Talk:1920s

Adding "Radio" to the collage
Household radio was a key technological change of the 1920s which completely changed the daily life. It should be represented in the collage of images in the top-right.

Roaring 20s
Shouldn't "Roaring 20s" have its own article? While it does refer to a decade, it refers to a particular and significant point of view about it. - Furry 03:22, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC) in the 1920s people have fun↔
 * I agree. Also, this Wikipedia article is nearly a photocopy of http://encyclopedia.calendarhome.com/1920s.htm, as well as http://www.thewordbook.com/1920s...  Does it annoy anyone else that someone has pretty much just copied and pasted from those two pages to make this article?


 * Yes it annoys me. it is still info but even so....--DPG 16:35, 3 July 2006 (UTC)DPG

tt¶t∞h₳₯€~ | ¡ ¿ † ‡ ↔ ↑ ↓ • ¶ # ∞  ‘’ “” ‹› «» ⟨⟩   ¤ ₳ ฿ ₵ ¢ ₡ ₢ $ ₫ ₯ € ₠ ₣ ƒ ₴ ₭ ₤ ℳ ₥ ₦ № ₧ ₰ £ ៛ ₨ ₪ ৳ ₮ ₩ ¥   ♠ ♣ ♥ ♦   ♭ ♯ ♮   © ® ™ ◌

Needs to be made international
While the national leaders section is well done, the sports figures and the entertainers seem overwhelmingly to be in the USA. Articles shouldn't be merged because some people need specific information and it is easier to find it in smaller articles.

Women's suffrage
I have removed the the women's suffrage entry, as it only applies to the US. Whilst this is clearly an important event, the same thing happened in most/all democracies over a number of decades, so I don't think this page is the appropriate place for it. Remember Wikipedia is not about the US alone. --Lancevortex 11:31, 28 May 2005 (UTC)


 * So were other things I inserted phenomena which occurred in the U.S.: organized crime, the first commercial radio station in P'burg.  You needn't remind me that Wikipedia is global.  The notion that it is not noteworthy because it happened in the U.S. is ludicrous.  So did a lot of events already noted on the page.  The remedy is for people with information about significant developments elsewhere to make contributions -- not to delete contributions simply on the basis that they occurred in the U.S.  If that were the case, much of this article would be nonexistent. Reverted, w/additional information. deeceevoice 15:04, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

... what did you expect from a free encyclopedia where people can make changes and add their own interesting information to it that may or may not be true. take it with a grain of salt. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.23.1.203 (talk) 21:55, 9 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I apologise for the patronising way I made my original comment, but I still disagree with you. If the US was the first country to have women's suffrage, then fair enough, it would be worthy of inclusion here. But it wasn't, and it means that in theory these decade articles will have hundreds (one for each democracy in the world) of entries for when each country got women's suffrage. Extrapolate this across all the other topics worthy of consideration and the pages will become unreadable masses of trivial information. They should just cover the most significant events that have made a major difference to the world. Of course, this means that certainly for the last couple of centuries, the US will have more entries than most countries, but in my opinion that doesn't mean that every event that happened in the US should be covered here.


 * You completely misunderstand when you caricature my position as an event being "not noteworthy because it happened in the U.S." -- you make it sound like I think all references to the U.S. should be expunged from Wikipedia. My position is that an event is not noteworthy just because it happened in the U.S. --Lancevortex 10:40, 30 May 2005 (UTC)


 * Having just looked at your amendment to the entry, I think it is now a lot more satisfactory. Thanks. --Lancevortex 10:42, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

I have a sugestion, most of this article only includes information about what happened in the US. Perhaps, instead of organizing this site around topic (most of which are from the US, and the ones that aren't are too vague) organize by country or region and anything that is redundant with other pages should be shortened and a link should be added to the appropriate page. For example, much is this article is redundant with the roaring twenties article. Instead of removing these parts of the article entirely, they should simply be shortened and then a link should be added to the roaring twentties article. This is what should be done with the section about women gaining the right to vote in the US.

It might improve this article to have some sort of connection to the decade in the description of the Big Bang picture. seventhtrilogy 16:50, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

It is next to a section describing the first theory of an expanding universe and the picture describes the birth of an expanding universe and directly tells so in the caption. What more connection to the decade is needed? User:Dimadick

1920's in the United States
This article does very little to make it clear that in the USA (and partially in some other countries) the 1920's was the period of maximum respectability for "modern" or "scientific" racist views, which were rather widespread -- this was the period when Eugenics really began to gather steam, when the WW1 army intelligence test results received wide publicity, when the KKK achieved broad political influence in many areas (and not only in the former Confederate states, either), and when the rather openly-racist restrictions against immigration into the US were passed into law. See Nadir of American race relations and Franz Boas for some of this. AnonMoos 04:54, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree.

Crime During the 1920s
This article is missing a big element. I think organized crime was an extremely important element during the 1920s. (At least in the USA) 68.248.248.254 13:46, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Social issues of the 1920s
I'm trying to repair Social issues of the 1920s so that it provides a more specific insight to the issues about the 1920s. I was thinking of merging it with this article, but then I realized that this article seems to be more of a general account of various events and whatnot. Should they be merged?-- The  i  kiro  id  (talk) (Help Me Improve) 01:12, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I think that there should be separate articles. This article should have bullet points about social issues, and a link to the main article. Kevin 02:35, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

What about reorganizing/breaking things down differently?
I think it would be great to have a "section" on each decade with a general overview of that decade, and then have "sub-sections" that could cover Social Issues, Politics, Entertainment, Sports and etc. Smaller "bites" of info that might be easier to navigate through, easier to find exactly what various people are looking for. -Annie Mouse

Missing Elements
In the section labeled "Events and Trends" the article doesn't talk about any trends at all, which I think is one part of the 1920's that a researcher would want to know about. I know for sure that I did. Also, I think the "Events and Trends" section could expand on the events, as it only lists political events.

It used to annoy me somewhat that this article seems to have been copied and pasted from other 1920's articles, but I guess the author had to have gotten his/her information somewhere... is that legal?Chavila 19:58, 15 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Um...I think it should go under Social issues of the 1920s. What does anyone else think?--The ikiroid (talk·desk·Advise me) 01:27, 16 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I think it should go there, too... it seems to fit. Chavila 04:52, 22 June 2006 (UTC)


 * What really bothers me is that the whole intro is copied from http://www.thewordbook.com/1920s and then that site is never credited. That definately isn't legal. Can anyone fix this? This is even more ironic because while I'm writing this, at the bottom of the Wikipedia edit page, it says: "Only public domain resources can be copied without permission—this does not include most web pages or images." (zanycire)

title
THis article should be more accurately titled 1920s in the United States of America

Automobiles
Shouldn't it say that automobiles became common and popular in the 1920s? Because it's true that it was when they became popular, wasn't it? 68.124.133.161, 68.124.133.161, 02:05, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Depends on what country you're talking about and how you define common and popular. Certainly they became much more widespread in this decade, but that was in part a continuation of a trend started with popular mass production of cars in the 1910s. See History of the automobile for more. -- Infrogmation (talk) 03:07, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Any mention of automobiles should be part of a much larger section on Science and Technology! This was an era of huge innovation in all kinds of areas - quantum mechanics and the attendent revolution in atomic theory (including a lot of important work that lead up to the dawn of the atomic age in the '40s), developments in genetics and evolutionary theory, major achievements in engineering (including the first mass-produced cars, of course), the first semiconductors...well, loads of stuff really. I might even write it myself at some point! —Preceding unsigned comment added by OliverHarris (talk • contribs) 16:47, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, need this for history project
DBQ question: What made the 1920s different from any other decade?

Document A: “Since the 1920s was a time of celebration, there were many fads. People loved to dance, especially the Charleston, Fox-trot, and the shimmy. Dance marathons were something everyone went to every weekend. The longest dance record ever recorded was a record of 3 weeks of dancing. Another fad of the 1920's was the radio. People "tuned" in every day to listen to music, as jazz, sports and live events. A favorite for listening to jazz was "the king of jazz", Louie Armstrong. The latest fashion fad was the flapper, a fad for women. The movie was also the latest thing. The start of 3-D movies was in the 1920's. The average American had a lot to look forward to, in the 1920's, that’s for sure!” (http://www.kidsnewsroom.org/elmer/infoCentral/frameset/decade/1920.htm - Fads of the 1920s). Think: What does this remind you of compared to today’s decade.

Document B: —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.155.200.88 (talk) 16:37, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

yes —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.172.238.251 (talk) 01:28, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:GoldDiggersBroadway2.jpg
The image Image:GoldDiggersBroadway2.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --03:40, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

The selection of notable events in the montage
We need to reach a consensus on the final selection of images included in the 1920s montage on the top of the page through a discussion (and not through edit wars) which would include (hopefully) many Wikipedians.

The current montage is composed of the following images:

Please share your opinion on this matter BELOW supplying reasons for or against the current images included and/or supply alternative suggestions. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 20:00, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Changes which need to be made:


 * The Shangtang.jpg image was actually taken in 1945 (check the description of the image).
 * With all respect to Babe Ruth, the Babe Ruth2.jpg image is too US-centric to be in the montage.

Please propose other images to replace them before you make any changes TheCuriousGnome (talk) 19:20, 25 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Well, maybe put in this image for the Chinese Civil War
 * The Chinese Civil War is not unique to the 1920s though - Encirclement Campaigns happened between April 1927 - December 1936, Intermittent clashes happened between January 1941 - July 1945 and Full-scale war happend between March 1946 - May 1950! Maybe we should add this image to the 1940s article/montage though. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 05:41, 26 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Babe Ruth came from America, like most baseball players come from, but he was famous other places around the world too. Just because they are from America, doesn't just mean it's U.S.-centric. CatJar (talk) 04:50, 26 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Baseball is a very U.S.-centric sport. besides, I still insist that the images in the montage should be of the most influential events of each decade and not of the most influential celebrities/international icons of the decade. Does anyone else besides CatJar believe we should add the image of Babe Ruth to the montage anyway? TheCuriousGnome (talk) 05:41, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Montage caption
I want to mention, the text underneath the montage needs to be corrected between the Charles Lindbergh and Stock Market Crash segments. All I see are two backwards brackets "]]". Thanks. 24.113.41.52 (talk) 20:37, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Babe Ruth
Why is he in the opening collage of the 20's? Nobody outside the USA knew who he was regardless of his fame over there, especially as baseball is not played significantly outside the US. He should be mentioned in this article perhaps but he is nowhere near important enough to be included in the opening series of pictures. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.29.89.26 (talk) 17:07, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

What Dates Constitute the 1920's?
I question the opening sentence of the article. As the Wikipedia article "Decade" states: "Because the common calendar starts with year 1, its first full decade is the years 1 to 10, the second decade from 11 to 20, and so on.[5] So while the "2000s" comprises the years 2000 to 2009, the "201st decade" spans 2001 to 2010."

Therefore the decade of the 1920's began on January 1, 1921 and ended on December 31, 1930.

WBcoleman (talk) 00:35, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 5 May 2016
Queen Elizabeth, Queen of the United Kingdom (1926) Prince Philip, Prince Consort of the United Kingdom (1921) Nancy Reagan, Former First Lady of the United States (1921 - 2016) Betty White (1922) Martin Luther King (1929-1968) George Bush, Former President of the United States (1921) Jimmy Carter,Former President of the United States (1921)

92.28.78.123 (talk) 17:47, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Declined – please clearly state the changes you think should be made so that other editors know exactly what to change. 97198 (talk) 12:20, 7 May 2016 (UTC)

Semi protection needed?
Why is this article semi protected? Every other article of the 1900s is not semi protected, so why is this one? Please remove it, thanks. - PolarBearTony — Preceding unsigned comment added by PolarBearTony (talk • contribs) 21:00, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:25, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Steamboat Willie1928.jpg

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: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 20:08, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Steamboat Willie1928.jpg

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: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:15, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Steamboat Willie1928.jpg

Babe Ruth
Tell me this random guy only received center place in the montage because you guys were unable to choose from the zillions of famous people and events the Twenties have gifted us with.
 * Discovery of Tutankhamun's tomb.
 * Gandhi's movement.
 * Picasso.
 * End of the Ottoman Empire.
 * Fleming's discovery of penicillin.
 * Independence of Egypt.
 * Birth of Yugoslavia.
 * Bauhaus architecture.

Or if it's mandatory that 1/3 of the images have to be American, then
 * The Jazz Singer, the first feature-length movie.
 * Mickey Mouse.
 * Flapper culture.
 * The jazz age.
 * The Great Gatsby.
 * Harlem Renaissance.

Can we please change this image. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:1110:118:A377:15E1:DBE0:6326:5D9C (talk) 23:00, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Reasons for emergence of Pilsudski
"Economic problems contributed to the emergence of dictators in Eastern Europe to include Józef Piłsudski in Poland"

This is untrue. World War I, and weakness of the neighbouring countries, resulted in Poland gaining independence in 1918, after being partitioned by Russia, Prussia and Austria in 1795. This is how Piłsudski became the leader and dictator of now independent Poland. This was a fight of the nation for freedom against neighbouring monarchies, not a switch from democracy to dictatorship.

See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partitions_of_Poland 83.57.69.0 (talk) 13:10, 19 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Fair point. I have rephrased it to "Further dictators that emerged included Józef Piłsudski in Poland, and Peter and Alexander Karađorđević in Yugoslavia.". Koopinator (talk) 20:33, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Collage
It appears an RFC on collages on Wikiproject years will be interpreted to also ban collages in decade articles. Users here may wish to participate. Koopinator (talk) 07:26, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

20's name updated?
The 1920's and 2020's are both called the 20's. shouldn't the 1920's just be called the roaring 20's now? 2001:56A:7204:9E00:41CF:49B7:E94E:8390 (talk) 01:35, 26 March 2024 (UTC)

Charles Lindbergh
While Charles Lindbergh flying across the Atlantic was an event in the 1920s, it is not science and so should not be in that section. Trentperson 12:18, 9 June 2024‎
 * Agree, no new science was used, just an adaptation of existing technology, so moved to that section. Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 14:00, 9 June 2024 (UTC)