Talk:Christmas in the United States (1946–1964)

Seriously?

This article covers Santa Claus Conquers the Martians, but not Miracle on 34th Street (1947, within the defined period)? Is that really addressing "the main aspects of the topic" (WP:GA? 3a)? Lampman (talk) 04:49, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

I added a little bit on the film section, but there's a couple of other things:

• The title should be "Christmas in post-War United States"; with the qualifier ""post-War", there is no need for an article. Not too sure about the capitalisation in "post-War" either.
• The picture in the "Christmas clubs" section squeezes the reference columns underneath to unnecessary narrow width. Lampman (talk) 21:51, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

It's not necessary to list It's a Wonderful Life. It's not a Christmas film. It has a Christmas scene but so does "Little Women" (1949) and "Lady and the Tramp" (1955). Don't list the film rankings either. They're not important in this article. Rankings belong in a "List of Best Christmas Films" sort of thing. Please leave the section formatted as is for a bit and let's not get into an edit war over this. In your opinion, your two films should be listed at the top of the section but in my opinion my film should be at the top of the article. I wrote the article and it won GA status as is. Please discuss any potential changes here first. Thanks. ReverendLogos (talk) 05:43, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

So the fact that the film has "a man whose imminent suicide on Christmas Eve gains the attention of his guardian angel," and "is a staple of Christmas television around the world" means it isn't a Christmas film? I mean, come on! I was originally released at Christmas time. Need I also point out its artistic connection with A Christmas Carol? Sillyfolkboy (talk) 08:56, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

The Guys an idiot and thinks he owns the page because he "made it" like that means absolutely anything on wikipedia. If he isn't an administrator or a patroller he has no power. A wonderful Life is without a doubt a christmas movie, and it along with miracle on 34th street is way more important then santa claus vs martians. A wonderful Life is almost always ranked #1 or #2 on top CHRISTMAS movie lists (competing with A Christmas Story). --Lasso jack (talk) 23:12, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Maybe you'd like to direct your incivility to an adminstrator. How far do you think it will get you? So your two movies were highly rated. Big deal. Take it to their respective articles. Stop the incivilty and pranking with this article. ReverendLogos (talk) 23:19, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Jack is being a bit insulting but I think behind his incivility there is a real point: I think It's a Wonderful Life really should be listed more prominently. What is your rationale for not doing so? The way this article approaches Film from Christmas in the post-War United States is peculiar. I don't think it's accurately representing it's topic. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 13:15, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Hes an idiot sillyfolkboy. Anytime he changes it, just revert it because his edits are seriously illogical. He wants to put a lesser known film as the high point of the article (obvioulsy a favorite of his) instead of sticking to what wikipedia is, and having the most important. --Lasso jack (talk) 04:21, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

(undent). Jack – stop engaging in a slow revert war and lets try and gain consensus on this matter. I'm leaving a message at the GA reviewer's talk page. Insulting ReverendLogos is just going to disrupt the article and prevent anyone from getting to the heart of the matter.Sillyfolkboy (talk) 13:09, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I was asked to give an opinion on the edit war here. First, I'd watch the incivility, as that can get you blocked from editing. Second, I passed the article without mention of It's a Wonderful Life, A Christmas Carol, and Miracle on 34th Street because IMO, one or two examples in each section makes it broad enough (but far from the comprehensiveness required for FA). However, that doesn't mean the article is perfect and other examples can't be added. Those ARE important films, so I do think they should be mentioned. One of the problems with GA reviews is that sometimes the reviewer isn't familiar enough with the topic to know when something notable is missing from the article. I think the article would benefit from adding info about these movies. I hope that helps. Nikki♥311 16:59, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

One more thing, after looking at the addition [1] (and ignoring the edit summary) it looks like a good edit to me. I don't see any reason to delete it. Nikki♥311 17:03, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Cheers for giving it a look over. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 19:57, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

I guess this is falling under the problematic banner of an article written by a sock puppeteer. Where do we go from here? Sillyfolkboy (talk) 00:23, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Not sure. I just looked back through the article and fixed some POV problems. I wouldn't be offended if you thought a GAR was in order. Nikki♥311 01:40, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just added archive links to one external link on Christmas in the post-war United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080919004728/http://www.northpoleny.com:80/page.cfm?page=History to http://www.northpoleny.com/page.cfm?page=History

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know. Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 15:25, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just added archive links to one external link on Christmas in the post-war United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080521080913/http://www.lkwdpl.org:80/lore/lore00.htm to http://www.lkwdpl.org/lore/lore00.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know. Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 11:38, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified one external link on Christmas in the post-war United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090116205252/http://www.christmastree.org/famous.cfm to http://www.christmastree.org/famous.cfm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}). This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:08, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I have just modified 2 external links on Christmas in the post-war United States. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091224050527/http://www.norad.mil/about/Santa.html to http://www.norad.mil/about/Santa.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090327080641/http://www.essortment.com/all/informationong_ooc.htm to http://www.essortment.com/all/informationong_ooc.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:29, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

Move

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. The redirect will be listed at RfD. (closed by page mover) GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 00:17, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

---

Christmas in the post-war United States → Christmas in the United States – Allows wider description of the topic for this country. Like other countries. J 1982 (talk) 23:33, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose. This article's scope is pretty specific - a "Christmas in the United States" article should be a separate thing. I also dunno if "Christmas in the United States" should redirect to this - I'd make it a redlink to show there isn't a direct article on the subject. Nohomersryan (talk) 07:54, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose It would amount to a large increase in the scope of the article. I agree with the previous commenter that the redirect should be redlinked per WP:REDLINK_{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 15:03, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 9 August 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Christmas in the United States (1946–1964)  — Amakuru (talk) 06:41, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

---

Christmas in the post-war United States → Christmas in post-World War II United States – "Post-war" without further specification is no longer sufficient nowadays. Marcocapelle (talk) 16:46, 9 August 2020 (UTC)—Relisting. —usernamekiran (talk) 21:24, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

• Move to Christmas in post–World War II United States or Christmas in the United States after World War II. (See MOS:PREFIXDASH.) —BarrelProof (talk) 17:49, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
• Support Christmas in the United States after World War II. I like the second title better than the first one because it indicates better that the time period is after WWII. Interstellarity (talk) 20:46, 9 August 2020 (UTC)
• Move to Christmas in the United States (1946–1964). Completely unambiguous. That's what the article says it's about and Christmas in post-World War II United States and Christmas in the United States after World War II are clearly ambiguous, given they could refer to any period up to and including the present. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:41, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
• Move to Christmas in the United States (1946–1964) per Necrothesp. The article's lead sentence does indeed qualify the period covered as the Baby Boomer years, thus confirming the specificity within the proposed 1946–1964 main header. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 02:18, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
• Move to Christmas in the United States (1946–1964) per above comments. Rreagan007 (talk) 19:03, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
• Comment Main article Post-war defines it as "the time since the end of World War II". Dimadick (talk) 19:59, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

---

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA Reassessment

Christmas in the United States (1946–1964)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Consensus exists to redirect the page, speedily delisting the article for housekeeping. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 20:50, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

This article was fully written by User:ReverendLogos, a sockpuppet of the banned user User:ItsLassieTime. The main source used, It's a Wonderful Christmas: The Best of the Holidays 1940-1965., is a book that I am unable to acquire and google books/amazon/archive all came up empty for giving me any information to confirm or deny the validity of the article. As a result the article as it is is unsalvageable. I suggest a speedy delisting so I can redirect the article to Christmas as this is an unnecessary content fork even without the copyright issues. Wizardman 00:10, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

@Wizardman: If no objections are raised, the article will be delisted in seven days. Noting that if the article is deleted/redirected for copyright reasons per PDEL and longtime violators, such a reassessment is unnecessary as an administrative measure: redirects cannot be GAs. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 03:17, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

@Wizardman: Just want to say but I was able to find the book https://www.google.com/books/edition/It_s_a_Wonderful_Christmas/-z8sPQAACAAJ?hl=en here. Though I will say that I am of the opinion that this article doesn't need to exist at all and honestly should either be merged/redirected tp Christmas or to create an entirely new article for Christmas in the United States and merge it there. Onegreatjoke (talk) 14:52, 17 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks; to clarify I wasn't doubting the book existed, but with there being no preview I couldn't verify anything in the article. Wizardman 00:50, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.