Template talk:Year article header/Archive 1

PAGENAME
Hmmm. Can you make the parameter default to ? It would solve your 2007/2014 problem. May I also suggest that you put examples on the /doc page or on this talk page, so we can see how it renders, and you can easily check whether you have properly fixed any bugs. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 21:35, 29 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Well, I could have done that with PAGENAME but I couldn't test it at the time in a sandbox to make sure it works correctly. Plus, the syntax as it was, was pretty hairy. Besides, I need to do some calculations and it's easier to have the number as a parameter I can work with instead of trying to use PAGENAME as a calculation field to get Zeller's congruence working to calculate leap years. Now, it works and I'm kind of scared to change it. I've done maintenance programming for over 30 years but I still worry about fixing things. I wasn't really too sure how to make it work for that, :( Paul Robinson (Rfc1394) (talk) 05:58, 26 November 2013 (UTC)


 * It shouldn't be too hard to get it working. You don't need Zeller's congruence, just use . Jimp 19:49, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Year
There is agreement that the articles should start:
 * The year 2014 will be

or just
 * 2014 will be

although no agreement as to which.
 * Year 2014 will be

is just wrong. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 20:13, 4 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Apparently this has been fixed. Every article about a year says it's an article about a year, so the template now just begins with with just the year. I have no problem with any of these. And I agree, it sounds better grammatically if it's either "The year 2014 will be" or "2014 will be" and since the article begins with "This article is about the year 2014" it's redundant to start the paragraph the template creates with "The year" Paul Robinson (Rfc1394) (talk) 05:53, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Garbled?
When used for the years 1916 through 1929, the output is garbled. For example, 1916 produces:

"1916 (MCMXVI) was a leap year starting on Saturday (link displays the full calendar) of the Gregorian calendar, the 1916th year of the Common Era (CE) and Anno Domini (AD) designations, the 916th year of the 2nd millennium, the 16th year of the 20th century, and the 7th year of the 1910s decade between 1583 and 1929 and with Julian Value: 1916 is 13 calendar days difference, which continued to be used until the complete conversion of the Gregorian calendar was entirely done in 1929."

It looks like it's OK up until "...1910 decade", which presumably should end with a full stop.

I'm not clear how it's supposed to read after that. I started looking at the code, but it's indeed seriously twisty. --NapoliRoma (talk) 22:47, 27 June 2014 (UTC)


 * The template does say "This template is good enough to use on years after 1929", so before then is not within its range of valdity. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:07, 30 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Then this should be replaced in a bunch of year articles where it's being used contrary to that warning, correct?--NapoliRoma (talk) 20:19, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

1929 and earlier
Years before 1930 show the Julian difference. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 04:14, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Exceptional common years
The templates for the years 1700, 1800, and 1900 are below. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 04:26, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Year 2100 also belongs to this section. However, it will not show the Julian difference, because it is after 1929. The template for that year is below. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 04:34, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

For years 2200 and 2300 are below. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 01:07, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

22nd century and 2101
What day of the week does the 22nd century begin on? The template shows that the 22nd century begins on a Saturday. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 04:42, 7 February 2015 (UTC)

Before 1582
The template for year AD 1 is below. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 01:04, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Year 4000
The number 4000 cannot be written in Roman numerals under the standard rules. Also, one correction is to make the year 4000 not a leap year. The template for that year is below. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 01:14, 15 March 2015 (UTC)

Strange text
This template seems to be generating some semi-coherent text to do with the Julian calendar. See for example, the top of 1927:

"1927 (MCMXXVII) was a common year starting on Saturday of the Gregorian calendar (dominical letter B), the 1927th year of the Common Era (CE) and Anno Domini (AD) designations, the 927th year of the 2nd millennium, the 27th year of the 20th century, and the 8th year of the 1920s decade between 1583 and 1929 and with Julian Value: 1927 is 13 calendar days difference, which continued to be used until the complete conversion of the Gregorian calendar was entirely done in 1929"

It starts off as standard boilerplate text, but after the word 'decade' it degenerates into incomprehensibility. I can't find where this text is generated, so an expert is needed to fix it please. Colonies Chris (talk) 11:53, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I see now that another editor raised the same issue (above) in June last year. Is anyone looking after this template? Colonies Chris (talk) 14:00, 24 March 2015 (UTC)


 * The template does say "This template is good enough to use on years after 1929", so 1927 is not within its range of validity. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:05, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Century leap years
The templates for the years 1600, 2000, and 2400 are below. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 20:01, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Croatia
Could you add Croatia as a country wikilink in the template? Thanks --JuznaAfrika (talk) 22:02, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
 * The template text doesn't mention Croatia. Jimp 03:13, 29 May 2015 (UTC)