Talk:1956

Lists Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Years Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Years, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Years on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.YearsWikipedia:WikiProject YearsTemplate:WikiProject YearsYears
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Page layout years

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 14:24, 7 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

For those who haven't found it already, see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Years/Survey. -- Smjg 10:52, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicated entry

I notice that there is an entry for "Eindhoven University of Technology is founded." both on June 15 of 1957 and unknown date in 1956, I don't know which is correct, but unless they're refering to different stages of the university's foundation, they can't both be. Draxar 12:48, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 15 January 2013

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

Please change "tresspassing" to "trespassing" in the entry for January 8 (spelling). PureFlaxOil (talk) 22:59, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thanks! Favonian (talk) 23:04, 15 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

Theresa May official portrait.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:51, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Theresa May official portrait.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:11, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Randy Rhoads21314.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 00:06, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

collage

@4me689

I created the collage of 1956, but I replaced the Khan Yunis massacre with Typhoon Wanda (1956), which caused 5,000 deaths. This massacre was part of the Suez Crisis and did not deserve to occupy a spot in the collage. It is sufficient to mention it in the accompanying summary. Nagae Iku (talk) 09:42, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I like it, this collage looks great, it's not too American Centric and it's perfect. 4me689 (talk) 20:21, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I like it too, but you should make it with the multiple image template by uploading cropped versions of the images already on Commons Marginataen (talk) 13:34, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Collage depreciation

Discussion started by blocked sock 33ABGirl (talk) 04:52, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
At Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Years#Lead_image, a discussion on whether to depreciate collages in general in going on. Please share your thoughts.--Marginataen (talk) 21:40, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]