Jump to content

Talk:Decade

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"two thousands" ?

[edit]

'For example, the decade commonly referred to as the "two thousands" ended on December 31, 2009.'

Who calls it this? All I ever see used is "the noughties". Graspee (talk) 08:40, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see it commonly referred to as anything in particular. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 01:03, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I removed the sentence. It doesn't seem to add anything. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 01:23, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

From what I understand, the first decade of 20th Century also had no nickname during that 10 year period. The Aughts was not really adopted until after the decade was over. We are kinda in the same situation now. Who knows what will take hold this time around, as people seem afraid of less common words these days. fcsuper (How's That?, That's How!) (Exclusionistic Immediatist ) 02:54, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some people call the decade 2000-2009 the twenty-ohohs. However, the first decade of the 21st century is supposed to be counted as the years 2001 to 2010, and not 2000 to 2009, as a decade always after a multiple of ten years, just as a century shall be counted as a period which ends after a multiple of one hundred years. 212.100.101.104 (talk) 17:14, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The "Usage methods compared" graph is messy.

[edit]

The graph titled "Usage methods compared" seems to be very messy and confusing. Shouldn't it just look like the following? Peter J. Yost (talk) 14:41, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Usage methods compared
Year 1990 1991 1992 ... 1999 2000 2001 2002 ... 2009 2010 2011 2012 ... 2019 2020 2021 2022 ... 2029 2030
0-to-9 decade 1990s 2000s 2010s 2020s ...
1-to-0 decade ... 1991–2000 2001–2010 2011–2020 2021–2030
Nevermind, I hadn't understood the graph correctly. Peter J. Yost (talk) 14:41, 23 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, Peter. The 1-to-0 decade was correct, because I once believed that a decade could start for example, 2010, but it actually didn't start until 2011, a year later. So it made me realize how dumb-minded I felt. Now we can finally agree to disagree that a decade isn't until the number one like millenniums or centuries. You did pretty good. Darrion "Beans" Brown 🙂 (my talk page / my sandbox) 01:19, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of "ordinal"

[edit]

The word "ordinal" was added in this edit. I have removed it because the word "ordinal" applies to things that are fundamentally ordered, while "cardinal" are used for counting things that have no inherent order. Thus, all dates are ordinal, no matter whether the count begins at 0 or 1, and no mater whether suffixes like -st, -rd, or -th are used. Hence it is inappropriate to use the word "ordinal" to differentiate between the two numbering systems. Jc3s5h (talk) 02:10, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Enough with the decade beginning debates

[edit]

I would like to oppose that like a century or a millennium (1901-2001), a decade doesn't begin without the number one, geographically. As we can see through the Gregorian calendars, the final result is clear that a decade is not ready without the one in it. For example, the 2020s decade didn't begin until January 1, 2021. I propose for any decade article on Wikipedia that mentions any decade starting at ***0 to be changed to prove that it always starts with ***1 starting with any first decade you can find. My prediction, my matter. There... CASE CLOSED!

Links to prove: [1] [2] [3] [4] Darrion "Beans" Brown 🙂 (my talk page / my sandbox) 01:18, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You don't get to close the case. If you try to enforce your belief by editing articles, it could lead to administrative action against you. Jc3s5h (talk) 13:08, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Chronologically, a decade shall be counted as a period ending after a multiple of ten years, just as a century shall be counted as a period ending after a year which is a multiple of one hundred. However, it needn't be wrong to count the years 1900-1999 as a century, although I think those years should be referred to as a hundred-year-period rather than a century, as a century should be defined as a period starting with the year 1 AD and ending with the year 100 AD or otherwise as a period starting after a multiple of a hundred years and ending after the following 100-multiple years (i.e. starting with a year with the final digits 01 and ending with the following year with the final digits 00).
In some language like Swedish, the 20th century seems to be translated as nittonhundratalet (1900-talet), although it is not a correct translation. I think the correct translation of the 20th century should be det tjugonde seklet or det tjugonde århundradet (compare Norwegian det 20. århundre) and nittonhundratalet should be the translation of the 1900s. Many Swedish don't understand that there is a difference between the 1900s (1900-talet) and the 20th century (det tjugonde århundradet), as the 1900s is the years 1900-1999, in contrast to tjugonde århundradet (the 20th century) which starts with 1901 and ends with 2000. 212.100.101.104 (talk) 22:04, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decades in other languages

[edit]

Is English the only language which recognizes a decade as a period which ends after a multiple of ten calendar years? For example, in Swedish a decade seems to be recognized as a period with the "joint ten-digit" (i.e. the years 1990-1999, the nineteen-nineties, in Swedish referred to as nitton-nittiotalet or nittonhundranittiotalet), despite the fact that a period with the "joint ten-digit" does not end after a multiple of ten years. Swedish people seem to not consider at all that a multiple of ten years are past at the end of a year ending on the digit 0, in contrast to English-speaking people who seem to consider this.

In English, a period ending after a multiple of ten years, i.e. the years 1971-1980, is normally referred to as the eighth decade of the 20th century, which in Swedish would be translated as det åttonde (8:e) decenniet av det tjugonde (20:e) seklet or det tjugonde (20:e) seklets åttonde decennium, but it seems that the Swedish language is so undeveloped that it so far hasn't become a "korrekt språkbruk" ("correct language use") to say "seklets Xth decennium", even though this should become a general norm to say a decade, just as in English.

Just as a century always ends after a multiple of a hundred years, a decade shall as well end after a multiple of ten years: As the 20th century ends in the end of 2000, the tenth decade of the 20th century shall be referred to the years 1991-2000 (not 1990-1999), the ninth decade of the 20th century the years 1981-1990 (not 1980-1989) and so on.

I wonder if it is possible to report a request to Svenska Akademiens ordlista (SAOL; the word list of the Swedish language) to define a decade as a period starting on a year ending on the digit 1 and ending (in the end) on the following year which is a multiple of 10. If SAOL receives such a request, it will eventually change the Swedish definition of a decade from a period of years with the shared ten-digit to a period which ends after a multiple of ten years. 212.100.101.104 (talk) 21:53, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't waste Svenska Akademien's time with your pet re-definition projects, BjörnBergman. - Tournesol (talk) 20:37, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think what "BjörnBergman" tries to say is important to consider. If English-speaking refer to for example the ten years 1981-1990 as the ninth decade of the 20th century, it should be referred to the same in other languages, for example Swedish. The Swedish translation of the ninth decade of the 20th century would be nionde (9:e) dececnniet av 20:e seklet or 20:e seklets nionde decennium.
Plus, the "ninth decade of the 20th century" is supposed to be referred to the years 1981 to 1990, rather than 1980-1989, as a decade is supposed to be defined as a period ending after a multiple of ten years. The first decade AD, which started with year 1 (as no year 0 exists), ended with year 10, as ten years were past in (the end of) year 10 and not year 9. The first decade of the 21st century is as well supposed to be defined as January 2001 - December 2010, and not 2000-2009. 217.21.226.230 (talk) 11:16, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(I speak Swedish here as it would be easier to talk to a Swedish wikiuser) Tournesol, i vissa sammanhang säger man faktiskt det första decenniet av det X:e seklet, men det kanske inte du känner till. Om man exempelvis säger det första decenniet av 21:a seklet så menar man ju det årtionde som började år 2001 och upphörde år 2010, vilket icke är detsamma som det så kallade tjugo-nollnoll-talet, som är åren 2000 till 2009. 1940-talet (åren 1940-1949) är likaså inte heller detsamma som det femte decenniet av 20:e seklet (som är åren 1941-1950). 217.21.226.230 (talk) 08:16, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think you shall note something when searching for "femtonhundratal" on SAOB (Svenska Akademiens ordbok). According to SAOB, "femtonhundratalet" is referred to the years 1500 to 1599, which i det närmaste sammanfaller med "sextonde århundradet" (1501-1600); I think is an important reference which proves that i.e. 1900-talet in fact isn't synonymous with tjugonde århundradet (the 20th century), as tjugonde århundradet isn't the years 1900-1999, but 1901-2000, just as nittonde århundradet is 1801-1900 and not 1800-1899. The English phrase "19th century" should in Swedish be translated to nittonde (19:e) århundradet and not 1800-talet. 212.100.101.104 (talk) 11:09, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]