was hoping that this would actually appear as the main image at OTD if it failed to get the TFA main image. 50th anniversaries are to be celebrated and there was extensive effort to prepare this article for its 50th.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 08:21, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - That has no relevance to this being on OTD. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:26, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Says who?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 08:59, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - Do you see "I worked really hard on this article" as an OTD criteria anywhere? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:43, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Having the same article on the main page (with an image) two days in a row is likely to draw complaints. OTD can use former TFAs, but they are always separated by more than one day. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:16, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- - P.S. images are often on the main page for more than 48 consecutive hours (at ITN), I believe without complaint.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 08:47, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Is this a policy you are making up or has this issue occurred in the past?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 08:21, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Where have I said this is a policy? This is what has happened in the past. Check any OTD entry which is also an FA, such as Space Shuttle Challenger disaster. Also, shouldn't Howcheng be contacted? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:24, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - (ec)What I am asking is are there examples of scheduling discussions of FAs that were given dates close to the actual anniversary that also contended for OTD. As the nominator of the TFA, and the main editor of the FA, I would prefer OTD main image on the 28th (the actual 50th) and a TFA near October 24th (between the 21st and 24th) when its debut exhibition ended. Can Bencherlite make contingency 9/27th scheduling adjustments?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 08:30, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - You'd have to check the MP talk page archives for examples of that. From my experience, if it ends up on the same date (by accident, almost always) the OTD entry is usually removed. I think a TFA for October would be okay, though I note that this would not guarantee an OTD spot. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:33, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        I am not talking about the same date. I am talking about consecutive dates. There are many instances of a DYK running and when it finishes the same subject going up at ITN right afterwards (sometimes with the main ITN image, I presume), with no complaints and ITN images often last for more than a single day.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 08:37, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        Any examples of those DYK to ITN? Never seen one. I don't think TFA then OTD the next day would go over well, sorry. Seems Bencher is of the same opinion. Your alternative suggestion, of having the TFA a month later, would probably be acceptable. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:50, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        I don't know the examples myself because I have been more of a DYK person. They are much rarer now that DYK lasts longer (8 or 12 hours instead of 6) and now that it is so rare for a DYK to run within 24 hours of being nominated. Now DYKs are often up for discussion for a month or two. It use to be that it was not uncommon for a DYK to run within a day of being nominated. Rod Blagojevich corruption charges has run at DYK, OTD and ITN giving it 3 main page appearances within a year. However, the DYK to ITN delay was several weeks. I only have two ITNs so I don't have any examples of extremely short delays. I recall discussions at ITN of waiting for something to finish at DYK, but don't rememeber any examples.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:45, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        That's actually a very interesting bit of history. I didn't even know it was possible. I am unaware of any others as, like yourself, I am more of a DYK person. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:43, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        According to Talk:Rod Blagojevich corruption charges, the article was on DYK on Dec 16, 2008, on ITN Jan 9, 2009, then finally OTD on Dec 9, 2009 (nearly a year later, although if it had been me doing the scheduling then, I likely would not have included it). I don't think ITN would omit an article just because it had made a recent appearance in a different section, seeing as we have no control over what happens in the real world. —howcheng {chat} 16:31, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Space Shuttle Challenger doesn't seem to represent the same sort of issue. It was TFA for its actual 21st anniversary and OTD for its actual 25th.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 08:35, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Indeed, it's not "a few days". But your question in your OP was "Is there an OTD rule that precludes Whaam! from runing at OTD after it finishes at FAC?", to which I answered "no". — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:49, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      - Then someone should undo Bencherlite's edit.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 08:59, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        "After" =/= "the day after". After can be 3 years. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:05, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        I don't understand this shorthand. Are you saying you don't think Bencherlite's edit is misleading in regards to whether Whaam! should be eligible for the 28th? As I have said above images run for over 48 consecutive hours on the main page without complaint all the time and there is longstanding precedent to allow for immediate use of an article in one section after it finishes running in another if it is topical for that second section.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:35, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        "The word after does not equal (is not the same as) the phrase the day after". None of the examples you've presented are immediate. Even the Blagojevich charges took over a month. Also of note: if this was run in OTD the day after TFA, there would still be a double link (recently featured in TFA).
        
        I think my position is abundantly clear: though I am against having the painting at OTD if it is in TFA the day before, though if TFA is after a month I would not mind as much. Your position is likewise clear: so long as it is not on the MP at the same time it is no issue (i.e. reuse the day after is fine). From past experience we both know that we are likely to not change our minds. What's left is to wait for a consensus to form, either with Howard and Bencherlite's input, or from others who pass by this page. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:43, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Howcheng we need a ruling on whether an OTD can run the day after a TFA? With the same picture? This seems most like an ITN running right after a DYK, which happens, but I am not sure.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 08:40, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not rescheduling the Whaam! TFA this late in the day. At such short notice, it's unfair to the primary authors of whichever article I pick to replace it. I made the decision 8 days ago on what articles should run on 27th and 28th September and nobody has come back to me with any issues until this suggestion, the day before, on an unrelated page. I'm not the one who makes the final decisions here at OTD - that tends to be Howcheng, and I'm sure he'll see this discussion when he comes to check the OTD selection before 28th Sept.

But, for what it's worth, I don't think it's fair to have the TFA on 27th appear on OTD on 28th. For one thing, it means that the same article will be linked prominently in two places on the main page at the same time (in OTD and, of course, in the "recently featured" list of the previous three days' TFAs). For another thing, it means that some other article has to give way to make room for Whaam!. And for a final thing, it would show a lack of co-ordination between the various main page sections to have such an obvious overlap on successive days - particularly if the suggestion is that the same derivative image should be used in both places on both days. Whaam! is not so important to Wikipedia readers, in my view, that it is appropriate to celebrate its 50th anniversary on the main page on successive days. OTD aims for variety for readers, I think, and repeating yesterday's TFA - particularly with the same image - is hardly offering variety.

There will be plenty of opportunities in future years for Whaam! to appear at OTD - the reality is that there are often few suitable articles for any particular day of the year and I would have thought that a well-maintained FA could reasonably expect to appear every other year or so.

I don't particularly care what the house rules for DYK and ITN are, because we are not talking about DYK or ITN. Yes, ITN images sometimes stay up for more than 24 hours, but that's only because not every story has a usable free image and ITN can often go more than 24 hours without a fresh story anyway. That argument is no precedent here.

The success or otherwise of the TFA drive for Whaam! is also, respectfully, besides the point. (Personally I would have thought that the most successful TFA drives would be the ones with the least amount of commentary necessary, where nearly all of the issues that might arise were addressed in the initial writing of the article, but that's besides the point...)

Tony, I think that asking whether there is a rule or a precedent to prevent it happening is the wrong approach here. At the end of the day, I think it's a question of basic fairness and common sense. Should an article that has been TFA on 27th take one of the few slots at OTD on 28th, or should it give way to something else that hasn't just been the TFA and try again next year? Just because there is no rule against such a thing happening (if that is the case, Howcheng may know) does not mean that it should be done. The absence of such a rule is, in fact, equally consistent with no-one ever before pushing for such an unfortunate monopolisation of the limited space available on the main page.

[Since writing the previous sentences, I've noticed something else, and so I add this:] If, though, you insist on a precedent, look at the 2012 notes for OTD 27th Sept - where Dawn (spacecraft) was ineligible to appear because it had just appeared on ITN. Does that help? Bencherlite ^Talk 15:58, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) The answer is no. When I was vetting DYK entries years ago, we would not accept an article if it was also under consideration for ITN, the rationale being that DYK was not a "second chance" venue should it fail to be accepted at ITN. I have no idea if this is still the case. Bencherlite pretty much nailed it, but let me restate: We already have a rule that says an article cannot make more than one OTD appearance in a single year. We also know that an article can't appear in multiple sections on the Main Page simultaneously (with the exception of TFA/POTD). Furthermore, to avoid topic fatigue, OTD also will skip articles related to others that have recently appeared (e.g., I won't run Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombings in the same year). Here's another example: William McKinley was TFA on Sep 14 2012 and I removed Theodore Roosevelt that day, even though McKinley was not the bold article. From these rules/guidelines/precedents, you can extrapolate that I would absolutely not run Whaam! in such proximity to a TFA appearance. Sorry. (As a side note, I'm retitling this section, because "2013 notes" will be the section title for when I log what changes I made for this year.) —howcheng {chat} 16:24, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

2013 notes

Deleted: United Arab Republic (featured on February 22)
New articles (unused): First aerial circumnavigation
Omitted: Balangiga massacre; Summit Series; Pope John Paul I; MS Estonia
Included: Peñarol (first appearance); Penicillin (5th appearance, last in 2011); Bob Denard (3rd appearance, last in 2010); Falcon 1 (2nd appearance, last in 2011; rescued from Ineligible)
Repeats: Norman conquest of England (2nd consecutive appearance, 8 total)

—howcheng {chat} 06:56, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 29 September 2013

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In the sentence, "The publication of The Sorrows of Young Werther rose the 24-year-old Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (pictured) to international fame", "rose" is grammatically incorrect (egregiously so, I'm afraid) and should be changed to "raised" or preferably, "elevated". WolfmanSF (talk) 00:52, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

WolfmanSF (talk) 00:52, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: please be more specific about what needs to be changed. I cannot find anything in Wikipedia:Selected anniversaries/September 28 which resembles the problem text shown above. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:29, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

2014 notes

New articles (unused): Battle of Kismayo (2012)
Rescued from Ineligible (unused): Whaam!
Omitted: Norman conquest of England; Peñarol; Penicillin; Bob Denard; Falcon 1
Included: Pompey (6th appearance, last in 2008; rescued from Ineligible); Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo (7th appearance, last in 2010; rescued from Ineligible); First aerial circumnavigation (first appearance; 90th anniversary); Pope John Paul I (5th appearance, last in 2012); MS Estonia (6th appearance, last in 2012; 20th anniversary)

—howcheng {chat} 11:01, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

2015 notes

Moved to Ineligible: Penicillin (maintenance)
Omitted: Pompey; First aerial circumnavigation; Pope John Paul I; MS Estonia
Included: Norman conquest of England (9th appearance, last in 2013); Peñarol (3rd appearance, last in 2013); Whaam! (first appearance); Mohammad Najibullah (first appearance)
Repeats: Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo (2nd consecutive appearance, 8 total)

—howcheng {chat} 07:58, 26 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

2016 notes

Moved to Ineligible: Bob Denard (maintenance)
New articles (unused): Pope Pontian; Slavník dynasty; Ulster Covenant
Omitted: Public holidays in the Czech Republic (ineligible—maintenance); Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo; Peñarol; Whaam!; Mohammad Najibullah (even though it's the 20th anniversary, the Taliban takeover is featured on September 27)
Included: Declaration of Independence of the Mexican Empire (first appearance); Balangiga massacre (3rd appearance, last in 2012); Drama uprising (first appearance; 75th anniversary); 2009 Guinea protest (2nd appearance, last in 2011)
Repeats: Norman conquest of England (2nd consecutive appearance, 10 total; 950th anniversary)

—howcheng {chat} 16:58, 27 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

2017 notes

Deleted: Pope Pontian (appears on July 21)
Moved to Ineligible: Pompey (maintenance); Slavník dynasty (maintenance); Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo (maintenance); MS Estonia (maintenance)
New articles (ineligible): Flag of Thailand (maintenance)
Omitted: Norman conquest of England; Balangiga massacre; Drama uprising; 2009 Guinea protest
Included: Peñarol (4th appearance, last in 2015); Ulster Covenant (first appearance); Summit Series (4th appearance, last in 2012); Battle of Kismayo (2012) (first appearance); Prosper Mérimée (first appearance); Florence Violet McKenzie (2nd appearance, last in 2017; also appeared on May 23, her death date); Patsy Mink (first appearance)
Repeats: Declaration of Independence of the Mexican Empire (2nd consecutive appearance, 2 total)

—howcheng {chat} 05:48, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

2018 notes

Moved to Ineligible: Battle of Mursa Major (maintenance)
Omitted: Peñarol; Ulster Covenant; Summit Series; Battle of Kismayo (2012); Prosper Mérimée; Florence Violet McKenzie; Patsy Mink
Included: Norman conquest of England (11th appearance, last in 2016); First aerial circumnavigation (2nd appearance, last in 2014); Pope John Paul I (6th appearance, last in 2014); Falcon 1 (3rd appearance, last in 2013); Jonathan Clarkson Gibbs (first appearance); Louis Pasteur (7th appearance, last in 2007; previously appeared on April 20); Guillermo Endara (first appearance)
Repeats: Declaration of Independence of the Mexican Empire (3rd consecutive appearance, 3 total)

—howcheng {chat} 16:09, 1 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

2019 notes

New articles (ineligible): Isis Pogson (maintenance)
Omitted: Norman conquest of England; First aerial circumnavigation; Pope John Paul I; Falcon 1; Jonathan Clarkson Gibbs; Louis Pasteur
Included: Battle of Tinchebray (2nd appearance, last in 2006; accidentally deleted in 2011); Penicillin (6th appearance, last in 2013; rescued from Ineligible; blurb previously also featured Alexander Fleming, which remains ineligible); Spaghetti House siege (first appearance); 2009 Guinea protest (3rd appearance, last in 2016; 10th anniversary); Prosper Mérimée (2nd appearance, last in 2017); Frank S. Scott (first appearance)
Repeats: Declaration of Independence of the Mexican Empire (4th consecutive appearance, 4 total); Guillermo Endara (2nd consecutive appearance, 2 total; 10th anniversary)

—howcheng {chat} 21:53, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2020 notes

Deleted: Florence Violet McKenzie (moved to May 23)
Moved to Ineligible: Ulster Covenant (maintenance)
New articles (unused): Avery Brundage
Omitted: Battle of Tinchebray; Declaration of Independence of the Mexican Empire; Penicillin; Spaghetti House siege; 2009 Guinea protest; Prosper Mérimée; Frank S. Scott; Guillermo Endara
Included: Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo (9th appearance, last in 2015; rescued from Ineligible); Whaam! (2nd appearance, last in 2015); Occupy Central with Love and Peace (first appearance); Isis Pogson (first appearance; rescued from Ineligible); Charles Duryea (first appearance); George Odlum (first appearance)

—howcheng {chat} 03:56, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2021 notes

Moved to Ineligible: Drama uprising (maintenance)
Omitted: Juan Rodríguez Cabrillo; Whaam!; Occupy Central with Love and Peace; Isis Pogson; Charles Duryea; George Odlum
Included: Battle of Mursa Major (first appearance; rescued from Ineligible); Declaration of Independence of the Mexican Empire (5th appearance, last in 2019; 200th anniversary); Alexander Fleming (first appearance; blurb previously featured Penicillin, which is currently ineligible, and is making its 6th appearance, last in 2019); Pope John Paul I (7th appearance, last in 2018); François Turrettini (first appearance); Jonathan Clarkson Gibbs (2nd appearance, last in 2018; 200th birthday); Sheikh Hasina (first appearance)

—howcheng {chat} 07:34, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

2022 notes

Moved to Ineligible: Peñarol (maintenance), Sheikh Hasina (maintenance)
New articles (unused): Jules Sedney
Omitted: Battle of Mursa Major; Declaration of Independence of the Mexican Empire; Alexander Fleming; Pope John Paul I; François Turrettini; Jonathan Clarkson Gibbs; Sheikh Hasina
Included: Norman Conquest (previously Norman Conquest of England, 12th appearance, last in 2018); First aerial circumnavigation (3rd appearance, last in 2018); Whaam! (3rd appearance, last in 2020); Typhoon Xangsane (first appearance); Battle of Kismayo (2012) (2nd appearance, last in 2017, 10th anniversary); Avery Brundage (first appearance); Louis Pasteur (8th appearance, last in 2018); Aleksandra Goryachkina (first appearance)

Heart ^(talk) 04:28, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]