Talk:Witchcraft Act 1735
Latest comment: 11 years ago by Mike Cline in topic Requested move
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Witchcraft Act 1735 article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
.svg){kind=small} | Daily pageviews of this article
A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org |
Requested move edit
- The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: Moved to Witchcraft Act 1735 Mike Cline (talk) 15:09, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
Witchcraft Act of 1736 → Witchcraft Act 1735 – This Act was actually passed and received Royal Assent in the legal year 1735, on the last day of the year (24 March). It is usually referred to as a 1735 Act. Also, naming conventions for articles about Acts of British Parliaments are to omit 'of'. I doubt this is actually controversial but will err on the safe side; it also needs admin help because the target article currently exists as a redirect to Witchcraft Acts. Sam Blacketer (talk) 19:55, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
- Comment I did a Google Scholar comparison of both terms and found 3,900 for 1736 and 3,660 for 1735. A quick look at Guiley "Encyclopedia of Witches, Witchcraft, etc." uses 1736. Could you provide a source that can decide such a cloudy result? SLawsonIII (talk) 00:21, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
- Comment -
It's funny, almost everything passed in "9 George II" is 1735. since it's chapter 5, that would lead me to believe it's 1735. The BBC calls it 1735, however the UK parliament site says it was passed in 1736. But I can't seem to find the actual date of royal assent anywhere.--Education does not equal common sense. 我不在乎 04:35, 21 August 2012 (UTC)- Okay, I get it now. Duh. Gregorian vs Julian calendar.... It was 24 March - 1735 of the Julian calendar, the calendar used at the time. - If they were using the Gregorian calendar at the time, the year would have started in January, and it would have been 1736. Found this ready made explanation once I realized what was going on. So it received royal assent in what was 1735 at the time. Many places call it 1735/36 to show Old Style and New Style dates, so it would be accurate to call it Witchcraft Act of 1735. --Education does not equal common sense. 我不在乎 04:55, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.