Talk:1900

[Untitled]

I changed the infobox so that the correct century (the 19th) is shown in bold. The 20th century starts with 1901, not 1900. --Thorsen 07:15, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

The year in topic layout on this page is one of three versions. I seek opinions before making them all the same; see comment on my talk page.

1900 is currently confirming to proposed model--BozMo 11:40, 5 May 2004 (UTC) BozMo(talk)

I'm doing some link corrections and note that Labour Party (UK) was founded twice this month ... anyone want to hazard which is right and make the appropriate deletion? --Vamp:Willow 16:51, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I am also doing some link checking and noticed that the date that the US State of Hawaii officially becoming a territory is listed as occouring 3 times in the year of 1900. The 1900 year page claims the date is Feb. 22nd, while the April 30, June 14 pages claim that it was organized on those respective days. The actual Hawaii page has no specific date and after much searching on the net I find that both dates are listed on numerous different websites. Can anyone confirm the actual date that Hawaii became a US territory and make the change? --Seandals 07:09, 12 Dec 2005 (UTC)

Format

[See: Talk:1950#Format. -Wikid77 14:06, 22 December 2006 (UTC)]

Hawaii

Did anyone notice that Hawaii becomes a U.S. Territory twice (on both February 22 and then again on July 14th)? Very impressive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.225.120.250 (talk) 10:47, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

It didn't even happen in 1900 according to the Territory of Hawaii article. The first territorial governor took office in 1900 though - his article, Sanford B. Dole doesn't give any dates. I have therefore removed both mentions of Hawaii becoming a territory in this article. Graham87 14:05, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Zheng Ji

I have fixed it so as Zheng Ji will now lead to the real person, not the disambugation page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Royalmate1 (talk • contribs) 22:40, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Savrola

According to the biography by roy jenkins, churchill's novel Savrola was first published as a serial in Macmillans magazine in 1899 from may to december, and was published as a book in the USA in November 1899. Got his marketing right, did churchill. Sandpiper (talk) 23:13, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

The Earth's field

If Rowland really discovered how the magnetic field works then why doesn't it mention it in either the articles on Rowland or on the Earth's magnetic field? Or is someone making stuff up? Gmackematix (talk) 23:33, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

Quirk in Excel

Slightly strange point any possibly being noted in the wrong place, but Microsoft Excel thinks 1900 Jan 1st was a Sunday and there there was a 29 Feb in it. Excel seems to know that 2100 is not a leap year. Odd point I know but something i found curious.--80.229.182.42 (talk) 16:21, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

That's a manifestation of this bug: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leap_year_bug. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:2C2:700:3A3B:991C:F8B6:3BE3:449C (talk) 14:27, 30 September 2018 (UTC)

Leap year?

According to the rules I know, it is not. But the article once says it is, and then later says it isn't! — Preceding unsigned comment added by AegNuddel (talk • contribs) 20:05, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

Lead

Okay, I can't seem to edit it because it's in a template that I can't figure out, but the following sentence should be removed from the lead: "Note that the Julian day for 1900 is 12 calendar days difference, which continued to be used from 1582 until the complete conversion of the Gregorian calendar was entirely done in 1929." Aside from being covered later in the paragraph, it does not specify a location for which the conversion was completed in 1929. --Khajidha (talk) 10:33, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Restoration of 2014 edits

I noticed that there was a box for the founding of Australia, but no mention of this event on the list of historical facts. I looked to see if there had ever been an item for Australia's founding, and found that established Wikipedia editor DerbyCountyinNZ had, in good faith, presumably, removed many items between 28 March 2014 and 18 April 2014, with the justification that they were either non-notable or ought to be covered in the country's Wikipedia page for that year. While it may be that this user was correct in many instances, I felt that several of the items, such as the founding date of Australia, were, in fact, notable enough to be included on the 1900 page. It's also difficult for one person to be the sole judge of notability to that degree. As such, I felt it would be best to restore these items, in most cases, as they existed on 28 March 2014. Let the reader decide on whether such items are of sufficient notability. This concerns about 54 items on the page. I also looked at 1901 and noted that this editor had not removed items from that page, so this appears to not have been a systematized change. As there may be differences of opinion on this matter, I left a note on my edit referring to this explanation on the talk page to initiate discussion before further changes along these lines.Ryan Reeder (talk) 16:50, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

1900: The introduction of quantum to physics

This article should included a mention of Max Planck's introduction of the idea of light quanta in the headline-introduction area. 1900 is the year that the idea of quantization is introduced into physics, and leads in 1905 to Einstein's explanation of the photoelectric effect, his Nobel Prize in Physics, and the beginning of the Quantum Revolution. Pwfen (talk) 11:44, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Japan population

In the World population section why is Japan stemmed out of Asia? Aminabzz (talk) 23:46, 13 August 2023 (UTC)

Virginia M. Alexander

Why is Virginia M. Alexander's image in the date unknown part? She clearly was born on February 4, 1899. Aminabzz (talk) 00:22, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:2101 which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 12:26, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:2300 which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 01:14, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

This was NOT a leap year.

there is some rule that years ending in 00 must be divisible by 8 or something Wikidglot (talk) 00:18, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

No, they must be divisible by 400 (or equivalently, by 16, as lcm(100, 16)=400). The year 1800 is divisible by 8 but it was not a leap year. GTrang (talk) 01:15, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

RfC on the exceptional/century common year wording

The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Change boldly implemented in Special:Diff/1364275800 at Template:Year article header/zc due to lack of objection. GTrang (talk) 16:27, 15 July 2026 (UTC)

---

A previous discussion at Talk:Century common year#Requested move 1 September 2025 did not have consensus to move the article to Exceptional common year.

So, let's revisit the wording issue with an RfC.

Should the words "an exceptional common year starting on Friday/Wednesday/Monday" in the header template for the years 1700, 1800, and 1900 be changed to "a century common year starting on Friday/Wednesday/Monday" to match the name of the article Century common year?

If the adjective "exceptional" should not be changed, then a new RM would need to be started at Talk:Century common year to move the article to Exceptional common year. GTrang (talk) 01:32, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

I have replaced the list of three options with a simple yes/no question, as that should hopefully make things easier. GTrang (talk) 18:41, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

Please answer Yes or No below. Thank you. GTrang (talk) 18:41, 3 July 2026 (UTC)

Discussion

Unfortunately, it looks like no one has cared to respond to this RfC yet. If no one responds to this RfC by the end of July, then the closer of this RfC may boldly implement the requested change. GTrang (talk) 18:41, 11 July 2026 (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.