Jump to content
 







Main menu
   


Navigation  



Main page
Contents
Current events
Random article
About Wikipedia
Contact us
Donate
 




Contribute  



Help
Learn to edit
Community portal
Recent changes
Upload file
 








Search  

































Create account

Log in
 









Create account
 Log in
 




Pages for logged out editors learn more  



Contributions
Talk
 



















Contents

   



(Top)
 


1 Holocene Era begins too early  





2 Contradiction?  
3 comments  




3 Use in Media Section?  
3 comments  




4 Relevancy references  
2 comments  













Talk:Holocene calendar




Page contents not supported in other languages.  









Article
Talk
 

















Read
Edit
Add topic
View history
 








Tools
   


Actions  



Read
Edit
Add topic
View history
 




General  



What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Get shortened URL
Download QR code
 




Print/export  



Download as PDF
Printable version
 
















Appearance
   

 






From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 


Holocene Era begins too early[edit]

The Holocene begins at 11.700 bk2 (before AD 2000) or 11.650 BP (Befoer Present= before AD 1950) or 9.700 BC or ca. 10.000 14C BP, see: Formal definition and dating of the GSSP (Global Stratotype Section and Point) for the base of the Holocene using the Greenland NGRIP ice core, and selected auxiliary records I infer that this "Holocene Era" begins 300 yr before the Holocene. Very interesting! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jerzas (talkcontribs) 16:17, 5 January 2009

Contradiction?[edit]

In the introduction of the article, it says:

The HE scheme was first proposed by Cesare Emiliani in 1993 (11993 HE).

But in the "Equivalent proposals" section it says:

In 1924 Gabriel Deville proposed the use of Calendrier nouveau de chronologie ancienne (CNCA), which would start 10,000 years before AD 1, which is identical to Emiliani's much later proposal.

In 1963 E.R. Hope proposed the use of Anterior Epoch (AE), which also begins at the same point.

Doesn't this contradict the introduction? Or is the introduction simply referring to the term HE? I think that the sentence in the introduction should either be removed or clarified. Therealviklo (talk) 13:48, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A good suggestion. Done. Better late than never. --Samotny Wędrowiec (talk) 05:06, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The article still (21 Dec 2023) credits Emiliani as being the originator of the Holocene calendar, but that credit should clearly go to Gabriel Deville in 1924. (We're about a week from the 100th anniversary of Deville's proposal, so it's a good time to get it right. In fact, it's a good time to actually adopt the proposal.) Ncguru (talk) 12:15, 21 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Use in Media Section?[edit]

I was just wondering if it would be a good idea to add a section for this? As right now, a popular game series (NieR) is using it for their year notation on their Concert Tour series coming next year. 71.90.116.133 (talk) 05:32, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Surely it would need more than one (probably marketing motivated) usage to be deemed sufficiently wp: notable? --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 08:05, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Another example could be the YouTube channel Kurzgesagt's support of the HE calendar. Urface20 (talk) 18:23, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relevancy references[edit]

The article makes repeated claims that the approximate start of the Holocene period is more relevant than the approximate birth of Jesus.

I dispute this, there's a lot more Christians, and people familiar with the BC/AD system than there are people who know when the Holocene approximately started, which is low outside of archaeology circles.

The "likely at 4BC" bit is very debatable aswell, there's no evidence to pinpoint that date, and various dates from then to 1AD are possible. With this calendar being set 10k before this event, the accuracy of the date is hardly a valid argument. The Holocene is not easily defined to any specific year. 188.29.235.138 (talk) 18:48, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, it was Cesare Emiliani who made these arguments, Wikipedia reports them without comment. As for the epochofAnno Domini, see date of birth of Jesus and Dionysius Exiguus. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 20:06, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

.


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Holocene_calendar&oldid=1223051235"

Categories: 
C-Class Geology articles
Low-importance Geology articles
Low-importance C-Class Geology articles
WikiProject Geology articles
C-Class Time articles
Low-importance Time articles
 



This page was last edited on 9 May 2024, at 15:44 (UTC).

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 4.0; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.



Privacy policy

About Wikipedia

Disclaimers

Contact Wikipedia

Code of Conduct

Developers

Statistics

Cookie statement

Mobile view



Wikimedia Foundation
Powered by MediaWiki