Misplaced Pages

Talk:Sweetest Day: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 03:33, 13 December 2006 editIsotope23 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users16,870 edits Digital scan images: Comment← Previous edit Latest revision as of 21:44, 9 February 2024 edit undoCewbot (talk | contribs)Bots7,512,855 editsm Maintain {{WPBS}} and vital articles: 2 WikiProject templates. Create {{WPBS}}. Keep majority rating "Start" in {{WPBS}}. Remove 1 same rating as {{WPBS}} in {{WikiProject Holidays}}.Tag: Talk banner shell conversion 
(98 intermediate revisions by 38 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Old AfD multi|page=Sweetest Day|date=30 August 2006|result='''Keep'''}}
{{calm talk}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start|
{{WikiProject Holidays|importance=}}
{{WikiProject United States}}
}}
{{archives|auto=yes}}


== Need more details ==
{| class="messagebox standard-talk" style="text-align:center;"
| width="48px" | ] || This article was nominated for ] {{#if:30 August 2006|on 30 August 2006|recently}}. The result of ] was '''Keep'''.
|}<!-- From Template:Oldafdfull -->


This article doesn't have nearly enough information. First of all, who celebrates the Sweetest Day and how do they celebrate it? Do people give candy, jewelry, flowers or other gifts? Is it mainly lovers that give these gifts or mainly family, friends, coworkers, etc.? Do people wear special colors on the Sweetest Day? Do they go on dates with their lover? Do they hold parties? In Pennsylvania we don't celebrate this holiday and I don't understand how it is celebrated. Please add more info!
<!--modified Archivebox begins-->
{| class="infobox" width="150px"
|-
! align="center" | ]<br />]
----
|-
| align="center" |
''']'''


Thanks!
''']'''


== Where is it celebrated? ==
''']'''
|}<!--modified Archivebox ends-->


Grew up in Indiana in the 60s and 70s and never heard of this holiday - moved away for 30 years and came back 10+ years ago and still don't hear about anyone celebrating it. In fact, have lived all around the country and the only place I've ever lived where it is conspicuously celebrated is Cleveland which just happens to be where apparently this thing started.
==General cleanup==
I'm doing some general cleanup here to tighten up the article per the ]. My hope is to eventually get this into shape to be a FA or at least a ] considering the fact that several news stories were written around Sweetest Day and they appear to have used this article as a starting point.--] 18:43, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


== Comment from {{user|Miracleimpulse}} ==
* Considering that several news articles have referenced this article, perhaps you should stop editing out the facts:


<small>I'm moving this here from ]. ] (]) 17:40, 11 January 2007 (UTC)</small>
Here is the complete New York Times article from October 8, 1922:
* This article should '''not''' be supported by WikiProject Holidays because Sweetest Day is '''not''' a ]; it is an annual ] sponsored by industry. Sweetest Day has never occurred without first being promoted by industry. ] 05:39, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
:*I wasn't aware there was a Holiday Wikiproject, or that they in anyway were supporting (or are even aware of) this article. It's never referred to as a "holiday" in the article other than when it is called a "Hallmark holiday". It is part of the Holiday category, but unless you take an extremely narrow definition of what "holiday" means, in reality most Americans don't make much distinction between holiday, observance, and celebration. If your problem is with the Holiday category I can point you to ] ] of ] that ] ] the ] ] of ]. Beyond that, what the observance is today is quite different from its apparent origins no matter what story you believe, much like <s>St. Valentine's Day</s> ], ], and ] are all considerably different today than their origin.--] 18:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
:*I think "supported by" is the wrong wording. I changed it to "within the scope of", to match the other WikiProject banners. --] 19:00, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
::The banner basically implies that the article will be monitored for improvement and/or vandalism by the project, with perhaps additional work on improvement, references, copyediting, and so on. The specific origins of any holiday are often open to question, and I very seriously doubt if this was the first "commercial" holiday. In fact, I'm virtually certain it isn't. Whether it is or isn't however, it would probably be a violation of NPOV to not include the article within the scope of the project, as it is included in the ] and its subcategories, which are the scope of the project. And, it is only a recently revitalized project, so I can easily believe you hadn't heard of it before. ] 19:14, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
:::To be honest I have not paid too much attention to most Wikiprojects outside of Wikiproject:Schools so there is probably a lot I don't know in that regard. Anyway, input on this article is always appreciated.--] 19:20, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
How does this then differ from Valentines Day and Mothers Day - two holidays that owe themselves to the greeting card industry. BTW, I was born in Detroit and grew up in Indiana, and I never even heard of this holiday (or whatever it is) until I lived in Cleveland and have never heard of it since moving from there.] (]) 20:44, 20 July 2009 (UTC)


==Comparison to Valentine's Day==
CANDY DAY TO SPREAD SWEETNESS SATURDAY
isn't this kinda exactly like valentines day?] 19:04, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
:I think I commented about this earlier as well (might be in an archived talk page now). I had no idea Sweetest Day had anything to do with candy, aside from chocolate covered strawberries, until I read this article. Judging by all the red hearts and roses, I just assumed it was another excuse to buy cards and flowers for your "sweetie." --] 04:45, 16 February 2007 (UTC)


==I've commented out the commons link for now==
Stores Manufacturing on Premises Are to Give Souvenirs of product.
The commons site for Sweetest Day is being used to push the same ] that was rejected by consensus in this article. Sorry, but you can't use commons as a go around for consensus here {{user|Miracleimpulse}}. You are trying to make the same arguments based on the same sources that were repeatedly rejected and disproven on this talkpage. Until this is resolved at commons, the link should stay out. I've commented out the link for the time being.--] 17:25, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
::Beyond that, commons links go at the bottom, where I commented out, not at the top where you keep adding it Miracle. As I said earlier, as long as you are pushing the same original research that was rejected here at the commons gallery, the link should not appear here. Commons isn't a way for you to circumvent the consensus against your version.--] 00:24, 24 February 2007 (UTC)


* The Commons Sweetest Day gallery is now protected. I am re-inserting the link. ] 23:43, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Candy day will be celebrated throughout the United States on Saturday next. The Confectioners' and Ice Cream Manufacturers' Protective Association announced yesterday that it has completed plans for popularizing the day in New York. There are about 1,800 candy stores in this city, and about 550 are members of the association and manufacture most of the candy they sell.
::As it's been stated numerous times before, Commons links go down in the external links section... I've uncommented the correct link at the bottom.--] 02:33, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


==Dead American Greetings Sweetest Day link==
In every one of the members' stores special displays will be arranged, and each customer will receive souvenirs, E. A. G. Intemann Jr., President of the association said. Pa, Ma, and the kiddies will all be supplied with a piece of home-made candy, mostly in the form of peppermint sticks. There has been so much interest manifest among confectioners and such enthusiasm over candy day that the association has offered prizes for the best display of candy manufactured on the premises and for the most artistic piece of candy manufactured. Mr. Intemann said that the candy entered in the competition would, in his opinion, be masterpieces of the candymaking art.


Why should a Misplaced Pages article contain a link to a cached version of an otherwise dead promotional link from American Greetings? Is this advertising at any cost? ] 23:43, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
"Let Candy Day be a time when everyone feels young again," he said. "Everybody likes candy, and we all want to make the day one of happiness for all; a day to bring back the memory of the time when a pilgrimage to the candy store for a stick of peppermint or a hunk of molasses taffy was an event to be looked forward to. I recall even now the childish pleasure I derived from a visit to the little store in our block and the pride with which I returned home attached to a stick of candy.
:It seems informative, and providing a link to the cache seems more valuable than just deleting it (especially since you seemed to revel in its going dead - POV????) ] 00:10, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


== Suggested changes to the Sweetest Day article ==
"I met a man the other day who said when he heard of Candy Day that it recalled just those things to his mind, and he started out to see whether he could still find the particular kind of candy that used to delight him. He did, and so it is not so very far-fetched to say that Candy Day will revive our youth.


The following changes should be made to the Sweetest Day article:
"The association wants to see Candy Day firmly established, and the public can rest assured that, so far as this organization is concerned, the day will not be made an excuse for gouging. Prices will remain the same as on every other day. What we do want, however, is to see every man, woman and child enjoy candy on next Saturday."


===Removal of industry promotional statements===
Although Candy Day was instituted in 1915, the confectioners made no effort to celebrate it. This was because of the war, and later because of the sugar situation. Saturday, Mr. Intemann says, will be New York's first real Candy Day.
The following industry promotional statements should be removed from the Sweetest Day article:


* '''Sweetest Day''' is an ] celebrated primarily in the ] and parts of the Northeast United States on the third Saturday in ]<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.sptimes.com/2006/10/21/Floridian/A_sweet_day_for_Hallm.shtml |title=A sweet day for Hallmark |last=Cridlin |first=Jay |date=] |publisher=St Petersburg Times |accessdate=2007-02-21}}</ref>.
* Sweetest Day/Candy Day ads for October 14, 1922 have so far been located in the New York Times, The Buffalo Evening News, The Cleveland Plain Dealer, The Cleveland Press, and The Chicago Daily News.


* It is described by Retail Confectioners International, as "much more important for candymakers in some regions than in others (Detroit, Cleveland and Buffalo being the biggest Sweetest Day cities)" and an "occasion which offers all of us an opportunity to remember not only the sick, aged and orphaned, but also friends, relatives and associates whose helpfulness and kindness we have enjoyed."<ref name="rci">, ''retailerconfectioners.org''. Retrieved on ].</ref>
Why not edit these '''facts''' into the article. ] 17:31, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment''', the fact that several news articles have referred to this article is exactly why I started cleaning it up to meet a higher standard of writing per FA & GA. The source you've stated above is already mentioned in the article (and is something you removed eariler today in your reversion). Going into the level of detail of incorporating the minutae of this into the article is unecessary and takes this article further away from style guidelines (and relevance I might add as evidenced by the anon comment above). Mention of the fact that they apparently tried to institute it in 1915 could be mentioned , but really that is the only pertinent thingsI see from that article other than mentioning that it happened. On a completely unrelated note, I'm not so sure a cut and paste job of that article is allowable even on the Talk Page. Anyone know if NYT retains copyright on their earlier works or if they've released them into the public domain and simply charge to query the archive?--] 17:47, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
:Anything published in 1922 is long out of copyright if it ever was copyrighted in the first place. Before 1977 nothing was copyrighted unless it had a copyright notice and it was fairly uncommon to copyright ordinary news articles. Even if it was copyrighted, the copyright expired in 28 years unless renewed during the last of those years, and most copyrights were not renewed. Even if it was renewed, it expired once and for all 56 years from the original copyright notice, until the law changed in 1978. ] 15:29, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
::*Good to know... thanks. I knew anything prior to '22 is PD, but I wasn't sure what the law was on renewing a copyright.--] 16:02, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


* Sweetest Day now largely involves giving small presents such as greeting cards, candy, and flowers to loved ones. While it is not as large or widely observed as ], it is still celebrated in parts of the United States, despite persistent allegations of being a "]." <ref>{{cite news | url=http://metromix.chicagotribune.com/localguide/suburbs/west/mmx-061018-west-suburbs-sweetest-day,0,7539245.story?coll=mmx-sgtop_promo |title=Sweet wine o’ mine |last=Arnett |first=Lisa |publisher=] |accessdate=2007-02-21}}</ref>
==Suppression and management of information==


These statements are all either direct quotes or are sourced to promotional or unsourced websites.
There is such an obvious effort to suppress and manage information about Sweetest Day on this page it is turning Misplaced Pages into a '''joke.''' ] 18:07, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
*] ]. The edits I and others have made to the article have been to cleanup the ], ], and ] that has been added to the article. You are the sole editor who disagrees with the consensus that has been established here time and time again. As for the photos, I've already stated numerous times that these should be in a Wikicommons Gallery with an link back to the article. I even saved one of them from deletion. How does that qualify as suppression?--] 18:17, 10 November 2006 (UTC)


Also, the references to Bill Lubinger should be removed because first of all, the Bill Lubinger article is mostly misinformation and secondly because the article no longer appears on the internet and I don't believe it was actually published in the paper version of ''The Cleveland Plain Dealer.'' If it was, please provide the page number on which it was published. ] 20:33, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
* ] Isotope. What a '''joke.''' While adding '''facts''' and information and photos to this page, my user page has been deleted and I have been blocked 3 times from editing. You have deleted most of the facts about the origins of Sweetest Day and '''sanitized''' the rest so that this article looks more like a promotional piece than an historical record. The Herbert Birch Kingston ] has been disproven about 12 different ways and yet it remains the lead sentence in the article. Advertising websites with no verification of "facts" are being used as references. Promotional statements from trade organizations are included in the article. What's happening on this page is making Misplaced Pages look like '''one big joke.''' ] 18:46, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
**'''Comment''' If you have a problem with me or my conduct here, please feel free to log an ] against me. The article talk page is the wrong forum for this.--] 18:58, 10 November 2006 (UTC)


==Image removal / '''vandalism'''==
Despite your contention this is vandalism ], this image is a large, grainy photo of a person with no strongly demonstrated sourced notability in regards to this topic. He was the chairman of the Sweetest Day Committee in Cleveland, 1921. This image adds nothing of real value to this article. At risk of this becoming a mantra I will say again: this belongs in a Wikicommons image gallery... not in the article. ], but I find it interesting you are suddenly reinserting this image into the article now that it has been nominated for deletion as orphaned fair use. The other images removed by ] I don't have a big problem with. They are smaller and don't mess up the asthetic of the article. Having one or at most two images for historical context isn't a problem, but the two images I've left in the article at least have more relevance to the topic. Hartzell is just too insignificant to justify an image in the article.--] 04:18, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


*The article has to quickly say what Sweetest Day is. "Promotional event" is POV, you don't like the word "holiday", so it is an "observence".
* Of course your edits to this page are '''vandalism''' Isotope! You have added virtually nothing to the article: you only remove things. You edit out '''facts''' which are uncomplimentary to Industry like Sweetest Day headlines from ''The New York Times'' which read ''"To Exploit Gift-Giving."'' C. C. Hartzell is quite significant to the origins of Sweetest Day. He supervised the giveaway of 10,000 boxes of candy at Cleveland's orphanages and charitable institutions in order to create a newsworthy event which would gain the attention of Clevelanders and help induce them to observe Sweetest Day. C. C. Hartzell also crowned the first ''Queen of Sweetest Day,'' 82-year-old Vera Sissons. C. C Hartzell also chaired the committee of 12 candymakers who arranged the details of Cleveland's first Sweetest Day in the year, and this is the '''fact''' you keep editing out of the article, because it contradicts the '''industry spin''' that ''Herbert Birch Kingston'' is the founder of Sweetest Day. Why don't you post a photo of '''Herbert Birch Kingston''' in the article. Why don't you introduce '''one single sourced fact''' which credits Herbert Birch Kingston with the founding of Sweetest Day. There must be one somewhere. ] was allegedly right there in Cleveland when the first Sweetest Days were promoted by industry in 1921 and 1922. Surely they took a snapshot of the '''industry icon''' who masterminded this multi-billion-dollar promotion. And if you believe the images related to Sweetest Day belong in a Wikicommons gallery, why haven't you created it. ] 04:55, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
*In order for the article to be NPOV, it has to include the quote from Retail Confectioners International, or something similiar. The article can't be an attack piece on the candy/greeting card industry.
:::I'm having a sense of deja vu here... we've had this conversation before. That removal is called editing. I've edited out original research, POV pushing, and content that takes away from this being a ] article, specifically trivial unnecessary details of the exact historical celebrations . I edited the New York Times section because it was overly bloated, focused on unimportant minutae, and overall detracted from the quality of the article. Contrary to your contention above<br>
* The last sentence states how the holiday/observence/promotional event/whatever is celebrated, and goes on to call it a "Hallmark Holiday", which is a fairly cynical turn of phrase.
::::"C. C Hartzell also chaired the committee of 12 candymakers who arranged the details of Cleveland's first Sweetest Day in the year, and ''this is the'' '''''fact''''' ''you keep editing out of the article''..."<br>
* Are you sure you want to remove the Bill Lubinger article? That is where the "concocted promotion" quote in the lead section is sourced to. If the Lubinger article goes, that goes too.
:::the article clearly states, "the first Sweetest Day was planned by a committee of 12 confectioners chaired by candymaker C. C. Hartzell." Hartzell is clearly mentioned in the article in reference to his chairmanship of the Sweetest Day committee; but he simply is not significant enough for their to be a photo of him in the article (much less a grainy, poor quality one). The rest of your post has been extensively covered here already in the archives. The article never states HBK definitively created Sweetest Day... it states the creation is attributed to him and this is sourced. As for why I have not created a gallery, these are your images that you've uploaded Miracleimpulse. I have to say that my interest level in this topic is not so great that I want to spend my time setting up an image gallery. I'm simply advising you that if you are interested it retaining these photos you should set them up into an image gallery.--] 14:03, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
--] 05:42, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
::I think all three of the images should be removed. They are grainy, poor quality, poorly cropped, taken from a side angle, and appear to be taken from a camera phone. These are not the kind of images that an encyclopedia article should have. Unless we can get properly scanned images of these newspaper articles, they should remain out of the article. ] 12:54, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


==Dispute==


Transfinite's comments * followed by my responses:
This article is under attack by industry spindoctors. All content including linked images should be protected. ] 23:41, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
:Under attack by industry spindoctors? You can't be serious. Whatever. For those coming here via the request for protection, this discussion would probably also be iluminating: ]. ] 00:00, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
* Protection for this page and all images has been requested . ] 23:55, 29 November 2006 (UTC)


*The article has to quickly say what Sweetest Day is. "Promotional event" is POV, you don't like the word "holiday", so it is an "observence".
:Images themselves can't be protected. And Not a dog and Tregoworth aren't unknown vandalizers, they've been here for some time. ] 00:33, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


:: "Promotional event" is in no way POV. The phrase simply states what Sweetest Day is. "Deceptive promotional event" or "a promotional event marketed through mass deception or on false pretenses" would be POV, but simply calling Sweetest Day a "promotional event" is not POV. Sweetest Day has never occurred without first being promoted by industry. Therefore it is neither a ] nor an ]. Sweetest Day is not recognized or observed by any state, local or federal government, nor is it recognized by any religion, faith or ethnic group. Sweetest Day is not even recognized by the City of Cleveland where it allegedly was founded. The only group which recognizes Sweetest Day are the industries which profit from it's promotion. I suppose we could call it an "industry observance" but "promotional event" is really more appropriate.
::I fail to understand how Miracleimpulse feels this page is "under attack by industry spindoctors" when the lead paragraph notes the following:
:::''Sweetest Day has also been referred to as a "concocted promotion" created by the candy industry solely to increase sales of candy. Persistent claims have also been made that Sweetest Day was manufactured by the American Greetings Company or Hallmark Cards in order to boost sales.''
::And it later is described as a ], a disparaging term. Seems to me that Micracleimpulse is mostly upset that her/his original research (images, etc) isn't being included in this article. Am I missing something here? ] 13:48, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


*In order for the article to be NPOV, it has to include the quote from Retail Confectioners International, or something similiar. The article can't be an attack piece on the candy/greeting card industry.
==Paranoia==
I think many of Miracleimpulses points are valid. The thesis that Sweetest Day was concocted by candy companies is credible and cited material supporting it should stay in the article. However, Miracleimpulse is being excessively paranoid towards the other editors. I don't think any of them are industry spin doctors. Does anybody here work for any candy or card related businesses?


:: Take a closer look at on Retail Confectioners International's website. Under "How It Started" Retail Confectioners International uses the standard ] to promote Sweetest Day. A verisimilitude is a highly deceptive cleverly-written statement which resembles the truth but actually is a replacement for the truth and intented to deceive. Inclusion of any industry verisimilitude in the Sweetest Day article without identifying it as such totally slants the article in favor of industry. All industry verisimilitudes should be immediately removed from the Sweetest Day article in order for the article to remain NPOV.
Anyway, the "spin doctors" are right that the article should not be cluttered with dozens of photos of old-time candy tycoons. I do think the two currently-present newspaper shots are useful as illustrations and should stay until replaced by better versions. As for verifiability, news articles from the Cleveland Plain Dealer are far more qualified as ] than promotional websites of candy and card companies. Also, newspaper articles are not primary sources by definition. Ask any history teacher. Primary sources are stuff like original documents from inside a company. That census record of that guy having a mortgage is a primary source. Newspaper articles are secondary sources, written by newspaper reporters based on original documents and interviews which are the primary sources. And unsourced materials on random web sites is basically crap.


* The last sentence states how the holiday/observence/promotional event/whatever is celebrated, and goes on to call it a "Hallmark Holiday", which is a fairly cynical turn of phrase.
It seems to me that you people are edit warring because you're mad at each other. Stuff is getting removed or edited not because there's anything wrong with it but only because the "other side" put it in. How about if you all take a break for a while and then try to approach this thing in a calmer fashion, making best efforts to be excellent to one another.
:: The term "Hallmark holiday" is actually a promotional term for Hallmark Cards. Again, to express this idea the term "promotional event" is more appropriate. The statement also includes buying suggestions, which again slants the article in favor of industry. Today Sweetest Day remains a promotional event sponsored by industry; it has not undergone some miraculous metamorphosis into a beloved holiday of any type.


* Are you sure you want to remove the Bill Lubinger article? That is where the "concocted promotion" quote in the lead section is sourced to. If the Lubinger article goes, that goes too.
] 08:11, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


:: is the Bill Lubinger article which was published online in October 2005. First of all, there was no 4-page Sweetest Day section included in ''The Cleveland Plain Dealer's'' October 8, 1921 issue. There was a 4-page Sweetest Day section included in the October 8, 1922 issue of ''The Cleveland Plain Dealer,'' however it made no mention of any of the things mentioned in Mr. Lubinger's article. Read it for yourself; it's in high-resolution. With this in mind, Mr. Lubinger's article can only be construed as being some sort of inverted promotion the purpose of which is to justify the observance of Sweetest Day. The article is 95% misinformation and deserves no mention in an encyclopedic article about Sweetest Day. During the Sweetest Day promotion of 2006 at least 3 internet websites quoted Mr. Lubinger's article because of it's inclusion in the Misplaced Pages article. Misplaced Pages should not be used to promote false information about Sweetest Day or anything else. As far as losing the phrase "concocted promotion" is concerned, that Sweetest Day is a "concocted promotion" will be evident to anyone who reads the Sweetest Day article once all the industry promotional phrases are removed.
: Thank you for your comments ]. Yes, it is my belief that most of the other editors of this article are spinning the article in favor of industry. This opinion is not a personal attack; I believe they are very good at what they are doing. Before my arrival on the scene here, none of them had ever edited the Sweetest Day article, and the read almost exactly like the ] on the back of a ] One thing I noticed was that of edit Misplaced Pages rather relentlessly, almost as if to hide their true purpose in editing Misplaced Pages. Many of them have also followed me around to each site I have edited to reverse my edits, and they even had (which I did not create) deleted. Now ] has nominated virtually every image uploaded for the Sweetest Day article, including those which have remained on the page for months The two images which have been allowed to stay in the article contain links to nearly 30 other images regarding Sweetest Day, many of which have public domain captions, news articles and editorials about the origins of Sweetest Day These images are not cluttering up the Sweetest Day page in any way, yet they are there for interested readers to review if they so choose. If a picture speaks a thousand words, ] is attempting to edit nearly 30,000 words out of the Sweetest Day article. Why would anyone wish to limit someone's access to such an abundance of available factual information? As stated before, improved quality images are on the way; I contacted ] today seeking their assistance with images for this article. ] should cease his attack and allow the new images time to arrive. The Sweetest Day article also currently contains at least three ]s, which are highly deceptive cleverly-worded promotional statements, which these editors insist must remain in the article. These verisimilitudes are all sourced to websites which advertise Sweetest Day using no real reference actually sourcing the statements. Finally, if you read the former edits of the Sweetest Day page, you will see a very clear pattern of information suppression and management. My observation of this pattern is not ]. It is perfectly ] and correct. And for the record, I am not angry at anyone: they are all ] and they are just doing their ].


:Thank you again for your comments ]. Your input is appreciated. ] 11:28, 30 November 2006 (UTC) ] 16:13, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
::For the record, I have no connection to Sweetest Day or its inudstries in any way, I don't care about Sweetest Day, and I don't really care about this article other than ensuring it meets encyclopedic standards. You'll notice my only substantive edit was a ] efforts to keep this article as encyclopedic as possible, reverting what I consider a possibly bad faith edit on the part of Miracelimpulse: (.
::My nominating photos for deletion has nothing to do with this article ''per se'', but rather are in accordance with the ]: they are all of extremely low quality (LQ), and except for the two that appear here, they are all orphaned (OR), (including many that make fair use claims that must be used in articles to be valid). ] 11:55, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
::Oh, and I consider Miracleimpulse's insinuation that I "edit Misplaced Pages rather relentlessly, almost as if to hide their true purpose in editing Misplaced Pages" an unacceptable and unbased ], similar to accusing me of being some kind of "spindoctor". I've been editing here for months, and just stumbled upon this article recently. Whatever. ] 11:58, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
:::] you have nominated for deletion every image uploaded for the article. These are 85-year-old images to begin with, reproduced from photocopies using an Apple ] camera. Grainy? Yes. Useless? No. To my knowledge these images are not reproduced anywhere else. The images also contain much information about the origins of Sweetest Day which is all in the public domain. Inclusion of these images in Misplaced Pages helps make Misplaced Pages as exceptional as it is. They are not cluttering up the article. If you don't really care about this article, please remove your deletion requests and allow the new images time to arrive. Thank you and best regards, for real. ] 12:40, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
::::I never said the images were "useless." Consensus apparently seems to be that they don't belong in the article - they are orphaned. Misplaced Pages is ] to archive photos that are not in use in articles (but perhaps ] is the place you should look to place them). They have been validly ] as LQ and OR. Please not that they are only ''nominated'' - perhaps consensus of other editors in the deletion process will determine that they should remain.] 12:49, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
*'''Comment to 67.117.130.181''' I don't think anyone has suggested that sourced material currently in the article (from Cleveland Plains Dealer for example) be removed from the article; I speak only for myself but I certainly wouldn't want to see this happen. Any information from websites has been carefully worded so it says exactly what can be factually stated based on that source. Remember, ordinary claims require ordinary sources and extraordinary claims require extraordinary sources. As for this edit war being because people are "mad at each other", I don't think that is necessarily the case. I certainly am not mad at anyone, though I must say that ]'s consistant ] are growing tiresome. This is simply about creating a fair, ], balanced article and I think the version currently in the namespace is the closest we've gotten to this goal.--] 14:26, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
:While I have not been involved in the history of this dispute, I would like to state my agreement with Isotope. The current version seems properly cited and consistent with Misplaced Pages policies. ] 14:38, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
::Agreed, I would suggest there is a legitimate ] regarding this article... ] 15:13, 30 November 2006 (UTC)


===Addition of facts===
==Anonymous industry spin doctors on Misplaced Pages==


The following facts should be added to the article:
There is every reason to believe that anonymous industry spin doctors are editing the Sweetest Day page here at Misplaced Pages and participating in this discussion. For more than a year now there has been an about Sweetest Day. Currently the thread has 263 messages in it. Now check out This individual posts regularly on the Yahoo American Greetings message board under various screen names, and it is my belief that this individual is also a participant or even several participants in this ongoing discussion about Sweetest Day here at Misplaced Pages. Until a few days ago, the photo on anonymous_spin_doctor's Yahoo profile was I believe they decided to swap the image for the sexy lady when they realized I might link this talk page with the American Greetings message board to make my point about spin doctors operating on Misplaced Pages. One way to resolve this problem is for the editors who care enough about the Sweetest Day article to make their identities public as I have. Or perhaps Misplaced Pages can investigate the issue and determine who is a ] or possible ]. It is never my intention to make a ] on anyone here at Misplaced Pages. However, I would be remiss in my responsibility as a Wikipedian if I did not bring my concerns about this issue to the attention of other Misplaced Pages editors. '''Be aware: The spin doctors are here.''' And their purpose is to manage and suppress information about this topic in order to use Misplaced Pages as a marketing tool in the promotion of Sweetest Day. ] 22:27, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
: You said "This individual posts regularly on the Yahoo American Greetings message board under various screen names" - what is your evidence, and how does that relate to any editor here? If you are concerned that a particular user has a ], you can try to present your evidence at ] (but they seem pretty strict about not doing fishing expeditions.) But, I'm curious as to your statement that you have made your identity public, since there is no such revelation on your empty ]. ] 22:50, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
:::He thinks that because he's given his real name on several occasions (Robb Thomas) that that's somehow full disclosure, thus anyone who doesn't also give their full name is in cahoots with the greeting card industry. It appears that Mr. Thomas is also a creator of greeting cards, or at least he has quite a collection on , which was linked to on one of the archive talk pages. --] 03:33, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
::::Seems he's also created a gallery of all those webcam images of old newspaper stories on the origin of Sweetest Day . ] 04:23, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
::(Oh, and jsut as a meta-comment: the fact there are 263 posts to a Yahoo Group dedicated "Sweetest Fraud" makes me chuckle a bit.) ] 22:56, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
:::Finally, that profile you linked to indicates the last change was in August, so unless they don't count changing photos as a "change" I'm confused as to your claim that the picture was just changed a few days ago (and what it is supposed to insinuate anyway). Plus, the image you claim was associated with that profile (which you just uploaded to WP ) is obviously taken at the same time and with the same camera as the other images you personally created and uploaded to wikipedia (ie, ). So, how did this Yahoo person (who you claim used to have that photo on their profile) gain access to that image, especially since it doesn't match precisely to the other one's you've uploaded? I'm very confused here. Please help me understand. ] 00:17, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
:] are you seriously suggesting that some individual created a Misplaced Pages account (or multiple accounts), edited numerous articles, all the while waiting for you to come here and edit the ] article, so they could launch into a concerted effort of sockpuppeting to thwart your edits here? That is a rather machiavellian prospect...--] 01:37, 1 December 2006 (UTC)


* 1) In 1922 Sweetest Day/Candy Day was also promoted in New York City, Chicago, Detroit, Buffalo, Cincinatti and other cities across America by the candy industry. (Note: was Herbert Birch Kingston involved in these other promotions of Sweetest Day?)
:Fanatics always seem to think that the fact that other editors don't accept all of their obsessive-compulsive original research proves that they're all on the payroll of their arch enemies and part of a massive conspiracy to suppress The Truth. ] 04:51, 1 December 2006 (UTC)


* 2) Sweetest Day was also referred to as "Candy Day," both in Cleveland and other cities where it was promoted.
== Removal of advertising statements and sources ==


* 3) Some candy giveaways for Sweetest Day were executed days before the event and then covered by local media.
Would someone please remove all statements sourced to advertising websites, including ''Retail Confectioners International'' and ''The Romantic.com.'' '''Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia not a free advertising website.''' ] 23:11, 12 December 2006 (UTC)


* 4) All candy was not given to poor people. In 1921 ''Sweetest Day in the Year Committeeman'' L. E. Gruber presented the mayor of Cleveland with a 15-pound box of candy for the mayor's wife.
*The quote from RCI is used to give thier side of the story, which is essential to make the article NPOV. TheRomantic.com isn't an "advertising site", it is a romance advice site. --] 23:46, 12 December 2006 (UTC)


* 5) In 1922 82-year-old Vera Sissons was selected by the ''Sweetest Day in the Year Committee'' to be ''Queen of the Sweetest Day.'' Ms. Sissons resided at the ''Home for Aged Women.'' Include image of Vera Sissons.
::* The purpose of both websites is to sell products for Sweetest Day. None of the statements on the websites are sourced in any way. Are you saying we need lies in the Sweetest Day article to balance the truth? Not very encyclopedic. ] 23:53, 12 December 2006 (UTC)


* 6) A list of companies which participated in the first 2 Sweetest Days in Cleveland should be included in the article, in order to demonstrate the true scope of the first Sweetest Day promotions in Cleveland. That list includes:
:::*Misplaced Pages is not in the position to call the RCI quote a "lie" without a source directly saying that. As for the external links, I've been surfing around TheRomantic.com, and besides the awful web design, they do sell lots of stuff, and link to other people who sell stuff. They seem a bit commericial to stay in External Links, and that site isn't used to cite anything in the article. I'm strongly considering removing it. The link to RCI should stay, though; it is used to cite the "official" story, which should stay in the article, even if you think it is full of dirty lies. --] 00:31, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
::::*The RCI quote should stay. I've removed theromantic.com and replaced it with the American Greetings link that was previously in External links. I also removed the 2 extraneous images that are not directly pertinent to the article. These should be in a Wikicommons Gallery. By the way, the Sweetest Day committee image is better than the one that was there before.--] 02:14, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
:::::* The statements about Sweetest Day on the websites of , and are carefully written highly deceptive ]s created to help sell Sweetest Day products. These statements are not sourced on any of the three websites because they cannot be sourced: they are deceptive statements created by marketing/advertising departments in order to sell products. As blatant and highly deceptive promotional statements, they should not be included in any encyclopedia article (even under external links) unless identified as such. Oh and Transfinite, I never said the statements were "dirty lies." They are the cleanest lies money can buy. ] 03:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC)


The Cleveland Plain Dealer Newspaper, The Cleveland Business Exchange, The Cleveland Advertising Club, Hotel Statler, Whitman's Candies, Loew's Park Theater, Loew's State Theater, The Ohio Theater, Apollo Chocolates, F.H. Roberts Company, Crane's Party Box, Ohio Confection Company, Euclid's Chocolates, Nimburger Hahn (Louis Hahn?) Candies, Shoot's Chocolates, Thurston's Magic Box Candies, Johnston's Candies, Hoffman's Candy And Ice Cream Companies, H.M.D Candies, Midland Candy Boxes, Standard Drug Stores (16 locations), Troughton's Sugar Jar Candies, Weideman's Candies, Addison Pharmacy, Alpha Pharmacy, The Bank Lunch, Benfield And Benfield (Benfield Drug Company), Bruggator And Ripley, H.D. Butler, W.W. Brown Company, Buckstein Drug Company, Cleveland Pharmacy, Deklyn's Candies, Deutch And Rosengarten, Fischer Rohr Company, Cedar Drug Company, Geiger Moss Drug Company, Geraldine Ferrar Company, Gerson Drug Company, Glick's Candies, Gordon Square Pharmacy, Hough Avenue Drug Company, The J.M. Gasser Company, Kappus Drug Store, Lakewood Pharmacy, Lake Shore Pharmacy, Liggett's Pharmacy, Marshall's Drug Stores (26 locations), Maxixe Cherries, Miller's Drug Stores, Parkgate Pharmacy, Price Drug Company, J.G. Reed And Company, M. Rinzler, Ritter's Candies, Seltzer Drug Company, G. Schneider-Richards Company, The Superior Peanut Company, H.M. Stage Company, Andrew E. Walleck Company, Weinberger-Euclid Drug Company, J.L. Westaway Company, Winton Hotel Drug Company, W.L.Wilson Company, Wyandotte Pharmacy, Wrigleys Gum, Reymer's Chocolates and BonBons, Edwards Candies, MacDiarmids Candies, Phelp's Candy, Mary Lincoln Candy Company, The Cross Candy Company, Forbes Chocolate Company, M. S. Stores, Romance Chocolates by The Wynne Wood, The Orient Company (baskets for candy), The Geo. H. Bowman Company, The May Company, Bailey's Department Store, Benedict's (dancing), Huyler's Candies, Martha Washington Candies, Bordens Chocolates, Schrafft's Chocolates, Playhouse Chocolates, Stranahan Brothers Company, Jackson-Trace Company, Beeman's Pepsin Gum, The Handy Service Store, and Ex-Lax (The Sweet Chocolate Laxative), Fanny Farmer Candies, The Loft, Inc.
== Digital scan images ==


More to come! ] 21:35, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
* Isotope, "old folks" like Vera Sissons and newsboys like "Jimmy" are already mentioned in the article, and their role (they were used as promotional tools) in the creation of Sweetest Day should be further detailed in the article. You guys better brace yourselves: there are a lot more digital scans on the way...this will ultimately become a factual article about Sweetest Day. ] 03:21, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

**Including an excessive number of images, particularly with respect to the overall article length, would give ] to one aspect of the matter and would be inappropriate. I continue to be concerned by your seemingly unceasing desire to edit Misplaced Pages only with respect to this one narrow topic or group of topics; you remain a ] and your conduct continues to be troublesome. ] 03:25, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
===Removal of holiday infobox===
***I had an edit conflict here, but I agree wholeheartedly with what ] just said. Those images add nothing of value to the article; they are extraneous in nature. Your rationale for including those images because "old folks" and "newsboys" are mentioned in the article is faulty ]. We don't add a picture of Cleveland in the article just because the city is mentioned there. Extraneous images that are related to the topic should be in a Wikicommons gallery.--] 03:33, 13 December 2006 (UTC)--] 03:33, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Sweetest Day is not a holiday it is an annual promotional event. Addition of the holiday infobox is purely promotional. It contains buying suggestions for Sweetest Day. ] 21:47, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I think I'll comment on this, since I am the one who added the thing. The observence part I tried to make NPOV, by including what the "industry" said it was for ("Remembering friends and loved ones"), and what it seems to be actually about: buying cheap useless junk. The ] article says the observences are "Sending greeting cards and gifts, dating". If you think the wording should change from "buying" to "sending", I have no problem with that. Besides that, I don't see the problem. It has the area it is celebrated/promoted in (which is sourced info), type (which is required for that template), and the date it happens on. --] 05:10, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

:: Again, Sweetest Day is neither a ] nor an ] anywhere. A promotional event does not warrant a holiday box, unless of course you are trying to deceive people into believing that the promotional event is in fact a holiday. Also, there is no referenced information stating that Sweetest Day is celebrated anywhere. That information is industry promotional hype and deserves no mention in an encyclopedic article. The holiday box has got to go! ] 16:16, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
:::Um, Sweetest Day is ''observed'' by a large number of people, ergo, it is an ''''. That's a neutral description of the event. ANd confirms (from a ]) that the day is observed. ] 16:42, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
:::: confirms that Sweetest Day was created by industry and is therefore a '''promotional event.''' The definition of states that an observance is "The custom of celebrating a holiday or similar occasion." Under "similar occasion" it states "An occurrence or condition of affairs which brings with it some unlooked-for event; that which incidentally brings to pass an event, without being its efficient cause or sufficient reason; accidental or incidental cause." This aptly describes the '''event''' called Sweetest Day. We have determined that Sweetest Day does not qualify as a ]. The term which best describes Sweetest Day is '''event,''' and given that Sweetest Day has never occurred without first being promoted by industry, it is best referred to as a '''promotional event.''' I have no problem with the first statement in the article reading: "Sweetest Day is the observance of an industry-generated promotional event." Sweetest Day is a '''promotional event''' which masquerades as a holiday, and for the Misplaced Pages article to call it a holiday or an observance furthers this industry deception. In order for the Sweetest Day article to remain NPOV and not promote the industry agenda, Sweetest Day must be defined as an event only, specifically an industry-generated promotional event. Again, the holiday box should be deleted immediately. ] 17:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
:::::I don't think anyone here would deny that Sweetest Day was created by industry (it isn't a naturally occurring phenomenon). But that doesn't mean it isn't "observed" - just like ] is observed, or Martin Luther King day, or ], or ]...all of which were created by some entity (whether industry, government, or religion is irrelevant to its social construction). As you say, it is an "event" - and event that is "observed". 'nuff said. ] 22:53, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
::::::Plenty of events are observed. This does not mean they are categorized as "observances." Above all, Sweetest Day is a '''promotional event''' and should be categorized as such in this article. Categorizing Sweetest Day as either an observance or a holiday slants the article in favor of the industry agenda. Industry has been promoting Sweetest Day on false pretenses for over 80 years. Misplaced Pages should not be used (as it has been for the past several years) to promote Sweetest Day on these false pretenses. Sweetest Day is a '''promotional event.''' End of story. ] 23:29, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
:::::::Yeah, and plenty of events are promoted, that doesn't mean they all should be categorized as "promotional events". Above all, Sweetest Day is a day that is observed, and should be categorized as such in this article. Categorzing Sweetest Day as an promotional event slants the article in favor of your anti-industry agenda. (right back at ya!). :) ] 00:02, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
:::::::: So: '''Sweetest Day''' is the observance of a promotional event sponsored by industry. Problem solved, compromise reached. Now let's change the article. ] 00:18, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
:::::::::Where is your evidence that it's ''not'' an observance? You keep going on and on at length about the ''origins'' of the so-called "event," but that has no bearing on how it's celebrated ''today''. Come here to Cleveland on the third Saturday of October and you'll see plenty of Valentine's gunk rebranded for Sweetest Day at drug stores and floral shops. Other than maybe Malley's, I've not heard one peep from candymakers about Sweetest Day here. It's all the card and floral shops that jump into the marketing blitz. I've been to more than one restaurant that served free chocolate-covered strawberries on Sweetest Day. Or are you going to claim that American Greetings is in cahoots with the food service industry too? --] 03:25, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
:::::::::: The food service industry, the flower industry, the jewelry industry, the greeting card industry, the candy industry and others: all are '''promotors of Sweetest Day.''' Each and every year since 1921 the promotion of Sweetest Day has preceded the alleged "observance." World War II did not interrupt the promotion of Sweetest Day. Vietnam did not interrupt the promotion of Sweetest Day. Industry has now promoted Sweetest Day 7 times since the events of 9/11/2001. First and foremost, Sweetest Day is a '''promotional event''' and should be categorized as such by this Misplaced Pages article. Unless of course Misplaced Pages is also being used by industry as a tool for the promotion of Sweetest Day. ] 13:46, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
::::::::::: By that definition the Christian Churches are not an appropriate source for discussion of ] or ], because they are promoters of those holidays. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 14:09, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
:::::::::::: Hello ]! Why did you delete the Herbert Birch Kingston US census forms from Misplaced Pages without nomination or debate? What kind of impartial admin action was that?? ] 14:15, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

BOYS vs GIRLS
As I write this, the article says "This holiday is celebrated by boys since girls mostly celebrate valentines day". As a person who observed this day growing up in Detroit, I have to say that the statement is not true. Furthermore, males and females both celebrate valentines day. In both cases candy and cards are given to loved ones of any gender. This sentence should be removed. <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (]) 01:49, 23 October 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

{{reflist-talk}}

== Detroit ==

Detroit attributes Sweetest Day to Fred Sanders. There's Freep articles to source from. ] (]) 13:30, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't live in the area that observes "Sweetest Day", but my grandparents did. They also grew up in and around that era. I must agree, it may not seem deserving of recognition to some. But to those whom grew up with it and passed it down, it is a part of their memories and maybe some heritage. I say leave it be. It is as much a special day as some of the other days that are concidered "holidays"; only it is not nationally observed. So what. Like I said to someone or to someone's family memories, it is special. Let it stay where others, wheither they observe it or not, can stumble across a marking in history. Cheffy74 <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 12:54, 11 March 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
This holiday is pretty strange.... seems to me like another excuse for Valentine's Day.

== External links modified ==

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to {{plural:1|one external link|1 external links}} on ]. Please take a moment to review . If necessary, add {{tlx|cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{tlx|nobots|deny{{=}}InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070310152505/http://metromix.chicagotribune.com:80/localguide/suburbs/west/mmx-061018-west-suburbs-sweetest-day,0,7539245.story?coll=mmx-sgtop_promo to http://metromix.chicagotribune.com/localguide/suburbs/west/mmx-061018-west-suburbs-sweetest-day,0,7539245.story?coll=mmx-sgtop_promo

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the ''checked'' parameter below to '''true''' to let others know.

{{sourcecheck|checked=false}}

Cheers. —]<small><sub style="margin-left:-14.9ex;color:green;font-family:Comic Sans MS">]:Online</sub></small> 10:09, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 21:44, 9 February 2024

Articles for deletionThis article was nominated for deletion on 30 August 2006. The result of the discussion was Keep.
This article is rated Start-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject iconHolidays
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Holidays, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of holidays on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HolidaysWikipedia:WikiProject HolidaysTemplate:WikiProject HolidaysHolidays
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconUnited States
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
Archiving icon
Archives

1, 2, 3, 4


Need more details

This article doesn't have nearly enough information. First of all, who celebrates the Sweetest Day and how do they celebrate it? Do people give candy, jewelry, flowers or other gifts? Is it mainly lovers that give these gifts or mainly family, friends, coworkers, etc.? Do people wear special colors on the Sweetest Day? Do they go on dates with their lover? Do they hold parties? In Pennsylvania we don't celebrate this holiday and I don't understand how it is celebrated. Please add more info!

Thanks!

Where is it celebrated?

Grew up in Indiana in the 60s and 70s and never heard of this holiday - moved away for 30 years and came back 10+ years ago and still don't hear about anyone celebrating it. In fact, have lived all around the country and the only place I've ever lived where it is conspicuously celebrated is Cleveland which just happens to be where apparently this thing started.

Comment from Miracleimpulse (talk · contribs)

I'm moving this here from Talk:Sweetest Day/Comments. ZimZalaBim (talk) 17:40, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

  • I wasn't aware there was a Holiday Wikiproject, or that they in anyway were supporting (or are even aware of) this article. It's never referred to as a "holiday" in the article other than when it is called a "Hallmark holiday". It is part of the Holiday category, but unless you take an extremely narrow definition of what "holiday" means, in reality most Americans don't make much distinction between holiday, observance, and celebration. If your problem is with the Holiday category I can point you to all sorts of "holidays" that don't meet the traditional meaning of holiday. Beyond that, what the observance is today is quite different from its apparent origins no matter what story you believe, much like St. Valentine's Day Valentines Day, Christmas, and St. Patricks Day are all considerably different today than their origin.--Isotope23 18:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
  • I think "supported by" is the wrong wording. I changed it to "within the scope of", to match the other WikiProject banners. --Transfinite 19:00, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
The banner basically implies that the article will be monitored for improvement and/or vandalism by the project, with perhaps additional work on improvement, references, copyediting, and so on. The specific origins of any holiday are often open to question, and I very seriously doubt if this was the first "commercial" holiday. In fact, I'm virtually certain it isn't. Whether it is or isn't however, it would probably be a violation of NPOV to not include the article within the scope of the project, as it is included in the Category:Holidays and its subcategories, which are the scope of the project. And, it is only a recently revitalized project, so I can easily believe you hadn't heard of it before. Badbilltucker 19:14, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
To be honest I have not paid too much attention to most Wikiprojects outside of Wikiproject:Schools so there is probably a lot I don't know in that regard. Anyway, input on this article is always appreciated.--Isotope23 19:20, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

How does this then differ from Valentines Day and Mothers Day - two holidays that owe themselves to the greeting card industry. BTW, I was born in Detroit and grew up in Indiana, and I never even heard of this holiday (or whatever it is) until I lived in Cleveland and have never heard of it since moving from there.Jmdeur (talk) 20:44, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Comparison to Valentine's Day

isn't this kinda exactly like valentines day?24.144.137.244 19:04, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I think I commented about this earlier as well (might be in an archived talk page now). I had no idea Sweetest Day had anything to do with candy, aside from chocolate covered strawberries, until I read this article. Judging by all the red hearts and roses, I just assumed it was another excuse to buy cards and flowers for your "sweetie." --Birdhombre 04:45, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I've commented out the commons link for now

The commons site for Sweetest Day is being used to push the same original research that was rejected by consensus in this article. Sorry, but you can't use commons as a go around for consensus here Miracleimpulse (talk · contribs). You are trying to make the same arguments based on the same sources that were repeatedly rejected and disproven on this talkpage. Until this is resolved at commons, the link should stay out. I've commented out the link for the time being.--Isotope23 17:25, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Beyond that, commons links go at the bottom, where I commented out, not at the top where you keep adding it Miracle. As I said earlier, as long as you are pushing the same original research that was rejected here at the commons gallery, the link should not appear here. Commons isn't a way for you to circumvent the consensus against your version.--Isotope23 00:24, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
As it's been stated numerous times before, Commons links go down in the external links section... I've uncommented the correct link at the bottom.--Isotope23 02:33, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Dead American Greetings Sweetest Day link

Why should a Misplaced Pages article contain a link to a cached version of an otherwise dead promotional link from American Greetings? Is this advertising at any cost? Miracleimpulse 23:43, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

It seems informative, and providing a link to the cache seems more valuable than just deleting it (especially since you seemed to revel in its going dead - POV????) Not a dog 00:10, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Suggested changes to the Sweetest Day article

The following changes should be made to the Sweetest Day article:

Removal of industry promotional statements

The following industry promotional statements should be removed from the Sweetest Day article:

  • It is described by Retail Confectioners International, as "much more important for candymakers in some regions than in others (Detroit, Cleveland and Buffalo being the biggest Sweetest Day cities)" and an "occasion which offers all of us an opportunity to remember not only the sick, aged and orphaned, but also friends, relatives and associates whose helpfulness and kindness we have enjoyed."
  • Sweetest Day now largely involves giving small presents such as greeting cards, candy, and flowers to loved ones. While it is not as large or widely observed as Valentine's Day, it is still celebrated in parts of the United States, despite persistent allegations of being a "Hallmark holiday."

These statements are all either direct quotes or are sourced to promotional or unsourced websites.

Also, the references to Bill Lubinger should be removed because first of all, the Bill Lubinger article is mostly misinformation and secondly because the article no longer appears on the internet and I don't believe it was actually published in the paper version of The Cleveland Plain Dealer. If it was, please provide the page number on which it was published. Miracleimpulse 20:33, 3 March 2007 (UTC)


  • The article has to quickly say what Sweetest Day is. "Promotional event" is POV, you don't like the word "holiday", so it is an "observence".
  • In order for the article to be NPOV, it has to include the quote from Retail Confectioners International, or something similiar. The article can't be an attack piece on the candy/greeting card industry.
  • The last sentence states how the holiday/observence/promotional event/whatever is celebrated, and goes on to call it a "Hallmark Holiday", which is a fairly cynical turn of phrase.
  • Are you sure you want to remove the Bill Lubinger article? That is where the "concocted promotion" quote in the lead section is sourced to. If the Lubinger article goes, that goes too.

--Transfinite 05:42, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


Transfinite's comments * followed by my responses:

  • The article has to quickly say what Sweetest Day is. "Promotional event" is POV, you don't like the word "holiday", so it is an "observence".
"Promotional event" is in no way POV. The phrase simply states what Sweetest Day is. "Deceptive promotional event" or "a promotional event marketed through mass deception or on false pretenses" would be POV, but simply calling Sweetest Day a "promotional event" is not POV. Sweetest Day has never occurred without first being promoted by industry. Therefore it is neither a holiday nor an observance. Sweetest Day is not recognized or observed by any state, local or federal government, nor is it recognized by any religion, faith or ethnic group. Sweetest Day is not even recognized by the City of Cleveland where it allegedly was founded. The only group which recognizes Sweetest Day are the industries which profit from it's promotion. I suppose we could call it an "industry observance" but "promotional event" is really more appropriate.
  • In order for the article to be NPOV, it has to include the quote from Retail Confectioners International, or something similiar. The article can't be an attack piece on the candy/greeting card industry.
Take a closer look at the Sweetest Day page on Retail Confectioners International's website. Under "How It Started" Retail Confectioners International uses the standard verisimilitude to promote Sweetest Day. A verisimilitude is a highly deceptive cleverly-written statement which resembles the truth but actually is a replacement for the truth and intented to deceive. Inclusion of any industry verisimilitude in the Sweetest Day article without identifying it as such totally slants the article in favor of industry. All industry verisimilitudes should be immediately removed from the Sweetest Day article in order for the article to remain NPOV.
  • The last sentence states how the holiday/observence/promotional event/whatever is celebrated, and goes on to call it a "Hallmark Holiday", which is a fairly cynical turn of phrase.
The term "Hallmark holiday" is actually a promotional term for Hallmark Cards. Again, to express this idea the term "promotional event" is more appropriate. The statement also includes buying suggestions, which again slants the article in favor of industry. Today Sweetest Day remains a promotional event sponsored by industry; it has not undergone some miraculous metamorphosis into a beloved holiday of any type.
  • Are you sure you want to remove the Bill Lubinger article? That is where the "concocted promotion" quote in the lead section is sourced to. If the Lubinger article goes, that goes too.
Here is the Bill Lubinger article which was published online in October 2005. First of all, there was no 4-page Sweetest Day section included in The Cleveland Plain Dealer's October 8, 1921 issue. There was a 4-page Sweetest Day section included in the October 8, 1922 issue of The Cleveland Plain Dealer, however it made no mention of any of the things mentioned in Mr. Lubinger's article. Read it for yourself; it's right here in high-resolution. With this in mind, Mr. Lubinger's article can only be construed as being some sort of inverted promotion the purpose of which is to justify the observance of Sweetest Day. The article is 95% misinformation and deserves no mention in an encyclopedic article about Sweetest Day. During the Sweetest Day promotion of 2006 at least 3 internet websites quoted Mr. Lubinger's article because of it's inclusion in the Misplaced Pages article. Misplaced Pages should not be used to promote false information about Sweetest Day or anything else. As far as losing the phrase "concocted promotion" is concerned, that Sweetest Day is a "concocted promotion" will be evident to anyone who reads the Sweetest Day article once all the industry promotional phrases are removed.

Miracleimpulse 16:13, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Addition of facts

The following facts should be added to the article:

  • 1) In 1922 Sweetest Day/Candy Day was also promoted in New York City, Chicago, Detroit, Buffalo, Cincinatti and other cities across America by the candy industry. (Note: was Herbert Birch Kingston involved in these other promotions of Sweetest Day?)
  • 2) Sweetest Day was also referred to as "Candy Day," both in Cleveland and other cities where it was promoted.
  • 3) Some candy giveaways for Sweetest Day were executed days before the event and then covered by local media.
  • 4) All candy was not given to poor people. In 1921 Sweetest Day in the Year Committeeman L. E. Gruber presented the mayor of Cleveland with a 15-pound box of candy for the mayor's wife.
  • 5) In 1922 82-year-old Vera Sissons was selected by the Sweetest Day in the Year Committee to be Queen of the Sweetest Day. Ms. Sissons resided at the Home for Aged Women. Include image of Vera Sissons.
  • 6) A list of companies which participated in the first 2 Sweetest Days in Cleveland should be included in the article, in order to demonstrate the true scope of the first Sweetest Day promotions in Cleveland. That list includes:

The Cleveland Plain Dealer Newspaper, The Cleveland Business Exchange, The Cleveland Advertising Club, Hotel Statler, Whitman's Candies, Loew's Park Theater, Loew's State Theater, The Ohio Theater, Apollo Chocolates, F.H. Roberts Company, Crane's Party Box, Ohio Confection Company, Euclid's Chocolates, Nimburger Hahn (Louis Hahn?) Candies, Shoot's Chocolates, Thurston's Magic Box Candies, Johnston's Candies, Hoffman's Candy And Ice Cream Companies, H.M.D Candies, Midland Candy Boxes, Standard Drug Stores (16 locations), Troughton's Sugar Jar Candies, Weideman's Candies, Addison Pharmacy, Alpha Pharmacy, The Bank Lunch, Benfield And Benfield (Benfield Drug Company), Bruggator And Ripley, H.D. Butler, W.W. Brown Company, Buckstein Drug Company, Cleveland Pharmacy, Deklyn's Candies, Deutch And Rosengarten, Fischer Rohr Company, Cedar Drug Company, Geiger Moss Drug Company, Geraldine Ferrar Company, Gerson Drug Company, Glick's Candies, Gordon Square Pharmacy, Hough Avenue Drug Company, The J.M. Gasser Company, Kappus Drug Store, Lakewood Pharmacy, Lake Shore Pharmacy, Liggett's Pharmacy, Marshall's Drug Stores (26 locations), Maxixe Cherries, Miller's Drug Stores, Parkgate Pharmacy, Price Drug Company, J.G. Reed And Company, M. Rinzler, Ritter's Candies, Seltzer Drug Company, G. Schneider-Richards Company, The Superior Peanut Company, H.M. Stage Company, Andrew E. Walleck Company, Weinberger-Euclid Drug Company, J.L. Westaway Company, Winton Hotel Drug Company, W.L.Wilson Company, Wyandotte Pharmacy, Wrigleys Gum, Reymer's Chocolates and BonBons, Edwards Candies, MacDiarmids Candies, Phelp's Candy, Mary Lincoln Candy Company, The Cross Candy Company, Forbes Chocolate Company, M. S. Stores, Romance Chocolates by The Wynne Wood, The Orient Company (baskets for candy), The Geo. H. Bowman Company, The May Company, Bailey's Department Store, Benedict's (dancing), Huyler's Candies, Martha Washington Candies, Bordens Chocolates, Schrafft's Chocolates, Playhouse Chocolates, Stranahan Brothers Company, Jackson-Trace Company, Beeman's Pepsin Gum, The Handy Service Store, and Ex-Lax (The Sweet Chocolate Laxative), Fanny Farmer Candies, The Loft, Inc.

More to come! Miracleimpulse 21:35, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Removal of holiday infobox

Sweetest Day is not a holiday it is an annual promotional event. Addition of the holiday infobox is purely promotional. It contains buying suggestions for Sweetest Day. Miracleimpulse 21:47, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I think I'll comment on this, since I am the one who added the thing. The observence part I tried to make NPOV, by including what the "industry" said it was for ("Remembering friends and loved ones"), and what it seems to be actually about: buying cheap useless junk. The Valentine's Day article says the observences are "Sending greeting cards and gifts, dating". If you think the wording should change from "buying" to "sending", I have no problem with that. Besides that, I don't see the problem. It has the area it is celebrated/promoted in (which is sourced info), type (which is required for that template), and the date it happens on. --Transfinite 05:10, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Again, Sweetest Day is neither a holiday nor an observance anywhere. A promotional event does not warrant a holiday box, unless of course you are trying to deceive people into believing that the promotional event is in fact a holiday. Also, there is no referenced information stating that Sweetest Day is celebrated anywhere. That information is industry promotional hype and deserves no mention in an encyclopedic article. The holiday box has got to go! Miracleimpulse 16:16, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Um, Sweetest Day is observed by a large number of people, ergo, it is an observance. That's a neutral description of the event. ANd this citation confirms (from a reliable source) that the day is observed. Not a dog 16:42, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Your citation confirms that Sweetest Day was created by industry and is therefore a promotional event. The definition of observance states that an observance is "The custom of celebrating a holiday or similar occasion." Under "similar occasion" it states "An occurrence or condition of affairs which brings with it some unlooked-for event; that which incidentally brings to pass an event, without being its efficient cause or sufficient reason; accidental or incidental cause." This aptly describes the event called Sweetest Day. We have determined that Sweetest Day does not qualify as a holiday. The term which best describes Sweetest Day is event, and given that Sweetest Day has never occurred without first being promoted by industry, it is best referred to as a promotional event. I have no problem with the first statement in the article reading: "Sweetest Day is the observance of an industry-generated promotional event." Sweetest Day is a promotional event which masquerades as a holiday, and for the Misplaced Pages article to call it a holiday or an observance furthers this industry deception. In order for the Sweetest Day article to remain NPOV and not promote the industry agenda, Sweetest Day must be defined as an event only, specifically an industry-generated promotional event. Again, the holiday box should be deleted immediately. Miracleimpulse 17:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
I don't think anyone here would deny that Sweetest Day was created by industry (it isn't a naturally occurring phenomenon). But that doesn't mean it isn't "observed" - just like President's Day is observed, or Martin Luther King day, or Boxing Day, or Dingus Day...all of which were created by some entity (whether industry, government, or religion is irrelevant to its social construction). As you say, it is an "event" - and event that is "observed". 'nuff said. Not a dog 22:53, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Plenty of events are observed. This does not mean they are categorized as "observances." Above all, Sweetest Day is a promotional event and should be categorized as such in this article. Categorizing Sweetest Day as either an observance or a holiday slants the article in favor of the industry agenda. Industry has been promoting Sweetest Day on false pretenses for over 80 years. Misplaced Pages should not be used (as it has been for the past several years) to promote Sweetest Day on these false pretenses. Sweetest Day is a promotional event. End of story. Miracleimpulse 23:29, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, and plenty of events are promoted, that doesn't mean they all should be categorized as "promotional events". Above all, Sweetest Day is a day that is observed, and should be categorized as such in this article. Categorzing Sweetest Day as an promotional event slants the article in favor of your anti-industry agenda. (right back at ya!). :) Not a dog 00:02, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
So: Sweetest Day is the observance of a promotional event sponsored by industry. Problem solved, compromise reached. Now let's change the article. Miracleimpulse 00:18, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Where is your evidence that it's not an observance? You keep going on and on at length about the origins of the so-called "event," but that has no bearing on how it's celebrated today. Come here to Cleveland on the third Saturday of October and you'll see plenty of Valentine's gunk rebranded for Sweetest Day at drug stores and floral shops. Other than maybe Malley's, I've not heard one peep from candymakers about Sweetest Day here. It's all the card and floral shops that jump into the marketing blitz. I've been to more than one restaurant that served free chocolate-covered strawberries on Sweetest Day. Or are you going to claim that American Greetings is in cahoots with the food service industry too? --75.117.252.7 03:25, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
The food service industry, the flower industry, the jewelry industry, the greeting card industry, the candy industry and others: all are promotors of Sweetest Day. Each and every year since 1921 the promotion of Sweetest Day has preceded the alleged "observance." World War II did not interrupt the promotion of Sweetest Day. Vietnam did not interrupt the promotion of Sweetest Day. Industry has now promoted Sweetest Day 7 times since the events of 9/11/2001. First and foremost, Sweetest Day is a promotional event and should be categorized as such by this Misplaced Pages article. Unless of course Misplaced Pages is also being used by industry as a tool for the promotion of Sweetest Day. Miracleimpulse 13:46, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
By that definition the Christian Churches are not an appropriate source for discussion of Christmas or Easter, because they are promoters of those holidays. Guy (Help!) 14:09, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello Guy! Why did you delete the Herbert Birch Kingston US census forms from Misplaced Pages without nomination or debate? What kind of impartial admin action was that?? Miracleimpulse 14:15, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

BOYS vs GIRLS As I write this, the article says "This holiday is celebrated by boys since girls mostly celebrate valentines day". As a person who observed this day growing up in Detroit, I have to say that the statement is not true. Furthermore, males and females both celebrate valentines day. In both cases candy and cards are given to loved ones of any gender. This sentence should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.9.198.83 (talk) 01:49, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

References

  1. Cridlin, Jay (2006-10-21). "A sweet day for Hallmark". St Petersburg Times. Retrieved 2007-02-21. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  2. Sweetest Day, retailerconfectioners.org. Retrieved on 2007-02-21.
  3. Arnett, Lisa. "Sweet wine o' mine". The Chicago Tribune. Retrieved 2007-02-21.

Detroit

Detroit attributes Sweetest Day to Fred Sanders. There's Freep articles to source from. MMetro (talk) 13:30, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't live in the area that observes "Sweetest Day", but my grandparents did. They also grew up in and around that era. I must agree, it may not seem deserving of recognition to some. But to those whom grew up with it and passed it down, it is a part of their memories and maybe some heritage. I say leave it be. It is as much a special day as some of the other days that are concidered "holidays"; only it is not nationally observed. So what. Like I said to someone or to someone's family memories, it is special. Let it stay where others, wheither they observe it or not, can stumble across a marking in history. Cheffy74 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cheffy74 (talkcontribs) 12:54, 11 March 2009 (UTC) This holiday is pretty strange.... seems to me like another excuse for Valentine's Day.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Sweetest Day. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —Talk to my owner:Online 10:09, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Categories: