Customer Reviews

The New York Times Almanac 2002

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

This year I purchased the "New York Times Almanac," rather that "The World Almanac," which I purchase every year. What a disappointment. On the cover they claim it's "the world's most comprehensive almanac," but it doesn't have half the information that "The World Almanac" does. I've learned from my mistake. I buy an almanac so I can have all the information I need in one place. To my mind, an incomplete almanac like this one is a waste of money.

Not a BAD reference book, but doesn't seem to have nearly as much info as the World Almanac.

I enjoy these types of almanacs a great deal but I was disappointed with the New York Times' offering. It uses information that doesn't seem as current as information in the "World Almanac" for instance. I also found it a bit disorganized.

When they are discussing the 2000 US population they mention the states with the largest hispanic population. They get the population columns mixed up. They claim California has a hispanic population of 33,871,648 and a total population of 10,966,648. That's impossible! They make the same mistake with other states they cover in that "article".

I'm a bit of an almanac afficionado, and the NYT Almanac -- in its organization, content and style -- beats the rest, hands down. More relevant facts, a logical layout, and even a readable typeface make this book an almanac lover's dream.

I use both THE NEW YORK TIMES ALMANAC and THE WORLD ALMANAC as references. The strengths of the former are its articles on world energy, the global economy and the global military situation. As a big fan of the movies, I find its lack of biographical data on celebrities and actors to be an annoying weakness.

---------------------------------------------------------------
NOTE:
This review is related only to year 2001 edition of the Almanac, not 2002 edition. I was pleased to find completely rewritten and generally fair section regarding World War II in the 2002 edition.(Note added on 03/06/2002.)
---------------------------------------------------------------

I was looking through the Almanac today in a bookstore, and two things disappointed me a lot in its Most Important Historic Events Of The Second Millennium section.

For one thing, the only event mentioned for the year 1941 was bombing of Pearl Harbor. And what about undeclared war against Soviet Union, which Germany started on June 22, 1941? Soviet Union lost over 20 millions of people in the war. I guess publishers of the almanac do not view an event as important, if there is no corresponding Hollywood fairy tail?

Secondly, for the year 1945 almanac proudly states: "British and American troops liberated death camps in Dahau and elsewhere". And not even a word about crucial role that Soviet Union played in liberating Germany from Nazi.

Can you think of something more shameful, than stealing victory from millions and millions of people, who paid their lives for it?

This book is truly innovative. It gives us a view at the Aborigonies of Southern Djibouti. A must buy. Wright is a literal genius.

I thought this book was very exciting