Talk:Bengali calendars/Archive 1

Archive 1

shit/sheeth

i see someone changed the season "shit" to "sheeth". although i totally understand that seeing a bangla word written "shit" will look funny to any english speaker, changing it to "sheeth" would not follow the transliteration system used in all the other articles about bangla. furthermore, it would be inconsistent even with the rest of the spellings in the calendar - since the same underlying vowels and consonants are being transcribed "i" and "t" in other words ("kartik", not "kartheek", "hemonto", not "hemontho", etc.). anyhow, if it bothers people, i'd prefer we just remove all the seasons, but not just have one of them mistransliterated. --SameerKhan 07:31, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

How about adding proper diacritics, then: śīta --Raga 21:10, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

that still doesn't solve the problem. the words are romanized here following the system set in the bangla and bangla script pages. neither sheeth nor śīta follows those. basically, i just don't see why people are so afraid of writing "shit". i don't think a german page would avoid writing the word "dick" ('fat') just because of its english meaning. this seems immature. --SameerKhan 00:25, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Star names

Added star names in bengali, someone please further look into, for further correction. Thanks. Need more practice in this, to become more fluent. ~Tarikash 11:35, 13 October 2006 (UTC).

Name

Should we rename this page "Bengali calendar", to match with "Bengali language", "Bengali script", etc.? It's strange that this is the only part of "Bengali culture" that uses the name "Bangla" instead of "Bengali". --SameerKhan 03:02, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Naming was discussed earlier in other Bangla/Bengali pages. And the conclusion is to use Bengali instead of Bangla. It should be moved to Bengali calendar and Bangla calendar should point to it. Auyon 07:35, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

References?

Such a long article, without ext links or references??--WoodElf 07:12, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion

Since all the month articles are stub, are will probably never become full articles, I suggest the twelve month articles be merged with the Bengali calendar main article.--WoodElf 15:15, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

new link

the free mobile bengali panjika / bangabda calculation program link may be included in external link section http://www.myjavaserver.com/~sourav/tithi/Tithi.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by Srvcti (talk • contribs) 11:35, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

The current Bengali year is 1431?!

--Librarianpmolib (talk) 12:57, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Time assessment rating comment

Want to help write or improve articles about Time? Join WikiProject Time or visit the Time Portal for a list of articles that need improving.
—Yamara ✉ 17:29, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Template:BENGALIYEAR

Why has <!--The current Bengali year is '''{{BENGALIYEAR}}'''.--> been commented out, and replaced with a hard-coded year, which does not even use Template:as of ? Apokrif (talk) 18:08, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Akbar/Hijri interpretation may be true

A calendar's 0 point is often set in hindsight. It is quite possible that bongabdo indeed started at around gregorian calendar 1590+ but it put its zero point much further in past. Thus it is incorrect to deny the validity of "hijri/akbar interpretation of bongabdo" just because the 0 of bongabdo goes much before akbar's time. I have hence removed certain lines from the article. Please feel free to discuss this issue with me.Baransam (talk) 11:47, 19 April 2009 (UTC)

I have removed a paragraph questioning the validity of hijri/akbar-interpretation today. Instead I have presented both the shashanka-interpretation and akbar-interpretation on equal footing. Debate can be done on discussion page. It is evident that the months of bengali calendar comes from sanskrit origins. However, sanskrit origins can not be used as an argument against akbar-interpretation. Akbar is believed to be a secular and compassionate emperor by many. Baransam (talk) 08:35, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

Leap year rule

I corrected a typo in the leap year rule. There should be 10 leap years every 39 years, not every 37 years. At least that is what the stated rule gives, and that matches the length of the sidereal year. HelmerAslaksen (talk) 08:39, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

Shashanka Interpretation

I am very interested in knowing a verifiable reference (preferably in hard copy, book/journal reference) to Shashanka intepretation. Unless that is done I remain sceptic of Shashanka interpretation and prefer to present it as 'another point of view' rather than a historical fact. Baransam (talk) 09:26, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

starting point of the Bengali era

"The starting point of the Bengali era is estimated to be on Monday, 12 April 594 in Julian Calendar and Monday, 14 April 594 in the proleptic Gregorian calendar." Bengali Panjika follows Surya Siddhanta rules, so Bengali San will always start next day of the Mesha sangkranti, and Mesha sangkranti starts whenever Nirayna Longitude of the Sun becomes 0°. In 594 Nirayna Longitude of the Sun was 0° on 19th March, so March 20th was the 1st day of Bengali San 1. 1st Boisakha, 1 San | 20th March 594, Saturday| Krishna Paksha | Tithi Ashtami According to "THE INDIAN CALENDAR" by ROBERT SEWELL & SANKARA BALKRISHNA DIKSHIT, SWAN SONNENSCHEIN & Co., LTD., LONDON, 1896. Please see Table 1 (Page xx & xxi) Sangkranti was on 19th March, 594, 16:15 Indian Time at Ujjain. Usingha (talk) 02:31, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

I think this statement is flawed. Sewell seems to calculate the starting date by subtracting the Bengali year number from the Gregorian year number. But the current year numbers of the Bengali calendar were started during Akbar's reign, and was deliberately made to coincide with the Hijri year at that time (i.e., Akbar used the current Hijri year number as the current Bengali year number). So, in year 594 CE, no one started counting Bengali year number 1. That's for sure. --Ragib (talk) 03:03, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

I just wanted to point out is that Bengali era’s starting point (please see article "Bengali Calendar, section: History, Para 1) can not be on Gregorian Monday, 14 April 594. I understood your point. Even though, we started Bangla San much more later, but using Bangla panjika rules we can calculate 1st Boisakh back to any year. If we say Bangla Panjika’s starting point was year 594 then 1st Boishakh was on 20th March on that year (according to Surya Siddhanta Ganita).

ROBERT SEWELL just did not subtract year to calculate Bangla San, but he gave Mesha Sangkranti date and time for years 594-1900 CE. 1st Boisakh always comes next day (Gregorian Day) of the Mesha Sangkranti. Let see what other calendars say:

1. According to "THE INDIAN CALENDAR" by ROBERT SEWELL & SANKARA BALKRISHNA DIKSHIT, SWAN SONNENSCHEIN, Mesha Sangkranti was 19th March 16h 15m (Arya Siddhanta at Ujjain). Now I am converting for Surya Siddhanta so I add 10m 42s ( to covert ) + 50m (for Calcutta) + 30 Minutes for Dhaka. Sangkrati was 19th March 17h 45m 42s, so 1st Boisakh was 20th April 594 AD.
2. http://emr.cs.iit.edu/home/reingold/calendar-book/Calendrica.html => gives Hindu solar date 1st Vaisakha on 21st March 594. This date and Bangla Date are always + or - 1 day.
3. My own Software (I used Surya Siddhanta rules) "Panji" gives some data which are following

Location: Dhaka (Lat: 23.7N & Long: 90.375E) a) Date: 19th March 594 at 6 AM Sun longitude: 359.3163229266849 Degree (Nirayana) b) Date: 20th March 594 at 6 AM Sun longitude: 0.294634286741 Degree (Nirayana) From those data we can tell that the Sun reached Mesha Sangkrati at 22H 47M 18S on 19th March 594, so 1st Boisakh was 20th March 594.

1. http://www.astro.com/swisseph/ae/0500/ae_0594.pdf => from this Swiss Ephemeris site we can have Sayana Longitude for March 23 (Gregorian 25) was 4°17’40, and Ayanamsha was 4°16’50 (Lahiri) at 0:0 UT (6:00AM BDT) which was also the Sangkranti day, So 1st Boisakh was 26th March 594 (Gregorian).

After analyzing most of data we can say that 1st Boisakh was 20th March 594 CE, and not in April at all. Thanks --Usingha (talk) 02:37, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Month naming: Sanskrit or Pali

On 24 September 2010, somebody from IP 84.51.180.242 wrote that bengali month names are derived from Pali. Earlier in the article, it was written as Sanskrit. What is the verifiable reference for this edit? I plan to talk with few folks in Pali department of Calcutta University and verify this statement. If I do not find any hard reference, I shall delete the line which talks about the origin being Sanskrit/Pali. Baransam (talk) 08:42, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Copyright problem removed

Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://www.banglapedia.org/HT/B_0124.HTM. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. MER-C 11:36, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

General article improvement

Seems like বব২৬ and Sminthopsis84 has some different idea about improving the article. I posit some changes Sminthopsis84 did was good. Can you two discuss? – nafSadh did say 05:47, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

The article needs improvement in the "Leap year" section, The old version of Bangla calendar has confusing "division the remainder"--stuff. I mean It should be described better, I'll work on that now. বব২৬ (talk) 15:10, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Bangla Academy revision says that, when the month of Falgun concur with a leap February, that will be a leap year. – nafSadh did say 20:26, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Two versions

There are two different versions of the calendar: the Bangladeshi official calendar (revised) and the original one used by Indian states of West Benegal, Tripura and Assam. I suggest a split for Bangladeshi national calendar be created, similar to Indian national calendar to avoid confusion.--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 06:08, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

I think the calendar used by Bengali Hindus is not Bongabdo, but Shaka era, they do not even use the same year number as Bengali calendar. – nafSadh did say 06:42, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

In India too, the Bengali year is 1412. eg. [1] A Bengali Panjika. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 07:04, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Just to clarify, I think that's a typo for 1421. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 12:59, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Confusing. Thanks to the Brits! Though, Bangladeshi National calendar will be an in-approrpiate name for an article. Rather, a single article Bongabdo shall address both calendar, in depth in two separate sections. – nafSadh did say 07:28, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

Oppose: The Bangla calendar used in Bangladesh and India is the same (same year nombor, same months and same pattern). Only the month lengths are different as the calendar was revised in Bangladesh. Also "Bengali calendar" IS NOT A RELIGIOUS CALENDAR. Bengali calendar is just associated with the season pattern native to Bengal region. It is not related to any religion specifically. The two versions of the Bengali calendar in 1 article is not at all confusing. Thank you. বব২৬ (talk) 15:07, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

I got confused because I have seen Hindu festivals are fixed depending on Shaka era. Also only use of Bengali calendar is now on news-paper front pages and such. – nafSadh did say 20:29, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

User:বব২৬'s edit

[2]

1. I have removed links as per WP:OVERLINK. Islamic calendar is linked a para above in "Akbar changed the practice of agricultural tax collection according to the Islamic calendar (Hijri)".
2. I can not understand your removing a referenced source that says that Bengali calendar was a solar calendar. This seems to be Wikipedia:Cherrypicking.
3. The month names are derived from Sanskrit. The reference clearly says that.

@বব২৬:, Please explain on the basis of WP:RS, why this information should be removed.--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 07:34, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

The first thing to be noted is that The Bangla calendar is not based on any other calendar, It's structure and features are just derived from mixing Islamic calendar and system from Hindu calendar, and finally the pattern of the calendar is based on the native climate of Bengal (Bangladesh and West Bengal), NOT CLIMATE OF INDIA ((CLIMATE OF BENGAL IS DIFFERENT FROM INDIA AS CLIMATE OF BENGAL HAS 6 SEASONS))). Secondary the names of the month are derived from Sanskrit names of Constellation stars, NOT Surya Siddhanta.

You are editing ""These names were derived from the Sanskrit names of the original solar Bengali calendar and were retained by Akbar."". What do you mean by it? both revised and non-revised have the same month names, such sentences will confuse readers. So the appropriate sentence is ""The names of the twelve months of the Bengali calendar are based on and derived from the names of the নক্ষত্র nôkkhôtrô (lunar mansions): locations of the moon with respect to particular stars during the lunar cycle.""

Thank you বব২৬ (talk) 09:29, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Prove your claims by RS, not by WP:OR. The reference explicitly says that Akbar revised the Bengali solar calendar, retained the old month names. Ritu (Indian season) is the Indian subcontinent scheme of defining six seasons, which are the same in Bengal. Though the disambiguated article name is "Indian season", it denotes the Indian subcontinent. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 13:18, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

see Climate of India, it has 4 seasons. Please study Geography lesson well and come back to Wikipedia. Bengal region has unique climate pattern with 6 seasons. বব২৬ (talk) 13:23, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

You have not given 1 single reference and are continuously removing the reference, without any RS. Did you even open Ritu (Indian season)?--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 13:30, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

The opened the article and the article says "in the Hindu calendar". Bengali calendar is not Hindu. Stop being religious on Wikipedia. I'm really hating it. Bengali calendar is not religious. বব২৬ (talk) 13:36, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Also that article says Falgun as Winter but in Bangla calendar Falgun is Spring (বসন্ত Bôsôntô). Hence Bangla calendar is different and native to Bengal (Bangladesh and West Bengal). Stop relating it to other calendars in India which are just opposite to Bangla calendar and Bangla culture. Don't just edit blindly and religiously. Please study lesson properly and edit correct. Thank you. বব২৬ (talk) 13:43, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Lunisolar?

বব২৬ edited saying Bengali calendar is a lunisolar calendar. In which period and version it was so? – nafSadh did say 20:37, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

The old version followed in India is solar (as 365 d) and also the length of days in month (not fixed are lunisolar features). বব২৬ (talk) 09:13, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

The old version was not Bangla calendar. When Bangla calendar was introduced it was entirely solar. The length of month differ, not based on moon's motion, but based on sun's position in the sky. You know the name of month is based on the star/constellation where sun stays during the month. – nafSadh did say 18:33, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Week start and weekend

Given the table that has been added at the start of the article and is quite difficult to understand, it would be helpful to have a section that discusses which is the first day of the week, and any weekend concept that exists in these calendars. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 12:43, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Actually week name that are based on stars do not impose any official start or end of week. In numeric week system (e.g. Arabic or Hebrew), Sunday is clearly the first day of week. In Bangladesh, now Fri and Sat are observed as weekly holidays. At some period it was half day on Thu and Friday holiday. During British regime, they followed Sat-Sun weekends. – nafSadh did say 17:33, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

Edit warring ANI

Redtigerxyz reported বব২৬ for edit warring on ANI. If one party feels there is an edit war, then there is; but for sure both Redtigerxyz and বব২৬ are equally responsible for warring. Anyway, it is useless to discuss this content dispute on ANI. But both should try to resolve the content dispute here on talk page. You can ask for WP:3O. But both should refrain from editing the article for three days or until issue resolves. – nafSadh did say 18:43, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

@Nafsadh:, It is extremely unfortunate that today this article is both biased and inaccurate (lunisolar calendar). While I respected your appeal of not editing for 3 days, in a massive overhaul on the same day বব২৬ has whitewashed the article by removing referenced material, without citing a single WP:RS to counter the referenced material added. While Sminthopsis84 thanked me for removing links as per WP:OVERLINK [3], it was reverted again [4] by বব২৬, in violation of the wiki-policy. I am dont think this is the right forum if someone wants to challenge established wiki-policies. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 08:37, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

The bengali calendar is a solar calendar

The edit summary of this edit claimed that "Banglapedia is not exatly mentioning the current Bengali cal as solar". That is untrue. Banglapedia, here, makes this very clear, including saying in the fourth paragraph "The Islamic Hijri calendar is a lunar while the Bangla calendar is a solar one." I have restored the statement about the solar calendar. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 13:16, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

User dissing Banglapedia, a topic ban may be required

This edit and this one removed the transliteration used by Banglapedia, Banggabda, and removed the citation to it in the following sentence (about the calendar being a solar one). The editor involved justified that on their talk page in this edit with the statement ""Banggabda" is not accepted name in English and though it is not a phonetic Romanization of Bangla." It is not acceptable to dismiss Banglapedia when matters concern Bangladesh. Banglapedia is *the* *authoritative* reference. If this behaviour doesn't stop, I propose that a topic ban for this editor may be required, a ban against editing any pages that in any way concern the country of Bangladesh. Sminthopsis84 (talk) 13:16, 15 November 2014 (UTC)

Questionable reliability of references

I suggest these can be reduced as IMO, they may not be WP:RS

• [5]; the blog doesn't seem to be a notable author.
• [6] No author or proof of being a RS.

--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 06:33, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

They appear to be,

• বাংলা বর্ষপঞ্জি is written by some relevant scholar

Author is Bishnu Das and Uttam Kumar Das from Bangladesh Textbook Board (correct me My Bengali is weak). They are authors/officiating coordinators of textbooks like [7], not mainstream scholars or academicans. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 11:19, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

• TARIKH-E-ELAHI refers to The Origin of Bangla new year and celebrating Pahela Baishakh which is written by the same author of the Banglapedia entry about this subject

Problem however exists, as the hosting sites are dubious. In case of the second source, changing it to Virtual Bangladesh would be better. – nafSadh did say 09:35, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

IMO, Virtual Bangladesh (only due to the notability of author) is better, else Banglapedia should be used as most of the content on Virtual Bangladesh and Banglapedia is same.--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 11:19, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Banglapedia should be in the list of references. Also, the new work you were referring earlier, which talked about Surja Sidhanta can be here. I wish someone could find Bangla Academy report/remarks about the revised version. – nafSadh did say 17:18, 17 November 2014 (UTC)