To report an error when this list is currently on the Main Page, see Main Page errors. Please remember that this list defers to the supporting articles, so it is best to achieve consensus and make any necessary changes there first.
Before making a suggestion, please read the selected anniversaries guidelines. Please remember that this list usually defers to supporting pages when there is disagreement, so it is best to achieve consensus and make any necessary changes there first.
Q1: Why is [Insert event here], an event that is "more important and significant" than all the others that are currently listed, not posted?
A1: Relative article quality along with the mix of topics already listed are often deciding factors in what gets posted. Any given day of the year can have a great many important or significant historical events. The problem is that there is generally only room on the Main Page to list about 5 events at a time, so not everything can be posted.
As stated on Wikipedia:FAQ/Main Page, the items and events posted on the Main Page are chosen based more on how well they are written, not based on how much important or significant their subjects are. It is easier for admins to select a well-written, cited, verifiable article over a poor one versus trying to determine objectively how much a subject is important or significant.
Keep in mind that the quality requirements only apply to the selected bolded article, not the other links. Thus, an event may qualify for multiple dates in a year if there is an article written in a summary style and an article providing detailed content; if one of those pages have cleanup issues, the other page can be bolded as an alternate.
Another criterion is to maintain some variety of topics, and not exhibit, just for example, tech-centrism, or the belief that the world stops at the edge of the English-speaking world. Many days have a large pool of potential articles, so they will rotate in and out every year to give each one some Main Page exposure. In addition, an event is not posted if it is also the subject of this year's scheduled featured article or featured picture.
Q2: There are way too many 20th-century events listed. Why aren't there more events from the 19th century and before?
Q3: This page seems to be biased toward events based in [Insert country or region here]. What can be done about it?
A3: This again is attributed to the systemic bias of Wikipedia. Many users are generally more interested in working on good, well-written articles pertaining to their home country. Since this is the English Wikipedia, there will be more English-speaking users, and thus more articles pertaining to English-speaking countries. And if there are more users who are from the United States, there will probably be more well-written articles about events based in the United States. Again, if you would like to further help mitigate the systemic bias in Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias.
Q4: Why is the birthday/death anniversary of [Insert name here] not listed?
A4: There are only four slots available for birth and death anniversaries. As with the events, article quality and diversity in time period, geography, and reason for notability are all contributing factors in whether an article gets selected for inclusion.
Q5: Are the holidays/observances listed in any particular order?
A5: Yes, there is a specified order: International observances first, then alphabetically by where observed.
Q6: Some of the holidays/observances that are listed have dates in parentheses beside them. What do they mean?
A6: There are two reasons that some holidays/observances have dates next to them:
Non-Gregorian-based holidays/observances are marked with the current year as a reminder to others that their dates do in fact vary from year to year.
National Days, Independence Days, and other holidays celebrating the nationhood of a country are generally marked by the year of the significant historic date being observed.
Today's featured article for August 26, 2025
Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 26, 2025
Concerning the entry about the second Battle of Bull Run: No, the battle did not begin today, August 26. It began on August 28, 1862, just like the wikipedia article on Second Bull Run says. L. Thomas W. (talk) 20:48, 26 August 2009 (UTC) L. Thomas W.[reply]
This case, as the article says quite clearly, was a Scots law case, not English law. However, as the House of Lords is the ultimate court for both Scottish and English civil law, the precedent extended to English law, also. Therefore, to be accurate, On this day should say
launch one of the landmark civil action cases in British Common Law.--ML5 (talk) 13:42, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
2008 – More than a week after a ceasefire was reached in the Russo-Georgian War, Russia unilaterally recognized the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.
It is needless to say that a country unilaterally recognized another country since the recognition of one state to another is an attribute of every sovereign state to decide it without any foreign interference and does not need to consult another country or other countries for this, hence no more sides or parties are needed to do so. If Abhazia had declared its independence unilaterally, that's a different tale, since international law provides in which situations a state may declare its independence, but it can not prohibit or ban if one country wants to recognize another country, because as I said before, it is an attribute of a sovereign state to decide whether it does or does not recognized any random nation.
I propose to delete that word for the reasons given above, in order to read: "2008 – More than a week after a ceasefire was reached in the Russo-Georgian War, Russia recognized the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia."
Nika de Hitch (talk) 10:20, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Not done Hi Nika de Hitch, you've used the edit request template incorrectly. This template is for users with a conflict of interest in editing the article and I've therefore removed the template as this isn't applicable in this case. As a side note, you could remove the word yourself as there have been no objections or further discussion since this edit request was made in August. st170etalk14:03, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
1968 – The Beatles released "Hey Jude", which became the then-longest single to top the UK charts.
Here we go again. Is this the UK Wikipedia? According to our"Hey Jude" article:
"Hey Jude" was a number-one hit in many countries around the world and became the year's top-selling single in the UK, the US, Australia and Canada. Its nine-week run at number one on the Billboard Hot 100 tied the all-time record in 1968 for the longest run at the top of the US charts, a record it held for nine years.
Suggest we include at least the U.S., along with UK, as the two largest relevant markets, and possibly also other English-speaking countries. – Sca (talk) 12:56, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For our audience, U.S. and UK seem more relevant -- possibly with the addition "and in many other countries" or words to that effect. (It was also popular in some non-Anglosphere countries, such as [West] Germany, France, the Netherlands, etc.) -- Sca (talk) 16:04, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't say it was only a hit in the UK. It does say it became the then-longest single to top the UK charts, where "longest" refers to its seven-minute length. That's more interesting than simply being a "hit". The blurb reflects the article, which only mentions (and references) the length record for the UK charts. I don't see what the problem is. Bazza (talk) 19:38, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is this: About 62 percent of the world's speakers of English as a first language reside in the U.S., where Hey Jude also was a huge hit. I myself remember it very well. The present blurb doesn't say "only," but it certainly implies it by not mentioning any other relevant English-speaking audiences, notably the largest one. English Wiki is not his Britannic Majesty's Wikipedia, it's Wikipedia for speakers of the English language, of which this I am one. As my 'Babel' user box says, "This user is a native speaker of the English language." -- Sca (talk) 19:56, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I was sure the complaint about this set was going to be that it was Americentric, given there are two US hooks plus a US bio and holiday. But no, we get Anglocentric! ERRORS, man. Vaticidalprophet20:00, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Excuses, excuses. But there's no editorial excuse for the blatant one-sidedness of the existing blurb. Unfair and disappointing. -- Sca (talk) 20:07, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]