Talk:Christmas (surname)
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Kingsif in topic Why the emphasis on the Faulkner character?
 | This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small} | Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
 | A fact from Christmas (surname) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 7 January 2022 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
Did you know nomination edit
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Theleekycauldron (talk) 04:37, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
( )
- ... that the origin of Christmas is uncertain?
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Pasquinade
- Comment: DYK discussion suggests there may be room for more festive hooks before Epiphany, but I would like to suggest this for April Fools.
5x expanded by Kingsif (talk). Self-nominated at 02:24, 26 December 2021 (UTC).
| General: Article is new enough and long enough |
|---|
| Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems |
|---|
|
| Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation |
|---|
|
| QPQ: Done. |
Overall: 
Prose newly expanded x5. Long enough. Neutral and well sourced. No apparent COPYVIO. Hook cited and interesting. QPQ done. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 05:14, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
- @Gatoclass: I'm not sure this is a fantastic AFD hook (although it's an excellent quirky), and the reviewer gave no indication—what do you think? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 00:29, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
Why the emphasis on the Faulkner character? edit
There's a long list of people who had this surname, and another list of several fictional characters that had it. But only the "Joe Christmas" Faulkner character merits his own section in the article, in addition to a separate mention in the opening paragraph. I think that the two links to Light in August that are included with the "Joe Christmas" entry in the list of fictional characters are sufficient, and that the separate mention in the first paragraph and the entire section at the end should be eliminated.
- I can explain why I added it, and let you decide on if you think it warrants inclusion? When I was checking sources of the history, a lot of sources showed up about the importance of the surname of Joe Christmas. I was intrigued. The Light in August article barely names the characters, and I wasn't interested in researching them, so adding detail on one character's name (not even the character), and nothing on the others, felt it would tip the balance of that article. And, of course, the detail is about the last name, which is pertinent to "Christmas (surname)" as a topic; it feels less uneven included here. As for why it is mentioned in the lead - as you note, there is a paragraph about it. To follow MOS:LEAD, it is appropriate to introduce/mention in the lead every point that has significant coverage in the article, as an overview of the topic.
In short, if the significance of Christmas as the surname of this character is one of the more prominent things people have to say about the surname, it feels appropriate that it is in the article. If covered in the article, it gets mentioned in the lead. "Eliminated" is a rather extreme verb choice, in any case - the information is encyclopedic and since it's been added, Wikipedia in general prefers it go somewhere rather than be removed. Kingsif (talk) 23:39, 7 January 2022 (UTC)