Talk:New Year

Time High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Time, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Time on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TimeWikipedia:WikiProject TimeTemplate:WikiProject TimeTime
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Holidays Top‑importance

	Holidays portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Holidays, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of holidays on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HolidaysWikipedia:WikiProject HolidaysTemplate:WikiProject HolidaysHolidays
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be automatically archived by when more than 5 sections are present.

Venice

The table reports Venice adopted 1 january new year on 1522, immediately below the table it's written that "1 March was the first day of the numbered year in the Republic of Venice until its destruction in 1797". Either of the two piece of information is incorrect or further explanation is needed.

Semi-protected edit request on 30 December 2024

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Remove Ukraine from this list "In other nations and locations where Orthodox churches still adhere to the Julian calendar, including Georgia, Israel, Russia, the Republic of Macedonia, Serbia, Montenegro, and Ukraine........"

Ukrainian churches use Revised Julian calendar which is equal to Gregorian calendar (the nearest difference is in AD 2800): "The Orthodox Church of Ukraine (OCU) has approved a transition to the Revised Julian calendar, starting Sept. 1, according to a July 27 decision reached at St. Sophia Cathedral in Kyiv." [1] Baby New Year (talk) 08:37, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately the citation you provided seems to require a subscription or is compromised in some way? Not that it matters because Revised Julian Calendar#Adoption agrees and cites Orthodox Church Of Ukraine Approves Calendar Switch In Widening Diversion From Russia (May 2023), which is good enough. I will revise accordingly and return when done. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 17:00, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done, though it is not entirely an open and shut case because Orthodox Christendom in Ukraine has split as a result of the Russian invasion – see Orthodox Church of Ukraine. The sect loyal to Moscow has been declared illegal – see Ukraine adopts ‘historic’ law to ban Moscow-linked Orthodox Church (August 2024). So, for the purposes of this article, I think it reasonable to accept that the Orthodox Church of Ukraine represents Ukraine and celebrates ecclesiastical new year on the same day as the civil new year. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 17:16, 30 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot that Russian-occupied Ukraine has no choice in the matter, so I will reinstate Ukraine to that extent. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 13:25, 1 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tamil New Year

Tamil New Year isn't a well-known example. In fact the identical holidays celebrated in South East Asia are far more well known. It should be replaced with the Thai festival surely? SamanthaWriggs (talk) 09:23, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge from New Year's Day

When we have an article about multiple holidays in different cultures, it doesn't make sense to have a separate article about one day of each of those holidays (New Year's Day). If we're going to split out an article about the European New Year holiday, merging these articles is a first step. Lophotrochozoa (talk) 20:56, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Having a separate article for new year's Day providers a home for the plethora of descriptions of local celebrations. The New Year article is thus much less buried in trivia and the astronomy and history of calendars can get due prominence. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 08:53, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This proposal is inspired by a discussion elsewhere where Carlwev and Purplebackpack89 also participated. Lophotrochozoa (talk) 15:47, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Split

This article covers both the European New Year holiday and a list of other holidays in other cultures. These holidays take place on different times of the year and don't necessarily have any historical connection, so I would like to split it into two articles, maybe called New Year (Western) and List of New Year holidays. Lophotrochozoa (talk) 20:36, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: It is really important that readers appreciate that theirs is not the only New Year. I can't think of any good reason to create yet another silo, let alone two. The article is not so long that a split is justified on tl;dr grounds. It is not broken, there is nothing to fix. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 22:01, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully the disambiguation suffix would help with that. I don't think that's enough reason to pretend that more or less unrelated holidays are the same. Lophotrochozoa (talk) 22:20, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

But they are not unrelated and they are not even all holidays. Their relationship is that they all mark the start of a new year in their respective calendars. Yes we have a Chinese New Year article and an Islamic New Year article, but their Western counterpart is New Year's Day. The fireworks on the day are just incidental decorations: the change of year is what is significant. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 23:40, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't make them the same holiday, so each of them should have separate articles in addition to the list. Lophotrochozoa (talk) 11:56, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, that is a category error. This article is about a new cycle in various calendars. The celebrations of that event are indeed different topics and yes, we do have separate articles for the major ones. I recognise that we get content drift in from the various New Year's Day articles but the solution is to spring clean, not collude. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 15:10, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Then why are you opposed to my proposal to split off an article about the European New Year holiday? Lophotrochozoa (talk) 14:59, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As a general principle, we shouldn't split articles unless they are over length or are combining radically different concepts. If we really must have a split, then splitting New Year's Day is more tolerable than splitting New Year.

And there is the additional complication that Africa, Australasia and the Americas are not European.

Anyway, I think that you and I have run with this for long enough, we need other editors to contribute. So let's both hold off on further comment until the end of July, as it is holiday season in the Northern hemisphere. 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 16:45, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]