Talk:Day of the Dead

Template:Vital article

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Emilydu (article contribs). This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): S.violetgrass (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Emilyelizabeth20, Collegekid2020.

removed link

Removed external link. The link is a pice of shit and the site is not in English nor in Spanish (looks like Chinese)Días de los Muertos photo and information site.

me mum diedlolhaha

<img src="http://ww3.sinaimg.cn/mw600/006XNEY7gy1fwts00ri02j30w319e43a.jpg">

The Day of the Dead

The day of the dead is when ppl from mexico, south america and even Russia and Spain celebrate their family members that have passed. now it is important to remember that The movie 'COCO' is not a good reference for this; that movie just ridiculous this amazing holiday asn i just wanna point out that The day of the dead is cool and all but when coca had jason derulo musicians that got me mad, like no hate against him but he just didn't belong is this terrible movie he can do better and i just think cocoa is disrespectful as it teaches kids about COCO like what even is that like come on Pixar or disney yall are getting trash like plz stop ok??????? Now for sports: The dodgers suck cuz they got beasten by the Red soxs i think bc they didnt drink that koolaid!!! oh and lonzo ball is the greatest PG ever yall just be haters!!! Quavo is lit same with Migos and Travis Scott. President Donald Trump certainly knows how to direct attention where he wants it. When he raised the idea of issuing an executive order to end birthright citizenship for the children of illegal immigrants, it became a top news story. Because of these remarks, and other provocative comments from members of his party about immigration, the change in Republican attitudes on the issue since George W. Bush’s pro-immigration presidency is obvious to all.

But there has been a major, if lower-profile, shift on the Democratic side as well. You can see it in the polls. In 2005, an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll found Democrats evenly divided about immigration, with 45 percent saying it strengthened the country and 44 percent saying it weakened it. By 2017, a huge 81 percent majority said it strengthened the country and only 16 percent dissented.

As is often the case, the evolution of Democratic attitudes can also be seen by tracking Hillary Clinton’s comments over the years. When she first ran for president, from 2006 through 2008, she was careful to take a moderate tack. She opposed giving driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants, came out for “tougher employer sanctions” to deter the hiring of illegal immigrants, and toggled between calling them “illegal” and “undocumented” immigrants.

During her second run, under pressure from Bernie Sanders, she came out for driver’s licenses and apologized for using the term “illegal immigrants.” Talk of employer sanctions fell away. (Sanders himself, by the way, has also “evolved” on immigration.)

Both conviction and strategy propelled the Democratic change. As conservative Democrats have become conservative Republicans, there were fewer and fewer voters and politicians inside their coalition inclined toward restraint.

Many Democrats became convinced, as well, that a strong pro-immigration stand could help them win elections because it would appeal to Hispanics, a growing share of the electorate. The white working-class voters whom that stand might alienate were, in contrast, a shrinking share.

At the same time, support for immigration became more and more associated with cherished values such as tolerance, openness and opposition to racism; support for restrictions on it, with intolerance, closed-mindedness and bigotry. The familiar dynamic of polarization also took hold: The issue became a mark of distinction between the parties, and a desire to crack down on illegal immigration and cut legal immigration became something Democrats linked with their partisan enemies.

One way of reading the data is that Democrats have led public opinion toward greater support for immigration. Independents and Republicans, too, became more likely to regard it as a net plus for the country between 2005 and 2017. Their shift was, however, much smaller than the Democratic one.

Democrats may, however, have moved too far for their own good. The public still shows some ambivalence. Only a minority of Americans wants an increase in immigration levels.

While most Americans favor granting legal status to illegal immigrants who have put down roots and behaved well here, some members of that majority doubtless fear that a continuing refusal to enforce the law means that one amnesty will be followed by more. Americans are also open to combining an amnesty with some of the changes that Trump wants, such as ending the visa lottery designed to increase diversity.

Democrats also seem to be failing to make the favorable trade between the white working class and Hispanics that they had expected. For some voters, the new rhetoric, which emphasizes the harshness of deportation and downplays the necessity of enforcement, signals indifference to the rule of law and to their opinions. The abandonment of the old, more balanced approach has lent credibility to Trump’s claim that Democrats favor “open borders.”

The president has used the opening Democrats have given him to push for policies that are also out of step with public opinion. Most Americans do not approve of his job performance on immigration. Even more disliked the separation of families at the border. Support for birthright citizenship seems to have risen in recent years. That is all BYe

Please Add

Dia de los muertos

DATE FOR THIS ARTICLE

WHERE ARE THE DATES FOR THE DAY OF THE DEAD YOU NEED TO ADD IT WIKIPEDIA

1818300080010208

2409:4063:238A:D6A0:DC:558F:4DAB:6A5E (talk) 06:29, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. --TheImaCow (talk) 07:32, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 September 2021

Im pretty sure day of the dead dates back at least a 1,000 years to several Catholic countries of Europe (Italy, Spain, France, England (before leaving Catholic church) Germany (before leaving Catholic Church), Malta, and probably others) and somewhat tied to their former pagan religions. Some of these countries were not unified 1,000 years ago but still celebrated in their former city states. This holiday was definitely not created in Mexico as it is a fairly new country speaking in terms of current countries in the world and a relative new receiver of the Catholic faith as the Spanish Colonizers did not arrive to Mexico until about the early 1500s. 2600:387:F:461A:0:0:0:2 (talk) 21:34, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 21:40, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 October 2021

Dia de los muertos is not just a Mexican holiday or celebrated in areas where there are mexican people, it is an Aztec holiday and celebrated by people all over Mexico and Central America. 70.118.16.99 (talk) 04:22, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

 Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (talk) 04:56, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Deletion of all references to specialist studies on Dia de Muertos

Any reason to mass delete specialist Mexican studies on the origins and history of Dia de Muertos, particularly during the 20th century beyond WP:JDL? Looks like a case of nationalist censorship here. Ricardo Perez Montfort and Elsa Malvido seem to be top experts on the topic. Do their findings hurt "Aztec" sensibilities? --Cristodelosgitanos (talk) 19:01, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Any reason to go against WP:BMB? (CC) Tbhotch^™ 19:15, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Yes. Absolutely. The article seemed pretty stable, presumably under your watch. It gave a detailed and sourced account of the history and development of the Day of the Dead with high grade sources: expert Mexican historians from the Mexican Institute of Anthropology and History. Is there a reason for ravaging the article? Is there any question on quality of sourcing or just WP:JDL? Isn't just better to add opposing views from quality academic sources than delete those we are unhappy with? --Cristodelosgitanos (talk) 19:24, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Now that all of these investigations have ended, I suggest the blanked sources on the origins and history of the day of the dead - particularly its development in the 19th and 20th century be restored or rewritten. I see no reason for deleting them and the account which blanked this section seems to be inactive. I will wait for a couple of days before editing the article. This mass blanking of the most interesting and well-sourced part of this article, presumably for ideological reasons, is not an improvement. Cristodelosgitanos (talk) 18:37, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

@Cristodelosgitanos: You need a WP:consensus to restore your preferred version. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 19:05, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

I do not have a preferred version. I just notice there is entire section of this article has been blanked by a single-edit account which is no longer active. Unless someone provides me with a valid argument not to, I will proceed with a draft section reintroducing sourced information regarding the history and development of the day of the dead in the 20th century. I will not revert the entire edit (not all of it seems negative), simply recover some of the lost sources in the "origins" section. I'll give a day or two out of courtesy before proceeding, since there may be other editors who wish to provide their input. Cristodelosgitanos (talk) 08:11, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 30 October 2021

Substitute --Dia dos Fiéis Defuntos (Portuguese: "Day of the Faithful Deceased")-- for --Dia de Finados (Portuguese: "Day of the Deceased")--. I'm a brazilian who's lived in Brasília, Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo and I have NEVER heard of Dia dos Fiéis Defuntos, maybe that's how it's called in Portugal.

Sources: https://www.saopaulo.sp.gov.br/spnoticias/confira-o-funcionamento-dos-servicos-estaduais-no-feriado-de-finados/ https://www.gov.br/pt-br/noticias/financas-impostos-e-gestao-publica/2021/01/governo-divulga-feriados-e-pontos-facultativos-de-2021

One is from State Government of São Paulo the other is from Brazilian government. Both address the holiday as "Finados" 2804:7F0:C83:3959:3CEC:42B2:E05B:5101 (talk) 21:36, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

 Partly done Added as a synonym. The Portuguese article (pt:Dia dos Fiéis Defuntos) has that name though. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 05:13, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 November 2021

Day of The Dead does not take place October 31st, it always has been November 1st and 2nd. Blitz777 (talk) 15:44, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

 Not done "though other days, such as 6th November, may be included depending on the locality". (CC) Tbhotch^™ 18:56, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 November 2021

When I was reading this article, I thought I missed something, but this sentence in the first paragraph is worded very badly.

"It largely originated in Mexico,[1] where it is mostly observed, but also in other places, especially by people of Mexican heritage elsewhere."

The first three clauses (It... places) suggest that Day of the Dead originated and is mostly observed in Mexico, but it also originated in other places. Based on the latter part, I think the original author intended to say that Day of the Dead originated and is mostly observed in Mexico, and is also observed in other places, especially by people of Mexican heritage. This is too many ideas for one sentence. I think it should be split into two sentences detailing origin and observance separately. Nameart1 (talk) 12:45, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 16:29, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 2 November 2021 (2)

38.141.38.60 (talk) 16:25, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

Day of the dead starts on November 1st not October 31.

 Not done Refer to the sources at the end of the sentence. (CC) Tbhotch^™ 05:05, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 November 2021

Hey, just wanted to include or ask someone to include a sentence on Día de los Muertos observance in the US, specifically pertaining to the observance by President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and First Lady Dr. Jill Biden placing the first ever Día de los Muertos altar at the White House from 1-2 Nov. 2021.

Source (images included): https://twitter.com/LaCasaBlanca/status/1455331550820700162?s=20 AnaboliQueer (talk) 03:56, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

@AnaboliQueer:  Done –MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 14:55, 4 November 2021 (UTC)