Have one to sell? Sell on Amazon
Flip to back Flip to front
Listen Playing... Paused   You're listening to a sample of the Audible audio edition.
Learn more
See this image

The New York Times Almanac 2002 Paperback – November 1, 2001


See all 11 formats and editions Hide other formats and editions
Amazon Price New from Used from
Paperback, November 1, 2001
$2.72 $0.01

There is a newer edition of this item:

NO_CONTENT_IN_FEATURE

Best Books of the Month
Best Books of the Month
Want to know our Editors' picks for the best books of the month? Browse Best Books of the Month, featuring our favorite new books in more than a dozen categories.

Product Details

  • Series: New York Times Almanac
  • Paperback: 1008 pages
  • Publisher: Penguin Books (November 1, 2001)
  • Language: English
  • ISBN-10: 0141002352
  • ISBN-13: 978-0141002354
  • Product Dimensions: 8.3 x 5.3 x 1.8 inches
  • Shipping Weight: 1.6 pounds
  • Average Customer Review: 3.2 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (9 customer reviews)
  • Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #6,043,446 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Editorial Reviews

Amazon.com Review

The New York Times 2000 Almanac is a dazzling achievement, with a thousand pages of densely packed information that cover the U.S., the world, the economy, health, sports, science, and technology with depth and perspective, while its "Almanac of the Year" chapter includes a "Chronology of the Year's Events," "Obituaries from 1998-1999," "Novel Prizes," "The Millennium," and "Major News Stories of 1999." And the almanac provides 16 color pages of maps, covering time zones and a current depiction of the world's nations, provinces, and states.

The index alone is 29 pages long. A glance at the P's illustrates the extraordinary scope of this almanac. A small sample includes Pittsburgh, Pa. (with population statistics, climate, crime, government, rents, and Web sites), Planets (glossary, characteristics, visibility, and 1998 to 1999 discoveries), Plate tectonics theory, Pledge of Allegiance, and Poetry (with Pulitzer Prize, Bollingen Prize, and National Book Awards), as well as Poland (with area codes, economy, geography, government, etc.), Polar regions, Political action committees, and James K. Polk. There are 65 entries under Population, plus entries for Poverty, Presidential elections and administrations, Prisons, Professional sports, Public schools, Purchasing power of the dollar, and Purim.

In topic range and quality of reporting, the Times Almanac outshines its competitors. It likewise surpasses them in usefulness and sheer quantity of detail. Though the print is small and the pages are thin, the Times 2000 Almanac will no doubt become the reference standard for researchers and writers, students and professionals who require easy access to abundant and accurate information. --Stephanie Gold --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

About the Author

John W. Wright is a book packager as well as an author of reference books. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

More About the Author

Discover books, learn about writers, read author blogs, and more.

Customer Reviews

3.2 out of 5 stars

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

30 of 32 people found the following review helpful By A Customer on December 19, 1997
Format: Paperback
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.
Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
9 of 9 people found the following review helpful By Lisa on December 9, 2000
Format: Paperback
Not a BAD reference book, but doesn't seem to have nearly as much info as the World Almanac.
Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
8 of 8 people found the following review helpful By J. Springer on January 7, 2001
Format: Mass Market Paperback
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.
Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful By A Customer on November 24, 2001
Format: Paperback
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".
Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
By Patrick Doherty on February 19, 2003
Format: Paperback
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.
Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback. If this review is inappropriate, please let us know.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again