Talk:End of the world

(Untitled)

The section title "Untitled" was retrofitted (added after the corresponding contributions, 16:05, 9 February 2007‎) to encompass several independent discussions, which also had not been placed in chronological order. Subsequently, i have reorganized the material, based on edit history records of dates of contribution, into retrofitted sub-sections that appear to have each begun with an initiating comment and continued with a response to it, responses to one or both of them, and so on. What appear to be separate discussions, started by later and comments responding to article content rather than previous discussion, have similarly been assembled, according to the most plausible hypotheses about the contributors' respective intents to initiate or respond. (Where the separating horizontal-rules i found imply interpretations clearly inconsistent with the history, i have ignored them; where they seem, in the context of the edit history, likely to be mistaken, i intend to comment on my reorganizations of the implied structure.)
--Jerzy•t 08:22 & 08:45, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

(1st-to-2nd-Millenium transition I)

_{[68. presumably found in the accompanying article, and copied to here:]}

In medieval Europe, it was widely believed that the world would end one thousand years after the birth of Christ. During the year 999 AD, many people did not grow crops because they thought there was no need, due to the coming armageddon. Many people went hungry in 1,000 AD when the end of the world did not occur.

_{[68. continued:]}
Is this accurate? I thought I remembered reading that it was a historical myth. 68.112.234.33 ^{— Preceding undated comment added 14:51, 18 August 2002‎} & -- April ^{An undated edit, by User:-- April at 14:53, 18 August 2002‎, replaced the IP-sig of the contributor, and effectively claimed the contribution was by User:-- April. The edit history and common sense are consistent with the IP having forgotten to log in, and being the same person as "-- April".}

Not only it's true, but when in 999 AD the end of the world did not occur, many of those who had predicted it, "admitted" a pretended mistake in their calculations, so they predicted that it would have occurred in 1,000 AD. This time for sure. (!) -- Gianfranco — Preceding undated comment added 14:58, 18 August 2002

(should this article be merged with eschatology?)

I think that the entire contents of this article should be merged with Eschatology, and deleted. There are interesting bits included here that are not in Eschatology, but should be. Otherwise, "End of the world" is nothing but a sub-category of Eschatology (not always Utopianism, and not always Millennialism or Christian eschatology, but always eschatology). Does anyone agree? — Mkmcconn — Preceding undated comment added 19:41, 5 November 2002

(1st-to-2nd-Millenium transition II)

A colleague inserted the following (which, due to some editors posting above previously inserted material, then appeared lower on the page), apparently to clarify what 131. must have meant by "these assertions", in their own contrib which then followed (and still does).^{--Jerzy•t 08:22, 18 November 2011 (UTC)}

In medieval Europe, it was widely believed that the world would end one thousand years after the birth of Christ. During the year 999 AD, many people did not grow crops because they thought there was no need, due to the coming armageddon. Many people went hungry in 1,000 AD when the end of the world did not occur.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 03:14, 4 March 2003 (talk • contribs) Josh Grosse

I doubt these assertions about the years 999 and 1000. I don't think many people could read then, especially among farmers, and it seems likely that most people in Europe did not know what year it was. -- Mike Hardy — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.183.81.100 (talk) 02:49, 22 November 2002

The exact degree of panic over the turning of the millennium is apparently a point of some disagreement. The idea, though, that it was significant to cause famine I think can safely be ruled out. I think it would be best to err on the side of caution until a reference can be provided, and am taking out the section accordingly.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Josh Grosse (talk • contribs) 03:14, 4 March 2003

(jewish eschatology)

I'd recommend that the bit about jewish end of the world stuff be put into jewish eschatology (it's definatly out of place here), and this article be made into a piece that depicts scientifically probably ways for the world to end (similar to the ones that are probably described in martin-ree's book which this article refers to).
this could include: SAI (super - AI's), asteroid collision, bio-terrorism, nuclear winter, (there are loads, most of which have some potential scientific merit) etc, etc. Or at least links to the relevent articles.
The article in it's present state just looks rather too random to be any good.
--Moriarty — Preceding undated comment added 23:53, 2 March 2004

(Hitchhiker's Guide ... sequel)

left off Douglas Adams' "The Restaurant at the End of the Universe?" Blasphemy, I say! Indeed, the world must be ending soon ...
--68.53.61.253 00:20, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Other views

For balance, their ought to be a presentation of other views, such as a Christian POV.--Josiah 15:48, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hubbert's Peak

I feel that Hubbert's Peak is not relevent in an article on the end of the world. The whole peak oil scenario will cause a change in our society but not the end of it. I have deleted the reference. Alan Liefting 21:06, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Agreed. Perhaps "End of the World as we know it". --Stbalbach 22:14, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Rename article

Renameing this article from "End of the world" to "End of the world (religion)" .. there are now many/multiple articles that discuss end of the world in religious terms, and none that talk about secular conceptions. I have created a new article End of Civilization and will point "End of the World" to it ... if there is disagreement, we can simply point it to the disambiguation page. In truth I think "End of the world (religion)" should be merged with other articles that are more developed. Stbalbach 01:19, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

or you could rename it to eschatology if you wanted to go the religion route. i think if you were looking for the end of the world, typing that in to get a page with various directions on where to go (from flash movies to song titles to religions) is perfectly acceptable. (oelschlegel, 220004aug06)— Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.27.1.2 (talk) 23:04, 22 August 2006‎

Heaven and Hell

I really don't get this stuff about Heaven and Hell not being literal terms but states of being in spirituality both in life and afterlife. What does that mean anyway?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Scorpionman (talk • contribs) 02:16, 8 May 2005

It's the theory that there is no heaven or hell, and that descriptions of such within religious texts are actually describing the individuals own mental/spiritual state as a result of their own guilt or lack therefo, rather than the judgement of some deity. However, the sentence is very POV, in that it labels this theory the "moderate" one, thus taking sides in the anti-religion debate by labeling all judgeing-god religious beliefs "extremist" by inference. Tom S.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.185.28.42 (talk) 17:05, 18 July 2005‎

this is missing so much

the whole mayan 2012 thing, scientific ways that the world could end, grey goo
http://www.rotten.com/library/religion/apocalypse/
http://ned.ucam.org/~sdh31/misc/destroy.html
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.203.92.62 (talk) 07:01, 23 May 2005‎

Flash Animation

I had added it there before, and I think it's pretty valid. It was quite a popular flash animation, so I figure people might come looking for it here. If you'd like it removed, I'd like to hear some sort of case on this discussion page, instead of just taking it off. Hanzolot 20:10, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah I keep removing it, seems to be my hobby. If you want to add it back, please create a Wikipedia article first. We only list red links if they could be a Wikipedia article, per the MoS. I don't think it could be a wikipedia article. The test is to create one, I may be wrong. -- Stbalbach 21:23, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, I didn't know that it was a big deal to have red links. I might come back and try making a page later on when I'm more experienced, right now it's not really worth the time/effort. =) Hanzolot 06:24, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Probable Vandalism

This just does not strike me as legit. I'm going to remove it, but here preserve it on the off-chance that it SOMEHOW is true... Or just so the rest of us can quietly laugh at it.

The Theory stating that on March 7, 2007 the spiraling vortex keeping the moon in orbit of the Earth will detach, causing the moon to come falling down to the Earth at a very high velocity. It will strike the Earth at full force causing a massive explosion equivalent to that of 28 million nuclear missles. If the vortex holds strong to do a last second development of a stronger pull, this will not happen, but there is only a .03% chance of that.

--Feerique 02:10, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Next time someone write someting like that, one should ban his IP.--85.108.75.90 09:25, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Beliefs about the End of the World

There should be links to various religious and mythological predictions of the end of the world Rds865 (talk) 23:15, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

WRONG WRONG WRONG!!! God will say somthing if the world is gonna end!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.51.148.77 (talk) 23:35, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

People-Scientists think on September 2,2012 a comet will strike the earth and will destroy the earth. Wrong. the comet will not strike the earth. the comet will either miss and go to mars, or the comet will partly burn up and strike the edge of the earth. Your call. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.51.148.77 (talk) 23:44, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

R.E.M./Great Big Sea

Not sure why this was removed from the music section:

• "End of the World" is the title of Great Big Sea's cover of "It's the End of the World as We Know It (And I Feel Fine)" by R.E.M.

Is it because it's the title of a cover, and thus sort of once-removed and seemingly irrelevant? Even if that's the case, shouldn't there at least be a link to the original song? Like:

• "It's the End of the World as We Know It (And I Feel Fine)" (R.E.M. song)
  

Maolmhuire (talk) 08:50, 24 January 2009 (UTC) its just fucking crazy

Added the "Videogames" section

And the DS game The World Ends with You (also known as TWEWY, Subarashiki Kono Sekai, and It's a Wonderful World), and added links to JRPG, Square-Enix, and Nintendo DS. If any of you know any other apocolyptic games, RPGs, whatever, add 'em; thanks! 69.171.164.27 (talk) 19:47, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Dab-CU

Overview

   The accompanying main-namespace page definitely needs the Dab-cleanup that it's been tagged for. What i intend to work toward is a split into a proper Dab page, plus some kind of SIA(s) -- List of eschatological schemata and something like List of scientific end-scenarios perhaps, which may deserve to be listed in the "See also" section. Subject to the principles that a Dab does not list all the titles that include the word (or phrase) in the Dab's title, and that grammatically related terms (canning, canned, canner) can sometimes be redirected to a common Dab page but conceptually related ones (End of the world, Ends of the Earth, End of Time) cannot, a lot of what is in sections other than "Theology", "Scientific", and "Locations on Earth" can be kept above "See also" in the Dab.
   I think the most important thing is that a compliant Dab not be produced by simply discarding entries. Few if any entries on the current page should disappear from WP, and the rest should find a home on pages whose contents cohere by conceptual similarity rather than being contenders for the title "End of the world", which is what most or all of those in the three sections i mentioned, and the terms redirected to the Dab, in fact are not.
--Jerzy•t 10:13, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Analysis tools

   I've just had 3 lists generated:

1. All links to the page, with the pages linked via Rdrs
2. Rdrs only ("Hide links")
3. Rdr-linkers only ("Hide Rdrs")

I think i'll annotate a list of the Rdrs with count of pages linking via each of them. Despite past bypassing of Rdrs, i'd like to see how much each Rdr is currently used (8 of 19 are non-zero). And also how many of the direct links to the Dab page (a different 19!) can be disambiguated by bypassing it to existing articles. More to come.
--Jerzy•t 10:41, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

   The following articles linking directly to the Dab page should have their respective links bypassed:

Christian eschatology
Jerry B. Jenkins
Last days
List of Rugrats episodes
The Horn Blows at Midnight
World War III (film)
Grand Unification (album)
Ninja Gaiden (arcade)
Hades in Christianity
Photon belt
The War of the End of the World
Depopulation of cockroaches in the ex-USSR countries
Villa Dulce
So Get Up
Outline of theology
Cult of Nostradamus
Malamorenò (song)
Jan Latosz
Le Dernier Homme

   I've retargeted End of Time and End of time (each with abt a half dozen uses) to The End of Time (disambiguation). Some of the uses of them seem well served by End time, but i haven't done the bypassing. The senses intended by other uses are so obscure that i created red-blue-combo entries with the using pages as the respective blue links, so that the Dab entries at least clarify the context for other editors who want to consider creating or identifying appropriate articles to replace the Dab-links with. I consider that avoiding dumping their readers into the semantic wilderness of the Eotw Dab that i found constitutes a substantial improvement re the handling of un-dab'd Eot links.
   End of all life is an unused Rdr to Eotw. It probably has the wrong target, but it's harmless until someone uses it, and that will help clarify whether the current target is sensible.
   Otherwise, i've left in place i think 16 versions of Eotw that differ as to casing, use of "the", and substituting "Earth" or "planet Earth" for "world". And as i worked, my commitment to bypassing Dabs has waned, so i think that's it for my attention to that problem here.
--Jerzy•t 07:02, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Remaining issues

   Besides the bypassing already mentioned, the Dab is still not cleaned up. It was pretending to be a Dab, bcz was neither disambiguating a single base title, nor a group of titles distinguished from one another by trivial differences; it was listing several base titles that are clearly distinct but each have end time as one of the competing senses. It is still a largely non-compliant Dab, but its problems no longer include having been subverted away from the core purpose of Dabs.
--Jerzy•t 07:02, 19 November 2011 (UTC)