Talk:3rd millennium

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Time Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Time, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Time on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TimeWikipedia:WikiProject TimeTemplate:WikiProject TimeTime
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Years Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Years, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Years on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.YearsWikipedia:WikiProject YearsTemplate:WikiProject YearsYears
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The content of Timeline of the near future was merged into 3rd millennium. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. For the discussion at that location, see its talk page.

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 365 days may be auto-archived by if there are more than 5.

Meaning between bold

I know that if a year in the [1] subheading is bolded, it means that it is the current year of the 2020s decade. Can you hint them the "boldness"? O7Official (talk) 10:54, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"2551" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect 2551 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 29 § 2551 until a consensus is reached. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 05:49, 29 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"March 2051" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect March 2051 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 2 § March 2051 until a consensus is reached. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 14:39, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"2900" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect 2900 has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 2 § 2900 until a consensus is reached. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 14:41, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"2090s (fictional)" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect 2090s (fictional) has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 2 § 2090s (fictional) until a consensus is reached. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 14:45, 2 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 13 March 2025

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

In the 26th century portion of the article there is vandalism with a racist message. Trevor VanderMolen (talk) 17:21, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done ToThAc (talk) 19:23, 13 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 16 April 2025

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please remove the mention of the singularity in 2045 per WP:CRYSTAL thanks. 35.136.190.243 (talk) 15:47, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done I was initially torn, because it could be argued that this entire article runs at least somewhat afoul of WP:CRYSTAL, but after thinking about it more I agree that one person's somewhat arbitrary prediction isn't what this article is for. DrOrinScrivello (talk) 13:08, 18 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Extinction predictions

This topic was originally included in the "Predictions and forecasts not included on this timeline" without a formal discussion, so I took it here. What are your thoughts regarding this subject? In my opinion these predictions should be limited to animals which are already Extinct in the wild or those that are functionally extinct. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:50, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Shields diary

Under 2049, we list: The embargoed 37-million-word diary of Robert Shields will become available to read and count words. In the article about the diarist, that information has been tagged as outdated in 2024. The diary is available for research at the library.[2] Renerpho (talk) 15:35, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Birthdays and Wills

There seems to be an ongoing slow-motion edit war about whether to include in the list the "1,000-something" birthday of ancient figures, and whether to include the scheduled release dates of the wills of various people, including members of the Royal Family. Personally, I think that this is WP:TRIVIA that doesn't need to be mentioned, but the Royal Family Wills does have a citation behind it (the other stuff doesn't), and I'm preemptively bringing this here (and will also request temporary page protection as all warring parties are already confirmed) for further discussion. I take no position on the content myself. Taking Out The Trash (talk) 17:54, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Content is just vandalism. Take the first item, 2217: The will Bella Bond is scheduled to become public knowledge, like a two year old murder victim has a will. Same for 2904: The will Dean Shillingsworth is scheduled to become public knowledge, same applies with the additional caveat of 900 years being preposterous. FDW777 (talk) 18:14, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yikes... I didn't notice those two. Definitely not a good look. Though at least some of the disputed content was/is definitely plausible like the tidbits about the Royal Family and something or another concerning a time capsule. So it's not obvious vandalism, even if parts of the content are implausible. Thus even if I had noticed the two questionable entries I would probably have still treated it as routine edit-warring to be safe. Taking Out The Trash (talk) 21:15, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]