Template talk:Year in other calendars

From MedBib.com - Medicine & Nature

Template:Year in other calendars is permanently protected from editing, as it is a heavily used or visible template. Substantial changes should be proposed here, and made by administrators if the proposal is uncontroversial, or has been discussed and is supported by consensus. Use {{editprotected}} to attract the attention of an administrator in such cases.
Any contributor may edit the template's documentation to add usage notes, categories or interwiki links.

Missing space

There is a space missing between the year and the word "in" in the box title. How can I fix this?--BozMo talk 07:25, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

ISO8601

Because there was no year "0", ISO8601 renders, say, 3 BC as "-0002". Could instances of this template for BC-era years therefore have a row for such conversions? Andy Mabbett (User:Pigsonthewing); Andy's talk; Andy's edits 22:02, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Holocene calendar

this isn't a real calendar, please remove

A mistake in the Islamic calendar?

I feel that a "conceptual" mistake concerns the Islamic years: before 622 they are written with digits + BH (I suppose "Before Hijra"). But as far as I know, in the Islamic world there does not exist anything like the Christian "BC". Even in historical texts written by muslims I only find dates according to the Common Era, but never "Before Hijra". For Muslims, the time before Hijra is jahiliyyah ("ignorance [of the revelation]"), and it has no sense to speak of such times in a historical way. So, I feel that for every year preceding 622 this template should not calculate negative dates, but simply show one and the same word jahiliyyah. --Vermondo (talk) 19:04, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Moreover, I see that this template calculates years in the "Islamic" way (i.e. shorter than solar years) even before Hijra, while, before the revelation, the years were (probably) regulated on the sun and not on the moon (in the same way of the Jewish calendar). I feel that even Muslim scholars would be puzzled about the "right" way to calculate such dates. This pitfall shows how improper is trying to extend the Islamic calendar back before its creation. The only solution is writing "jahiliyya" and that's all ;-) --Vermondo (talk) 19:15, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Similar problem with the Iranian calendar. What should we do with such calendars, which have a sense "after" their beginning but none "before"? I think that forcing them to express "negative" years is inappropriate and probabily mistaken --Vermondo (talk) 11:59, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Julian Calendar

The Julian calendar is very important for anything relating to Western history prior to the 16th century. I am quite surprised it is not in this template. IBstupid (talk) 04:56, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Chinese calender

The conversion in the template is complicated enough, but it is supported by over 4000 templates (over 2% of all Wikipedia's templates). Can someone point me to an explanation or table of the conversion/intercaluary months etc.? Rich Farmbrough, 13:00, 8 June 2009 (UTC).

Thai solar calendar

Thai solar calendar year for AD 1782 given as 2325, but this is an anachronism. The Siamese solar calendar was first adopted in AD 1888 with 6 April as its New Year's Day and 6 April 1782 as its epoch (reference date), retroactively making 6 April 1782 6 April Year 1 of the Bangkok Era. In AD 1912, New Year's Day was moved back to 1 April and year counting changed to a Buddhist Era (BE) reckoned as having had an epochal year 0 from 11 March 545 BC, believed to be the date of the death of Gautama Buddha. In AD 1941, New Year's Day moved back to 1 January, making conversion from AD to BE a simple matter of adding 543. The country's name also changed from Siam to Thailand, marking the advent of the Thai solar calendar.Pawyilee (talk) 14:13, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Long Count?

Room could be made for the Mesoamerican Long Count calendar, e.g. 2009 would be 12.19.15.x.x -- 12.19.16.x.x baed on [1] EamonnPKeane (talk) 22:50, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

Request

{{editprotected}} Just wondering if tnavbar could be changed to navbar to avoid an extra redirect? Similar to what was done with Navbox -- WOSlinker (talk) 09:45, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Done Matthewedwards : Chat 16:57, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

En dash spaces

WP:ENDASH says "Spacing: All disjunctive en dashes are unspaced, except when there is a space within either one or both of the items (the New York – Sydney flight; the New Zealand – South Africa grand final; June 3, 1888 – August 18, 1940, but June–August 1940)." In this template, for instance, Islamic calendar 847 – 848 should be Islamic calendar 847–848
Unfortunately, that only works for positive numbers. WP:ENDASH also says "The word to, rather than an en dash, is used when a number range involves a negative value or might be misconstrued as a subtraction (−3 to 1, not −3–1)." Simply removing the spaces from Bahá'í calendar -400 – -399 makes it the unreadable Bahá'í calendar -400–-399
The minus signs shouldn't be hyphens (MOS:NUM#Common mathematical symbols) but fixing that doesn't create a readable result either: Bahá'í calendar −400–−399
So the ideal solution would be to remove the en dash spaces only for positive numbers, and perhaps to do something else for negative numbers. I've changed some of the printable characters in other templates, but changing your "if" statements is beyond my WP:BOLDness level at this point. So I'm leaving it as is for now. Art LaPella (talk) 02:29, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Bengali Calendar

{{editprotected}} I am trying to add the Bengali/Bangla calendar but unfortunately I am not sure how to write the code for it. Its actually very simple, Gregorian year -593 years (so it is currently 1416). I think the code is something like:

|- | [[Bengali calendar]] | {{ #expr: {{{year|<noinclude>{{CURRENTYEAR}}</noinclude><includeonly>{{PAGENAME}}</includeonly>}}}-593 }} |-

(I copied it from one of the other entries and changed the number, so its probably not completely correct) --Reahad (talk) 01:40, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Added. The code looks good to me. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:31, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Heisei 22

(copied from Talk:2010#Heisei 22)

It is not sure that 2010 will be part of the Heisei Period --82.134.154.25 (talk) 17:49, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

I agree. The problem is in the template. Please discuss at Template talk:Year in other calendars. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 20:22, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

I think that this template should be adjusted so as not to display the Japanese calendar for future years. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 20:24, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Is this really a problem? For example, the article for 2010 Winter Olympics says that the 2010 Olympics will be held Feb 2010, but we don't know absolutely for certain that some horrible terrorist attack or something will cause the Olympics to be canceled. I think assuming the next year (2011 since I'm typing this in 2010) will be part of the Heisei period is as reasonable as assuming the next Olympics will take place. It's not like we can't change it if it isn't. Madlobster (talk) 07:28, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

It seems a bit WP:CRYSTAL; we can be sure that 2100 will not be part of the Heisei Period, so deciding exactly where to draw the line is more arbitrary than most of our decisions. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 11:20, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

As indicated on Japanese era name#Nengō in modern Japan,

"one reign, one era name" (一世一元 issei-ichigen^?) system was adopted, wherein era names would change only upon imperial succession.

and in the article of the reigning Emperor Akihito also indicates

The Era of Akihito's reign bears the name "Heisei" (平成^?), and according to custom he will be renamed "Emperor Heisei" (平成天皇 ; see "posthumous name"^?) after his death by order of the cabinet, in which the name of the next era under his successor will also be established.

Therefore, the era name "Heisei" could not be changed unless Akihito would pass away.--Belle Equipe (talk) 17:34, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

I said 2100, as his age would be 112. Perhaps I should have said 2150, but still.... — Arthur Rubin (talk) 00:52, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

The Era names, particularly "Heisei" (平成^?) and "Showa" (昭和^?), are still widely used in Japan, for example

The year of casting for each Japanese coin only described by either Shōwa or Heisei (coins issued in early 1950's or earlier are not circulated any longer but only among collectors).
All the documents issued by governments for domestic purposes have dates with the year written in the Japanese Era only, including Japanese driver's licenses. There is no description of the dominical year included.
All train tickets have date of issue, and date of reservation for tickets for seat reservation written with the Japanese era (e.g. if you purchase a ticket at a train station now, the date of issue is written as "22-01-02", which means "(Heisei)22-01(=January)-02", since Japanese way to describe dates is YY-MM-DD).
Most of schools issue certificates with the date by the Japanese era.

etc.

--Belle Equipe (talk) 01:34, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Vikram Samvat

New Year 2066 (Vikram Samvat) began on 14 April 2009 (Gregorian calendar). Therefore, 2065 – 2066 (Vikram Samvat) are correct for 2009 (Gregorian calendar), not 2064 – 2065! This also applies to other years on Gregorian calendar. For example, 2064 – 2065 in 2008 and 2066 – 2067 in 2010. Please, correct Template:Year in other calendars.

This code is correct:

{{#expr: {{{year|<noinclude>{{CURRENTYEAR}}</noinclude><includeonly>{{PAGENAME}}</includeonly>}}}+56}} – {{#expr: {{{year|<noinclude>{{CURRENTYEAR}}</noinclude><includeonly>{{PAGENAME}}</includeonly>}}}+57}}

James Michael 1 (talk) 01:51, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.
All material adapted used from Wikipedia is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License.
Seeking health information online: does Wikipedia matter?