Talk:Hallmark holiday

Hallmark's Official Stance/Response

I would suggest that a reference or inclusion of the following blog post should be placed within this article. Hallmark addresses officially the term "Hallmark Holiday" here: http://blog.hallmark.com/2010/02/11/hallmark-didnt-invent-valentines-day-but-we-know-who-did/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramseymohsen (talk • contribs) 16:25, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Opposition to the list

I created this article, but fear that trying to list said Hallmark holidays will lead to endless disputes, so suggest that this be left out. StuRat

Merger with Hallmark Holiday

Please discuss this at the proposed merger talk page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Hallmark_Holiday Sonic 17:56, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

I did a merge with the Hallmark holiday article. I tried to keep the best wording from the two articles and preserve all the information. Transfinite 22:36, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

The List

Regarding the list at the bottom of the article, we should have a better definition of what a "Hallmark Holiday" is.

Take Halloween, for example. It's listed as a Hallmark Holiday, but it's perhaps one of the oldest holidays, and has significant religious meaning to Wiccans and other pagans and neo-pagans as Samhain.

So, is there any good reason Halloween is listed? Should the list be there at all? I'd like to pull Halloween, if there's no objection...

Joe 16:29, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Remove Halloween from the list. StuRat 21:25, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I tend to agree that Hallowe'en doesn't belong, but I would suggest that Christmas does. - Smerdis of Tlön 16:37, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Christmas has been around for many centuries, originally as a purely religious ceremony ("Christ mass"). Only in recent times has it become an orgy of present giving. A Hallmark Holiday is one invented just for gift exchanges, so Christmas doesn't qualify. StuRat 02:01, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Christmas is merely a ripoff of the Pagan holiday of yule, there is no religious significance behind it, it was coopted in order to gain converts, its as commerical as they come

...and possibly a bit of a ripoff of the birthday of Mithras as well. This is a rather slow moving discussion, but the list is quantified as holidays "often identified as Hallmark holidays". It doesn't really matter if Christmas had a different begining; so did St. Valentine's day before the "Saint" part was dropped. The real question is, is either commonly referred to as a "Hallmark holiday". I would say no to "Christmas" but yes to "Valentine's Day".--Isotope23 14:44, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I also think Christmas should stay off because many people still celebrate Christmas as a religious holiday. The religious purpose is far from gone. I would say that Hallowe'en should be added with a note that this is purely in the mainstream sense of costumes and candy.Slayer425 04:26, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Well the real question is, can it be verifiably sourced that people refer to Halloween as a "Hallmark holiday". While it has become a commericial endeavor when compared to its origins, anecdotally I've never heard anyone refer to it as a Hallmark holiday. I think that really should be the litmus test here; is a holiday or observance referred to as a HH in reliable sources (or at least documented in a WP:RS as being referred to as such by people).--Isotope23 14:09, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Also are we only talking about the US celebrations of these holidays? Because in Japan, for example, Xmas is celebrated with no real religious connotation, rather it has more of a commerical holiday feel to it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 129.22.53.86 (talk) 16:50, 10 February 2007 (UTC).

Alternatives

Are there any reliabe sources documenting homegrown alternatives to Hallmark holidays? Singles Awareness Day would be one, and some people here are celebrating Goldman's Day somewhat similarly. There should be mention of this kind of action against Hallmark holidays, but I don't know of any sources. ~Switch ^{t c g} 09:11, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Apostrophes

I raise the question of the spelling of 'Father's Day' and 'Mother's Day' (sic). It seems to me that the plural form, eg 'Fathers' Day' should be used, as it generally is in Australia where I live, because the 'holiday' (not a term we would use in Australia, by the way, as 'holiday' means a public holiday, or vacation, here) is for many fathers, not just one. I won't change what's written in the article but I think it should be discussed and preferably changed. Alpheus 00:10, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Well Fathers' Day certainly wins out in a google fight, but the wikipedia article is Father's Day (and Mother's day, etc). Ultimately, what the article is called in wikipedia itself is what will be used here. They've had this discussion over there and it seems like they've decided Father's Day makes more sense when you think about it, not to mention that's how it's been spelled by its early creators. --68.13.147.241 18:06, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Feb 14 comment

Hallmark hasn't created a single holiday. This "article" sounds like a bunch of anti-commercial, anti-corporate, anti-capitalist leftist whining to me.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.78.24.2 (talk • contribs).

I'm inclined to agree about the validity of this article. The list especially seems very made up. Not really liking it at all. I really wish wikipedians would delete unsourced articles.--68.13.147.241 18:08, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I also agree that this stuff is made up. Especially that junk about one of those holidays 'being a time to bow down to the guy who screwed you in the ass all year.' (I'm quoting that.) Just delete this article.

That was vandalism and was quickly reverted. Try a Google search for "Hallmark holiday". It's not an uncommon term, and the article is pretty NPOV about it. ~Switch ^{t c g} 03:40, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Here is an article (Valentine's Day no more than a Hallmark holiday, Catie Joyce, February 14, 2007, mainecampus.com) that uses the term as you see. This guy says that Hallowe'en is not a Hallmark holiday. et cetera... ~Switch ^{t c g} 04:11, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Christmas

To claim Christmas is not the celebration of significant religious event is offensive to many Christians. Also claiming that Christmas exists primarily for commercial purposes is preposterous. Many corporations may have exploited the celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ but that is not the same thing. There are no documented references in mainstream media of Christmas being a hallmark holiday. The inclusion of Christmas does not improve the quality of the article so I therefore request this is removed.

Yes, there are. Major media won't talk about it because they don't want to offend Christians and corporations, but smaller media do. And the "Hallmark holiday" is quite a widespread idea. ~Switch ^{t c g} 04:11, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Deletion

I'm inclined to nominate this article for deletion - I don't see it ever being more than a dicdef of a bit of American slang. Any thoughts?--Colindownes 22:34, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

• I disagree, I think it belongs here. It's a concept which needs to be explained along with examples. There are many other on WP of the same nature. --Patik 15:41, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

"Ideal, perfect holiday"

Has anyone ever heard of the phrase "Hallmark Holiday" used to mean an "ideal, perfect holiday"? I haven't, there are no sources, and there's been a "sources needed" thing for more than a year. I'm deleting the paragraph, I guess. ThisIsMyWikipediaName (talk) 14:06, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

I haven't, but that might be saying very little since the term "Hallmark Holiday" isn't something I've heard much in the first place. 134.50.209.12 (talk) 03:36, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Love Day

The Simpsons actually spoofed this concept in an episode where marketers created "Love Day" in August to account for the mid-summer lull due to lack of holidays at that time. Is that worth mentioning? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.54.154.25 (talk) 06:53, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

i think including that spoof is a good way of demonstrating what a 'hallmark hollyday' is in the eyes of the public: a bunch of pr-dudes going over a calendar to find obscure celebrations, and then marketing the hell out of it —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.127.245.41 (talk) 21:36, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

NPOV edits

I saw this article for the first time, and based on what I've read in these discussions, it's come a long way to seem neutral. I just want to make the following edits to make it as close to NPOV as possible: "These [holidays] are frequently ignored by a sizable percentage of the public[citation needed]" manages to be both speculative and vague at the same time. If someone wants to put a sentence like this in a wiki article, they should take it from a source, so that that source can clarify the meaning of "ignore" "sizable" and "the public". I'm deleting it, because it's obviously one particular person's judgment based on experience.

And this: "However the result often is that gift givers feel pressured to give a gift on those days as told by advertisers or society that one is expected. In the period before Valentine's Day, men are heavily marketed to by the sellers of jewelry, chocolate, flowers, and similar products to purchase such products as gifts for the women in their lives. Companies like Vermont Teddy Bear and PajamaGram are noted for their ads on sports radio shows. Their advertisements laud the ease in which their products can be bought and given to a girlfriend or wife with little effort on the man's part." This entire paragraph is dedicated to prescribing a negative judgement to the term. This article needs to be neutral. If these things are so awful, then the reader can judge that for themselves. The comparison to Vermont Teddy Bears and PajamaGram doesn't serve to inform the reader either, it merely blankets the judgments onto more companies. In short, I'm deleting this entire paragraph because it's petty and literally adds no relevant information to the article. If that wasn't reason enough to remove it, the fact that none of the claims have citations is.

Finally, there's this add-on at the end of an otherwise informative sentence: "Related to "Hallmark Holiday" is the pop-culture term "Hallmark Moment." It can suggest either a serendipitous event or encounter, or a sappy emotional appeal, especially manipulation of emotion for financial gain". The cited article demonstrates a use of the term to refer to (what would be) a "sappy emotional appeal". But the language "manipulation of emotion for financial gain" is incredibly harsh, especially since the only thing the article mentions that supports this claim is a reference to the fact that Hallmark commercials exist. If we were to extend this logic, we could muddle the page of literally every single company (and all of their related pages) with such a disparaging phrase, due simply to the fact that virtually all commercials are appealing to emotion. This phrase, unlike the others, might be better edited than deleted: "Related to "Hallmark Holiday" is the pop-culture term "Hallmark Moment." It can suggest either a serendipitous event or encounter, or a sappy emotional appeal, including appeal for financial gain." Since Hallmark Moment is a colloquial phrase, a more inclusive description is going to more accurately capture its common use. This is because the common use of a colloquial phrase isn't "reigned in" by an authoritative definition.

Does all of this make sense? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.192.145.120 (talk) 21:45, 29 September 2011 (UTC)138.192.145.120 (talk) 22:13, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Hallmark moment

I have removed the sentence about "Hallmark moments" ("Hallmark Moment" is another pop-culture term that can suggest either a serendipitous event or encounter or a sappy emotional appeal, including appeal for financial gain.) as it doesn't really relate to the topic of this article. It could go on a "Hallmark moment" article or as an indication of cultural impact on the Hallmark Cards page, but it doesn't belong here. --Khajidha (talk) 18:02, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

References

Merger proposal

I propose that Hallmark holiday be merged into Hallmark Cards. I think that the content in the Hallmark holiday article can easily be explained in the context of Hallmark Cards, and the Hallmark Cards article is of a reasonable size that the merging of Hallmark holiday will not cause any problems as far as article size or undue weight is concerned. 188.246.71.145 (talk) 23:50, 14 May 2017 (UTC)