Talk:Chaharshanbe Suri/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Logo For Persian Celebration

Dear Google Team We will be grateful if Google put a special logo for the Iranian celebration (Chaharshanbe Suri) on its main page on March 16th and 17th . Suri is the last Wednesday of solar year( Persian Calendar) and is the most important celebration for many nations including Iranians, Kurds, Azeris, and some other nations …and I am sure all of them will be impressed and appreciated by this act of Google. Appreciated —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.245.87.193 (talk) 20:58, 6 March 2010 (UTC)

weak

it's very weak article. it's a tons of books about this subject. Writer just used rumors. after newrooz I will spend time to edit this. Suri means festival too even Tom Cruise knows this :)

it's wrong .... the right form of poem is " Zardi to az man .. sorkhi man az to " .. he wrote poem and this mean wrongly .... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.165.77.224 (talk) 08:34, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

I have lived in Iran all my life and have heard the poem at least five hundred times from my elders. The correct form of the peom is in fact "zardi-e man az to...sorkhi-e to az man", which literally means the wish to transfer ones weaknesses & diseases (yellowness) to the fire and get health and llife and energy (Redness) from the fire. I don't know where the previous author lives, but this is true about the poem. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.207.240.12 (talk) 12:46, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

This article is very poor

Anyone qualified to retrieve this mess? ZanLJackson (talk) 02:21, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

confusing

what does "Traditionally celebrated on the last Tuesday night of the year, Chahrshanbeh Soori has, since the Iranian revolution, been marked on the evening of the last Tuesday." exactly mean? It seems like it didn't change, so what's the point of putting that sentence in 69.235.39.215 (talk) 06:19, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

I agree, does the sentence referred to intend to say that the night of the celebration changed after the Revolution, or that it stayed the same? And also, why is it called "chaharshambe" if it is celebrated on "sehshambe"? Erusse estelinya (talk) 19:32, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Title

Charshanbe Suri ([Čāršanbe Suri – چارشنبه ‌سوری] Error: {{Lang-xx}}: text has italic markup (help)) is the most common and appointed pronunciation of the name of the festival, while Chaharshanbe Suri is mainly used as a formal spelling. Both Charshanbe and Chaharshanbe are used among the Iranian and global press; and furthermore, Dehkhoda Dictionary has referred to the festival with the spelling version of Charshanbe.
Besides, please note that, regarding the last edition (2012–) of the Persian transcription system approved by the UN, Čāršanbe Suri is the correct way of the transcription, and not the one which is mentioned on the website of Encyclopædia Iranica.
–Rye-96 (talk) 22:00, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Rye-96: Chaharshanbe Suri is the formal and correct/original spelling, while Charshanbe Suri is used as a kind of slang/dialect/accent thing, it's kinda easier to pronounce. You're from Tehran, where people more than others have different ways of pronouncing things. --HistoryofIran (talk) 02:48, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

I suggest a Wikipedia:Requested moves if other editors don't agree with you or there are disputes. A consensus, ask involved editors to participate in consensus. --Zyma (talk) 05:18, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Any sources is not credible than Iranica abouth Iran.--Samək^Talk 06:43, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Samək: Err.. what? --HistoryofIran (talk) 12:36, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Among the various sources, Only Iranica is reliable abouth Iranian historical issues. OKEY?--Samək^Talk 16:18, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, Zyma. That must be tried.

Your personal comments are not counted, dear Samək.

And HistoryofIran, it is not only our way of pronouncing the word. You must be aware that it is common in other regions as well; and that's why it is necessary, especially while offering the term in another alphabet. It exists in the dialect of the Tajiks of Tajikistan and Afghanistan as well, in the form Charshamba. I don't understand the opposition.

–Rye-96 (talk) 17:03, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Well, pretty sure Chahar means four, and not Char, which again, is just a easier way for pronouncing it. I know that it is pronounced like that in other regions as well (although the majority of the population of Iran does not pronounce it Char), that was what I said. But I also said that the the formal/correct/original spelling is Chaharshanbe. Heck, you even yourself said that Chaharshanbe is the formal spelling. --HistoryofIran (talk) 17:15, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

@HistoryofIran: That's just another version. Both of them exist in Persian literature; and please note the Azerbaijani Çərşənbə and Kurdish Çarşema. It exists in other literatures as well.

Besides, Chaharshanbe is already used at the top of the article. I'm not suggesting to remove that.

–Rye-96 (talk) 17:26, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

@Rye-96: Stating "I am a native speaker of the language, and I have used the standard UN transcription system", you are merely confessing to do original research. WP:OR: "The only way you can show your edit is not original research is to cite a reliable published source that contains the same material." So I ask you to do so, because The burden to demonstrate verifiability lies with the editor who adds or restores material. "Even with well-sourced material, if you use it out of context, or to reach or imply a conclusion not directly and explicitly supported by the source, you are engaging in original research." I see no reliable source for your edits, and I don't need to "face" that "certain articles of Iranica are outdated". Next time you want to question Manouchehr Kasheff and Ali-Akbar Sa'idi Sirjani's article, don't forget to provide a better reference. Pahlevun (talk) 17:29, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Rye-96: It's kinda irrelevant how it is spelled in Azeri and Kurdish when we are talking about the Persian spelling, which is definitely Chaharshanbe, as Iranica also states. --HistoryofIran (talk) 17:33, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

@Pahlevun and HistoryofIran:
I notify again, Charshanbe Suri ([Čāršanbe Suri – چارشنبه ‌سوری] Error: {{Lang-xx}}: text has italic markup (help)) is the common and usual version of the name of the festival, while Chaharshanbe Suri ([Čāhāršanbe Suri – چهارشنبه ‌سوری] Error: {{Lang-xx}}: text has italic markup (help)) is a more formal way. Although, Charshanbe has been in formal usage as well; e.g. in the Dehkhoda Dictionary and among the Iranian and global press.
And beside of that, Čāršanba-sūrī is a wrong way of pronunciation and transcription, at least while considering the Persian spoken in Iran, with regard to the last edition (2012–) of the Persian transcription system provided by the UN.
–Rye-96 (talk) 18:38, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

@Rye-96: I still see no reliable reference supporting your idea. Farhang Moeen and Dāyerat-ol-ma'āref-e Fārsi mention the pronunciation the same as Iranica. Pahlevun (talk) 15:35, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Chaharshanbe Suri. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:41, 19 November 2016 (UTC)