Talk:1989
 | This article is rated List-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Page layout years
[edit]There is a discussion on my talk page on page layout.
For most of the last three hundred years there is inconsistency and duplication between the year in topic paragraph, the "see also" box and what is on the year by topic pages. Prior to 1950 I am pretty convinced we can painlessly (except for sore fingers) delete all of the year in topic paragraphs and ensure that the material goes into a "see also" box, creating such a box where none exists. Post 1950, particularly from the "year in US television" link a lot of material has been added to this paragraph as highlights (sometimes making up most of the page content pointed at).
Personally I think we should still delete the paragraph, keep the box linking to the topic sites and move any particularly important parts of the year in topic paragraph to the main chronological list. This does involve undoing quite a bit of work which someone has done.
Therefore, unlike for prior to 1950 (where I've said no objection= I do it) for post 1950 I won't touch these pages unless a significant number of people agree with the change. (I am also unlikely to get the pre 1950 stuff done before summer unless the service speed improves dramatically). talk--BozMo 13:46, 7 May 2004 (UTC)
can someone mention that this was in fact the year of the snake?? it would seem appropriate
- No, because it's far too trivial. Jim Michael (talk) 00:44, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
Most reverted?
[edit]I seriously think 1989 qualifies for the most reverted page on Wikipedia. 1/2 the edits are reverts practically. and it's call cause silly people wanna get their name on Wikipedia. It's sorta funny. Stormscape 08:44, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
- I fixed that problem. I asked to have the page protected from future vandalism. You won't have to deal with reverts anymore. Bkissin 03:48, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
Link update
[edit]Events -> Unknown date -> Retirement of the Alize aircraft: Alize should link to Breguet Alizé
-The link stating that in January James Watkins was appointed Secretary of energy should be redirected to "James D. Watkins." Wikipedia's entry for "James Watkins" is a different person.
Why protect this page?
[edit]What's the point of protecting this page?Ndp2005goh 14:31, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
- Because, as soon as we unprotect the page, 70,000 idiotic kids born in 1989 will post their names in the births section. After countless reverts, (Which were basically the only edits on this page) it was finally decided to protect it from further vandalization. Bkissin 21:38, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
- Point of interest--adding the {{sprotect}} tag doesn't actually protect the page. --Fang Aili talk 03:50, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
- Then what tag should we use? Bkissin 15:17, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
- How about not protecting? If persistent vandalism continues, it can be protected again. But protection in general goes against the spirit of 'anyone can edit'. If it needs re-protection, let me know. --Fang Aili talk 18:54, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
- Then what tag should we use? Bkissin 15:17, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
- Point of interest--adding the {{sprotect}} tag doesn't actually protect the page. --Fang Aili talk 03:50, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
Another summer
[edit]In a public enemy song there was a lyric, "1989 the number another summer (get down) sound of the funky drummer" I also request for permission to post lyrics that relates to the year. Does a sysop object? Vladimir Stalin 10:18AM EST 4.1.07
- Nowhere near important enough for an international year article on an encyclopedia. Qzm (talk) 23:58, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
I'm not sure whether this article is correct or not... I'm pretty sure Filippo Inzaghi didn't die in 1989! Deleted that bit anyway, but not going to check anything else 7+1 02:07, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Was not born on 24th February 1989, he was born on 24th JANUARY 1989. Please correct this. 82.12.250.153 15:49, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Under the ongoing section it lists the Cold War. Unless I'm mistaken most people believe that the Cold War ended with the fall of the USSR. The tensions between USA and USSR that made up the Cold War no longer exist Superstarwarsfan (talk) 23:48, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
- The Cold War was ongoing in 1989. The tensions let up around 1991. This article is about the year 1989, so the Cold War was ongoing. Jons63 (talk) 00:12, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
- Doesn't ongoing mean that it's still going on today? Superstarwarsfan (talk) 01:53, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
- No, this article is about what was going on in 1989. that statement means that it was ongoing at the end of 1989. Look at 1988 it says the same thing. It should say the same thing for every year since the early 1950s. Jons63 (talk) 01:57, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
- Well then never mind. But in my defense that is a little confusing. Superstarwarsfan (talk) 02:12, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
- Superstarwarsfan: When you read this article, imagine that 1989 is right now, and "ongoing" makes a little more sense. Though I admit this has potential for confusion, if you read the article and mind the timeframe, it should sound proper. For example, if something was "ongoing" back in 1984 and is written that way, the context (I think) is logical as long as somewhere it is mentioned that "now" is 1984 (in this case, the article title eponymously implies that we are looking at this as if it were happening right now.) I hope my comments made sense and lessened the confusion instead of making it worse. 98.202.38.225 (talk) 05:29, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
- Well then never mind. But in my defense that is a little confusing. Superstarwarsfan (talk) 02:12, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
- No, this article is about what was going on in 1989. that statement means that it was ongoing at the end of 1989. Look at 1988 it says the same thing. It should say the same thing for every year since the early 1950s. Jons63 (talk) 01:57, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
- Doesn't ongoing mean that it's still going on today? Superstarwarsfan (talk) 01:53, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
I'd like to add the date that the Stone Roses released their first album. Whether it's to your taste or not, it is regularly in the top five of 'greatest album ever/in the world/etc' polls in the UK, so it can be argued that it is quite significant.
Will the page remain locked for some time?
- It's already listed on 1989 in music, where events related to music are recorded. --TM 13:31, 22 April 2008 (UTC)
- Ok, thank you for pointing that out! (80.193.99.43 (talk) 14:06, 22 April 2008 (UTC))
" ...rips open during flight, sucking 9 passengers and crew out of the first class section."
In cases of explosive decompression, high pressure environments tend to expel their contents. They transition from high pressure states to low pressure states. In an aircraft, this means they are blown out into the atmosphere, not sucked. (121.45.44.161 (talk) 12:51, 3 August 2008 (UTC))
The Web
[edit]The original proposal for the World Wide Web was made and distributed in March 1989, may be worth a mention. -137.222.114.243 (talk) 19:21, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
- There is a reference for this in http://www.w3.org/People/all#timbl, but alas, no clear date is mentioned. But I support the argument that the greatest invention ever must be mentioned here in this page. WarFox (talk | contribs) 07:57, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
1989 English football season climax
[edit]The famous match between Liverpool and Arsenal has been removed from so I'm posting here to gain a consensus on its inclusion. Given that the match is the most famous climax to an English football season (the most popular domestic sports competition on the planet) I think it would meet notability criteria easily. in facts its arguably the most dramatic climax to any league competition. For those unaware - the final match of the centenary season was between the two title contenders (itself very unusual), and Arsenal were playing away and had to win by two goals (something most people though was impossible). The crucial goal was scored in the very last minute of the match and it meant the title was won at the last possible minute and by the tightest ever margin (both teams had exactly the same number of points AND the same goal difference). The game inspired a best selling novel and the movie "Fever Pitch". Far less significant sporting events are included in this article, and surely if any 1989 sporting event meets notability criteria then this is the one?--Shakehandsman (talk) 19:38, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
- Definitely not - main year articles are for important international events. Jim Michael (talk) 00:44, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
Maybe there should be a picture or something? It seems like the massacre was one of the more influential things of the year. --99.48.48.133 (talk) 04:47, 18 May 2011 (UTC)
- Did anyone other than Hu Yaobang die in relation to that matter? It's not entirely clear from the page AFAICS — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.225.107.155 (talk) 19:59, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
I discovered that, unfortunately, there was no picture for one of the greatest pianists of all time. He is no less famous than Bette Davis or Franz Joseph II. I would add Horowitz's picture but I don't have enough skills to do that and I don't want to screw up the page... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.25.151.68 (talk) 18:43, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
Now, I'm not objecting to his birthday being included, I'd say it's warranted, but shouldn't Tom Kaulitz be mentioned as well? Bill is not the only member of Tokio Hotel. 99.239.176.33 (talk) 04:34, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
Superbowl
[edit]Should the Superbowl be included for this year? Centralized discussion at WT:YEARS#Superbowls — Arthur Rubin (talk) 17:09, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
I'm thinking of adding a hatnote on this page for 1989 (Taylor Swift album) seeing as it has more than 7 times the number of views than this page and the disambiguation page combined. Any opinions or objections? [1] [2] [3] Zarcadia (talk) 17:53, 22 May 2015 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
[edit]The file Romanian Revolution 1989 Demonstrators.jpg on Wikimedia Commons has been nominated for deletion. View and participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. Community Tech bot (talk) 23:05, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
[edit]The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. Community Tech bot (talk) 21:36, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Revert of IP edits
[edit]@Garchomp2017: Why the revert? Those edits don't appear to be vandalism to me. Indeed, you restored some errors that the IP had corrected. -- irn (talk) 21:21, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
- I don’t know, but I’ve been dealing with those kinds of IPs for two years and it’s still getting on my nerves. I know I haven’t editing on Wikipedia that much but sometimes enough is enough. Gar (talk) 02:54, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
- When you say "those kinds of IPs", what are you referring to? I noticed that two of your recent edit summaries mention improper use of fair use images. Is that the issue? -- irn (talk) 17:56, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
See WT:YEARS#Eclipses for a matter relevant to this page. Arthur Rubin (alternate) (talk) 23:10, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
When did the Romanian Revolution start?
[edit]December 17 (en.wiki: Retrieved: 2019.12.15)
The Romanian Revolution begins in Timișoara when rioters break into the building housing the District Committee of the Romanian Communist Party and cause extensive damage. Their attempts to set the buildings on fire are foiled by military units.
No, not at all.
- december 15. – In the evening hungarians and romanians together defend pastor László Tőkés with a girotondo from the terror mashine of Ceaușescu. [1]
In hungarian:
- december 15. – Este magyarok és románok élőláncot alkotva védik Tőkés László református lelkészt. Ezzel kirobban a román forradalom, mely 20-ra elsöpri a Ceaușescu rendszert.[2]
--Elekes Andor (talk) 10:45, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
References
- ^ „Tőkés László és Temesvár népe örökre beírta magát a történelembe” https://www.magyarhirlap.hu/belfold/20191214-tokes-laszlo-es-temesvar-nepe-orokre-beirta-magat-a-tortenelembe Hozzáférés: 2019. december 15
- ^ „Tőkés László és Temesvár népe örökre beírta magát a történelembe” https://www.magyarhirlap.hu/belfold/20191214-tokes-laszlo-es-temesvar-nepe-orokre-beirta-magat-a-tortenelembe Hozzáférés: 2019. december 15
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
[edit]The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:37, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
3.7 thousand should be changed to 3,700?
[edit]In my opinion, '3.7 thousand' should be changed to 3,700 as 3.7 thousand doesn't sound right. Xboxsponge15 (talk) 17:13, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
[edit]The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 01:09, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Collage thoughts
[edit]Please let me know if anyone has any disagreements on the images included in the collage, and I will put it up for vote. Thanks The ganymedian (talk) 22:42, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
- Please revise this so that the images are in correct proportion, i.e. not squashed either vertically or horizontally, and remove domestic events. Deb (talk) 14:54, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
Move discussion in progress
[edit]There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:1989 (disambiguation) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 15:37, 6 May 2024 (UTC)