Jump to content

Talk:Nowruz

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 62.178.137.216 (talk) at 20:01, 12 January 2008 (→‎Hier bitte etwas posten, das beweist, dass das Kurdische Volk unterdrückt wird!). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on 21/3/2006. The result of the discussion was keep.
Archive
Archives

Please do not edit archived pages. If you want to react to a statement made in an archived discussion, please make a new header on THIS page. D.Kurdistani 09:20, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Archives:

Baba Norouz / Hajji Firouz

Alright, there is a section on hajii firouz but nothing on baba norouz who is even a more persistant cultural icon. M87 23:15, 13 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Persian Vs Iranian

An anonymous user 82.95.13.109 (Talk) has been changing all instances of 'Iranian' to 'Persian'. I'm not an expert here, but my understanding is that the word 'Persian' has some political connotations, so I'm pretty sure that violates NPOV. I have reverted the changes, but whoever made them should feel free to discuss them on this talk page first before deciding whether to continue. Pipnosis 16:41, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge

  • Support I have reviewed every little detail of what is claimed as Kurdish version of Norouz, and I can't find anything that is different besides the language that is used in the celebration.

It is important for this merge to take place as there are many, atleast 20 different local tribes and ethnic groups who celebrate Norouz in and out of Iran. There is no reason to have dozens of different articles as it is already obvious in the article that there are various people who celebrate it, even if they are not Iranian and even that they belong to various different religious groups, etc.

At the moment article is confusing as it may look like it is celebrated differently in Iran than outside Iran and by different people.

Currently, the Kurdish article is nothing different besides lots of pictures from demonstrations of a political rally, and those problems are already explained in this article. --Rayis 00:33, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. The article on Kurdish celebration of Newroz would take a very large part of the article. Newroz is an important event for Kurds, and the way they celebrate it deserves a proper coverage - especially as Newroz celebrations among Kurds in Turkey are an important way of manifesting Kurdish cultural identity, causing wider consequences in Turkish - Kurdish relations. Bertilvidet 00:37, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Bertilvidet, please read above first. I do not believe that it will. I have reviewed the legend, the history, the celebrtion and they are all similar to what ever other group of Iranian peoples celebrate it as. The importance of the Turkish situation is already very apparent in the current article. --Rayis 00:42, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Check out Christmas, its all in one article. Also, another solution would be to have an article like Christmas worldwide. What do you guys think?Azerbaijani 01:14, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, this article is comparable to Christmas, dealing with the general traits of the celebration. But, we also have articles such as Philippine Christmas traditions and Polish Christmas traditions. In the same way I do believe that the specificities of the Kurdish celebration do deserve more attention than a short summary in the main article. Bertilvidet 09:16, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Norouz worldwide is a very interesting idea, because it could include all the local traditions, and be neutral on its emphasis on tribe variations or problems celebrating it --Rayis 08:34, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support Nowruz is celebrated by Iranians, Azeris, Kurds, Tajiks, Uzbeks and Afghans and etc. There should be one article and then focus on celebration in each country. --alidoostzadeh 01:18, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I tend to be on Bertilvidet's side. It's not that the Kurdish celebration is that different and deserves another article, but that we are applying summary style and moving some details from one page to another so that it does not take away and confuse the general reader. Notice that Newroz would redirect here. -- Jeff3000 03:45, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The argument for creating the article was that they are different festivals and that it is "important for Kurds". I believe the main significant difference is political problems in Turkey, as you can see in the Kurdish article it is filled with pictures of a KDP rally. These are already addressed in the current article. I think the general reader will be confused as they may think that the Kurdish version is a different festival. This isn't the case, and the article we are talking about isn't something like "Kurdish problems in celebrating Norouz", also as I said there are dozens of other ethnic groups who celebrate it. At the moment it looks like there are two official versions, one "In the modern Iran" and the Kurdish, but this is not the case as it is celebrated the same in other countries as well as by Kurds. The Kurdish issue is mainly with human rights and it is already apparent in the article --Rayis 08:32, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, that was not the argument. Last year when all this was being flushed out and there was a discussion the reason was precisely the summary style and no other. Please read the archives of the discussion pages. -- Jeff3000 13:59, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, but looking at the legend section of the Kurdish article, it is a fork of this article. The other thing is that this article is by far not excessively large for it to be cut in to pieces. And again, the Kurdish article is already presented pretty much the same in this article. The other sections have been unreferenced since the article was created last year. So again, I do not believe the the WP:SS needs to be applyed because it specificly says "When articles grow too long". I don't really see how this rationale can apply in this case. --Rayis 15:31, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Wikipedia:Summary style. - Francis Tyers · 14:50, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How does this guideline apply here? Please see WP:SS#Rationale, most of the content of the Kurdish newroz page is the repeat of this article and the rest (such as the poetry) has been unreferenced since its creation --Rayis 15:31, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
If the Kurdish page is not well done, i t must have degraded over the past year. The better solution would be to fix it (rather than merge) so it has a concise lead that points to this page, and then goes into specific details that would be too much in this page. If all the extra information from the Kurdish page is added here it will give undue weight to the Kurdish celebration. Regards, -- Jeff3000 16:01, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't agree. "Well done"? So you are encouraging we copy the same details from this page to there? they are similar festivals! if you take out all the similar information, you are left only with the political things which are already included in this page, the merge would not really take any more space than it already does in this page. This means that there will not be much change here, and there won't be any undue weight for it --Rayis 19:15, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The Kurdish page, if you remove the mythology section which is suspect, and the lead, is 5K worth of text. The section in this article has 1.6K of text. Thus there is quite a bit of text there that if put here would be just too much detail. I'm suggesting changing that article to have an appropriate WP:LEAD that is used in a way that fits with summary style, maybe removing the Mythology section, and the rest can stay again subscribing to WP:SS where the details are in that article. Regards, -- Jeff3000 19:34, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think you keep refusing to check and see that most of the material is repeated in this article, including bits in the lead and most if not all of the mythology section --Rayis 20:43, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
In my text comparison above I did not include the mythology section or the lead, but here are the sections which are not included in this page, and if they were so would be a disservice to this page as it bloats it for no good reason:
  • The two paragraphs on the banning of the celebration by Kurds in Syria
  • The two paragrahss (sentences) of the Kurdish diaspora celebration
  • The whole controversies section, which in my mind would not be useful in this article.
  • The Kurdish literature part, which again would be way too much for this page.
Regards, -- Jeff3000 20:50, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Jeff, I believe that if we remove the non-sourced sections, I can summarise the whole thing in the section that is already in the article. There is a lot of other paragraphs of unreferenced random commentatory in the article which I do not believe are serving a real purpose right now besides giving an excuse for keeping the article --Rayis 21:27, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I want to understand the reasoning why you want that page to be removed. No one will reach that page first as Newroz redirects here, and it allows for details, which are current there, and may well be added in the future, to not indundate the casual reader who does not want the details in a summary article, just as per WP:SS. -- Jeff3000 21:44, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have explained many reasons for why above. Other than that, much of the article has been an attempt to confuse the reader that this is a "Kurdish festival" rather than a festival celebrated by Iranian peoples. It is very clear if you read the difference in here to understand why this article existed in the first place. It is not a coincidence that much of the article was done by user Diyako [1] who seems to have been banned for a year for many disruptions to Iran-related articles --Rayis 21:54, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Assume good faith on the purpose of the article. When you see confuse I see summary style in precisely the way it is supposed to be used. Why should there be a limitation in showing how Kurds celebrate this common festival/day except that it would make this page unreadable; by moving the content to another page, it solves the problem. The consensus in the past was done with many editors, of which most do not have an axe to grind with either the Iranians or the Kurds. Right now there are three supports and three opposes, and so there is no consensus to change things. -- Jeff3000 22:22, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Jeff, this is not about how many votes, it is about where the discussion goes. You are the only opposer who is willing to discuss. If the article did indeed show "how Kurds celebrate this common festival", it would have matched the title. But as I keep repeating myself, I have reviewed the material and they celebrate it exactly the same, and they include the same celebrations as part of the festival, including Chaharshanbe suri and Sizdah bedar. Any difference is minor and can be described in the Norouz article. I hope we can come to a compromise. Regards, --Rayis 22:38, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have also reviewed the material and in my mind there are portions of that article which are details that help to define what is different/important to the Kurdish celebration which should not be in this article. This is in line with WP:SS. We are both repeating ourselves. As of yet there is no consensus to merge that article into this one. Regards, -- 04:19, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Support they are not at all different --Pejman47 15:10, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support It's the same celebration. --Mardavich 22:57, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Support - - this is utterly bizarre! Noruz is essentially same tradition that has been observed for thousands of years by all Iranians (Kurds, Persians, Lurs, Baluchis, Azaris, etc.), as well as non-Iranians (Turks, Uzbeks, Turkmen, etc.), who were influenced by Iranian culture; the only difference is the pronunciation of the term which is depend on the region! If this is the case therefore, we have to create over twenty different articles here about Noruz, and call it: Khuzestani-Noruz, Luri-Nowruz, Kermani Nawruz, Yazi-Newroz, Sistani-Newruj, Esfahani-Noruz; Khorassani-Noruz and so and so forth! ← ← Parthian Shot (Talk) 08:39, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I find it really sad for Wikipedia if a majority decides to delete the article on Kurdish celebration of Newroz, and I am not sure about the motives for it. The celebration is of high importance for Kurds, and - as described in the article - it is a crucial point for Kurds to celebrate cultural identity. Search Google News and you will realize how important the event is. The notability cannot seriously be questioned. Is the aim of Wikipedia not to be a resource providing serious encyclopedical background? We have it; removing it will be a loss for the encyclopedia. Bertilvidet 21:37, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry but this doesn't justify why we should have an article for every group who celebrates it. Are you saying it is more important to Kurds than for example Mazandaranis? This festival has a page, and we shouldn't create a page for every single people who celebrate it when they do it just the same. If you feel that you should create one for controversies surrounding them celebrating it in Turkey, perhaps you should create an article called Controversies regarding Kurds celebrating the Norouz festival in Turkey, but I am not sure how that would be "serious encyclopedical", because it is not. It may be a sad time for Kurdish human rights in Turkey but it doesn't mean we should change the rules because of it --Rayis 21:55, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The Kurdish article is not breaking any rules. Please point me to one policy which states that page cannot exist. In fact there are guidelines that do allow for it's inclusion, WP:SS. Secondly there is nothing wrong with articles on other countries celebrating the festival in their unique way; please create them. -- Jeff3000 22:16, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Already discussed Jeff. It seems like we have consensus too --Rayis 22:19, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You quite well know that there is no consensus, and without consensus the status quo stays. I've asked an admin to give his opinions. -- Jeff3000 22:22, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
6/2 is not consensus? I appreciate an admin's point of view. --Rayis 22:26, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's 6/3, and consensus is not based on vote counting in Wikipedia. Please see WP:CONSENSUS. -- Jeff3000 22:32, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Usually we don't count anonymous votes - which will make it 5/3.A t least we should be able agree on how to count. Bertilvidet 22:37, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The first vote was not anonymous, it came with my nomination --Rayis 22:41, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Yet another attack on the Kurdish content in Wikipedia. Oppose because Kurds celebrate Newroz differently and this is notable to be in the main article; Norouz but since it has a huge story behind it, it deserves a seperate article. In addition Kurdish Newroz is celebrated as an official London festival; http://www.london.gov.uk/londoner/06mar/p7b.jsp?nav=on. How can it not be notable or important enough to deserve an article. Ozgur Gerilla 22:53, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kurds don't celebrate it differently, they just celebrate it! This is an encyclopedia and it should reflect the facts. Because of the recent interest in pro-Kurdish rights, there have been many attempts to highlight their culture and festivals which is all good. However in this case, this is a festival celebrated in many countries by many people. The article existed for a year and it still doesn't show that they celebrate it differently, infact they celebrate it exactly the same as others. --Rayis 23:01, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, Kurds celebrate it very different to Persians and obviously for some different reasons. Fire is what symbolizes the Kurdish festival whereas for Persians fire is nothing in Newroz. Kurds jump around this fire and play Halay whereas the Persians don't do this; where for the Kurds, That's the whole point! This is how and why Persians celebrate it; http://www.aiap.org/norooz/about_norooz.html Now, for somebody that knows this, it is very different. It seems to me there is a lot of people in Wiki who know nothing about some issues, it is these people who think they can make quality contribution, who use Internet sites (which lack the truth) to back their arguments and avoid the reality. Let's remember it's the reality that needs to be written in these articles, because we aren't a fiction encyclopedia. Ozgur Gerilla 23:47, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's not correct, Kurds, Persians, Azeris and everyone else celebrate Norouz in the exact same fashion, fire is important for everyone in pre-Norouz festivities such as 4shaneh souri. --Mardavich 13:35, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but it smells chauvinism a little bit by saying that Kurds are totally unique.We Turks celebrate it the same as u do; but some people try to convert it to a some kind of challenging between different communities.(butoprak) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.226.232.10 (talk) 00:43, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I just realize that substantial amount of information about the Kurdish celebration of the article has been removed from its article, see [2]. I do certainly not hope this was an attempt to prove a point in order to get the article deleted. Bertilvidet

I didn't edit this because I do not know a great deal about the history part. But I know for sure that the contemporary celebrations are notable, and deserve and article. Bertilvidet 23:56, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
See the simply solution below. Nouroz is all one celebration, whether it be Kurds or anyone else. This is like saying that the Christmas in Germany is not the same celebration as the Christimas in the US. We can just have one article talking about Nouroz, and another article, Nouroz worldwide, talking about how it is celebrated everywhere else.Azerbaijani 00:11, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The celebration that the Kurds currently celebrate as their new year, transliterated as Newroz, while originally having the same origin, as the Persian celebration has rightly or wrongly morphed into something that is quite different, both in it's believed source (again rightly or wrongly) and its significance to the Kurdish people. Currently the Kurds see the new year as a political movement seen to fight against the cultural repression that they believe is prevalent in Turkey [3]; it was for a long time illegal for the Kurds to celebrate the new year in Turkey [4]. Because of this the meaning of the holiday is quite different to the Kurds than other Iranian peoples; for example they look at the persecution that has happened at different new years [5]. Furthermore, the believed source of the holiday has changed and Kurds celebrate some other Kurdish legends [6][7]. While this new source, is for the most part probably fictitious and created ([8]) it is nevertheless a documentable belief that is significantly different that the original reason for Norouz, and thus needs to be in Wikipedia. We shouldn't take value judgements over why Kurds have created a new source for Norouz, but just document it, and also document that there are views that it is may not be true and that it was originally from the Persian. In doing so, placing all that information in this article would add too much detail for a general description of Norouz, and thus needs to instead placed in a daughter article as per summary style. Regards, -- Jeff3000 17:19, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff, please don't generalise things like that. "Kurds" are an ethnic group consisting of millions of people; they haven't all "done" something together. If a few people put up a few websites or write a few articles, these do not necessarily reflect what all Kurds believe or do. We all agree about the Kurds problems celebrating Norouz, but these do not mean that for "Kurds" everywhere Norouz means anything else besides what it has meant for possibly thousands of years. This is a neutral Encyclopedia, and there is no reason for it to focus on something more than it is the case in reality --Rayis 17:36, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The Kurds, while being from the same ancestors as other Iranian people, are an ethnic group and are composed of millions of people, (see the reliable sources in the Kurdish people article). I have already provided academic sources that provide for the differences, and here is another. From Nevruz or Newroz? Deconstructing the 'Invention' of a Contested Tradition in Contemporary Turkey., Yanik, Lerna K Middle Eastern Studies, vol. 42, no. 2, pp. 285-302, March 2006. From that article:
  • "In the late 1980s, with the rise of Kurdish nationalism and the terror that accompanied it, however, in Turkey, the concept of Nevruz as well as the celebration of it had come to be associated with Kurdish identity."
  • "Thus it can be argued that Nevruz was ‘invented’ or adopted to cope with these two challenges, and mostly to balance and neutralize, at least culturally, rising Kurdish nationalism. Moreover, the adoption of Nevruz meant polishing the image of Turkey for which the Kurdish issue had been a constant source of tension and thus considered a big hurdle in the way of possible membership of the European Union."
  • "Nevruz day and the rituals of the Nevruz tradition, such as people gathering and jumping over a bonfire, were used as a means to express Kurdish identity in Eastern Turkey where the population is overwhelmingly of Kurdish origin, and to some degree within some enclaves in Istanbul and Ankara where again the number of people of Kurdish origin is high. Secondly, the PKK (Partiya Karkaren Kurdistan) (Kurdistan Workers’ Party) specifically chose the Nevruz day to stage various terrorist attacks in order to obtain maximum publicity for its cause. This Kurdish association with Nevruz became increasingly pronounced after the 1950s when the Kurds in the Middle East and Europe slowly started to adopt Nevruz as a tradition. Coupled with the suppression they suffered, the ‘recovery’ of Nevruz became more intense and more ‘politicized’. In using Nevruz as their symbol of revival and resurrection the Kurds referred to an interesting legend in their mythology according to which, Nevruz marked the celebration of the uprising led by Kawa, a blacksmith, against Dehhak, a repressive ruler. Kawa, according to the legend, killed Dehhak and freed his people.15 Despite its importance for most of the Alevi-Bektashi groups in the region in general,16 Nevruz came to be associated by the end of the 1980s mainly with Kurdish identity as well as with the attempts to express and resurrect it."
Reliable sources that clearly show the political and cultural differences associated with the celebration of the Kurds. Furthermore, another interesting point in the article is why Turkey legalized Nevruz, it was due to cope with Kurdish Nationalism and to fend off the EU. These are all important aspects that need to be mentioned, and again would clutter up this page, and thus should be in a daughter article as per summary style. Regards, -- Jeff3000 17:52, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A few lines on this matter can be summarised easily, if not, as I have mentioned previously, we can dedicate an article to the problems Kurds face in celebrating it in Turkey. These problems are not faced by Kurds who live in Iran, Syria, and Iraq. I think by now you have shown your point of view and I would appreciate it if you let others comment. Regards, --Rayis 17:58, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


"people gathering and jumping over a bonfire" is the same as other places. and "nevruz marked the celebration of the uprising led by Kawa, a blacksmith, against Dehhak, a repressive ruler. Kawa, according to the legend, killed Dehhak and freed his people." this is not the true legend regarding Newrouz but you can find it exactly the same in Shahnameh--Pejman47 18:07, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
an important fact that was neglected here, is that all the things that opponents of Merge says are all about kurds in TURKEY, only third of kurds live in turkey and in Iran not only they didn't and don't have any problem for celebrating it, but they are encouraged to do that! and in Iran 4 consequative days are holidays just for Newroz, if the community decides to not merging this article; it should at least must be renamed to "Celebration of Newroz in Kurds of Turkey and Syria"--Pejman47 18:42, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose merger - just because it may be a common holiday amongst Iranian subgroups, if that's even the right label to include Kurds, doesn't rob the distinctiveness of the Kurdish cultural expression and coverage by wikipedia seems fair to me.--Smkolins 18:32, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Smkolins, the "distinctiveness of Kurdish culture" in case of Norouz has not been shown! only political problems facing Kurds in Turkey celebrating Norouz. --Rayis 18:35, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It has been shown; they use a different legend as their source (again rightly or wrongly). Furthermore, here are more reliable sources that show that this is not only a thing for the Kurds in Turkey. First of all, from the article quoted above:
  • "This Kurdish association with Nevruz became increasingly pronounced after the 1950s when the Kurds in the Middle East and Europe slowly started to adopt Nevruz as a tradition."
From the book "Echoes of Violence: Letters from a War Reporter" (2007) by Carolin Emcke which is based on reports in Iraq:
  • "It is Newroz, the Kurdish New Year, and they are celebrating the story of the blacksmith Kawa, their first resistance fighter. Kawa freed his people 2,600 years ago from the despotic Kind Duhok. Now they are fighting for liberation again, and Nasraddin's unit longs for a speak from their taciturn commander"
From "The Australian People: An Encyclopedia of the Nation, its People and their Origins" (2001) by James Jupp:
  • "The most common Kurdish celebration in Australia is Newroz. This occasion does not only mark the beginning of the Kurdish new year but is also considered the Kurdish National Day."
From "Mustafa Barzani and the Kurdish Liberation Movement" by Massoud Barzani and Ahmed Ferhadi which again is things happening in Iraq:
  • "The Party organized the Newroz Celbrations of 1954 in Arbil, Suleimniyya, Halabja, Koy Sanjaq where mass gatherings were held with tend of thousand of workers, peasants, intelligensia and laborers in attendence. Patriotic slogans, speeches outlining Kurdish demands, and patriotic songs were presented."
From "Kurdish Diasporas: A comparative Study of Kurdish Refugee Communities" (1999) by Osten Wahlbeck in a chapter about Kurds in Finland
  • "The extand of contacts between Kurds and the majority population also becamse apparent during the Newroz celebrations (the Kurdish New Year)."
  • "The Newroz celebration was another way of demonstrating support for the Kurdish cause."
  • "Newroz is an important celebration for all Kurds."
From "The Kurds" by Philip G. Kreyenbroek and Stefan Sperl in the chapter on "The Kurds in Syria and Lebanon":
  • "Newroz (New Year's Day) is a popular Kurdish festival celebrated on 21 March each year by Kurds everywhere, dress in their national dress....In Afrin, Kurd Dagh, the celebration of Newroz cost the Kurds three dead and eighty arrests. Now the festival of Newroz is once again tolerated."
In "The Kurds: Culture and Language Rights" by Krim Yildiz (2004):
  • "According to Human Rights Watch, Kurds in Syria have had the struggle to obtain permission to celebrate Newroz, and in the past htis celebration has been met with violent repression. A report written in 1994 by officials from two embasses based in Damascus concurred by stating that Newroz events are tolerated as long as they do not become political demonstrations protesting the treatment of the Kurds".
These sources show that the the political nature of Newroz for the Kurds and the mytical legend source for it is uniquely Kurdish, and is celebrated by Kurds throughout the world, including those is diaspora. Regards, -- Jeff3000 18:46, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Jeff, we had already established that there are political associations regarding some Kurds. I will list the reasons I believe the articles should merge:

1- There are dozens of ethnicities who celebrate this festival, many with very few traditions that make their celebration any different to what is regarded as "Norouz" that Iran celebrates as it's new year's festival

2- There are no reliable, third party sources that show Kurds, especially as an ethnic group, celebrate it different to a degree that it is necessary for it to be a seperate article. Currently, the major part of the section for Kurdish celebration is dominated by the political problems of Kurds celebrating the matter in Turkey, and only one or two sentences about how the difference in traditions of the festival.

3- I believe, as others have voted also, we can have a nice balance of information regarding the traditions of Kurdish celebrations of this festival and a short paragraph summarising the problems in Turkey (which I believe have stopped by now since Turkey celebrates it as its own spring holiday) in this article

4- This paragaph can be a very nice addition to this article but so far the focus has not been to provide reliable sources, atleast in the articles, regarding how "Kurds" celebrate this matter. Mainly, 5 million Iranian Kurds take little part in the "random collection of links" mainly referring to newspapers and pictures of political rallys in Turkey are used as sources.

I think if any effort is being put by those who oppose this merge is being put in getting votes rather than actually checking the articles and providing sources, currently the article is a mess, and before I started removing nonsense from it, it was even worse. So I really would like to suggest more effort in to the article which as it stands, half of it is regarding the politics and the other half is mainly poorly referenced and it is covered from top to bottom with pictures of a Democratic Society Party rally. Maybe then there would be a real reason for the article not to be merged in a nice summary (currently its impossible with the amount of unreferenced or poorly referenced info and all the political rally pictures). Thanks, --Rayis 20:09, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Rayis but you are completely misinterpreting the discussion. The only sources given in this discussion are those that show that the Kurds celebrate it differently. None of the support statements have said anything other than "support-they are the same". The second range of sources show clearly that this is not solely a Turkish thing but a Kurdish movement, all throughout the middle east and in diasapora. Throughout the world the celebration has political and nationalistic feelings that do not exist in other celebrations. So let's go through your points one on one:

  1. This argument doesn't hold water. That the other ethnicities or countries do not celebrate it differently, does not invalidate that the Kurds do. If other groups do celebrate it differently go ahead and create articles for the other celebrations as well. The Kurdish article is definitely abiding by Wikipedia policies of summary style.
  2. "No reliable third party sources" - I have shown many above, in Turkey, in Syria, in disaspora, and that is only through a short search.
  3. The Wikipedia guideline of summary style addresses this point exactly. There is a nice balance in this article, and that does not imply that more information cannot be provided in the daughter article.
  4. See point above, I've provided journals and books. Please read reliable sources and you'll see, they are considered very reliable. -- Jeff3000 20:18, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Jeff as I said, if you want the article to improve, go ahead and do so. The sources you have provided in this discussion do not make the article any fitter to keep. Unless there is an improvement there is no doubt that it should be nominated for an AfD (only after the sourced info is summarised in this paragraph here). You have by no means shown why there is any needs to have a seperate article on this matter as your references only confirm what is already available in the article and the paragraph here! As you point out regarding the WP:SS and also "undue weight" most of the information in the Kurdish celebration of Norouz is regarding the political problems, and little has been focused on what it is regarding the celebration that is different to how others celebrate it! If it is just jumping over the fire, when fire symbolises more to Kurds than others, I don't see how that shouldn't just be summarised in the Norouz article. If it is just to make a point that the celebration is political, then it is definately worth it to understand that it misses the whole idea of it being a celebration as well as the fact that it is not a widely celebrated event by "Kurds" in the region (as a political festival!), so again: Most Kurds celebrate the Norouz festival, in a very similar manner to others, and recently it has been associated with politics, and there have been problems in Turkey for the Kurds there to celebrate it. I do not believe this matter really needs an article to itself, while it can be nicely summarised in the Norouz article. Unless you can really show that this can not be done, I don't believe there is a reason for the article not to be merged in to Norouz. --Rayis 20:31, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I will get to that article in a second. I have also brought this discussion up at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Society, law, and sex -- Jeff3000 20:55, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Great, although I hope you did not miss the other parts of my discussion. In any case improvement may be useful for merge anyway. Thanks, --Rayis 20:58, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


  • Support That can be an international article with section on Kurds , Persians , Azeries, Tajiks , Afghanis , Tajiks and etc .Comparsion would be more possible. That's also possible to draw a map to show the Geographical places that celebrate Nouwroz ...

Alborz Fallah 9 March 2007

  • Support

'The very same was argued last year and the conclusion is with clear intention being ignored by non relevant facts about how an ancient Iranian festival has come to attain political significance for a section of Kurds who has decided to exploit their Iranian identity in countries which oppose it

But to some again association with the same Iranian identity would not serve the greater political agenda of fabricatiing an exclusive parallel history

hence the desire to paint it all new

what exactly does it prove to bring line from an source stating that for kurds in Australia and Finland Norouz is important? what ofcourse they are an Iranian people Norouz is also important for afghanis living in Australia and Finland

Ok Barzani and PKK decided to launch some major move on Norouz! so bloody what even Khamenei the leader of the IR of Iran has to appear on TV every bloody Norouz to greet the nation because its Iran after all and Norouz is the pillar of Iranian Identity

So some western commentator grasped some shiity grain of understanding about some political struggle when he saw them during their new year gathering ......soooooooooooooooo what ????

Its like a dude from asia who has never heard of Christmas or Easter travelling to Basque or Kosovo and commenting on how he understood of these people trough their celebration Christmas

Its the same and all the more beautiful that some Kurds in turkey should choose at least once a year to engage in their Iranian identity which hurts some wiki editors who dont even know or care to know if in Tajikestan and Azarbaijan it too is a festival and that there too they incorporate fire

but distinct dogmatic editing is not even concerned???--129.241.91.138 13:14, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is not the purpose of Wikipedia to make judgements over certain facts. It's purpose is to document them. The facts are that, rightly or wrongly, for the Kurds the meaning of Norouz has changed from what it was originally for most Iranian peoples. This needs to be documented. It has nothing to do with serving political purposes - it has happened, it needs to be documented. By not documenting then Wikipedia would serve the opposite political purpose of censoring what is happening in Kurdish reasons. That Kurds all over the world, including Australia, Finland, the UK all celebrate the day as a national day further shows that in fact has transformed and this needs to be documented.
You mention "sooooo what?" Again the point of Wikipedia is not to ask this question, but document what has happened. Political ralleys have happened, Norouz has become a symbol of Kurdish represssion. It has happened, it has been published in multiple reliable sources and thus per Wikipedia's attribution policy definitely has a place in Wikipedia as it is both verifiable and notable. Regards, -- Jeff3000 13:52, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


With all due respect when u say political rallies have happened? If a political rally happens in a country which disallows Christmas or Diwali due to some goverment policy that rally does not become part of the definition of that festival it sure may deserve mention but it is a sporadic fact in 2500 years of celebration and evolution of the concept of that festival

if this Norouz (and its quite possible) somebody like ahmadinejad decides to launch another "statement" on Norouz to rally the citizens of IR around some motive ..then yes "sooooo what?" is the appropriate remark and it definitely does not need to the grace the article, someone may fancy a page on it since as you may put it It has happened

Iam sorry people in Kermanshah are Kurds they dont share the same anxiety, people in Ilam are kurds they also dont but hell maybe the MKO and the iranian opposition in general too uses Norouz to meet and propbably rally against the Islamic republic and they are are not even Kurds it is 20-21 st century political usage of a tradition its not a defining factor

Iranians or Iranian people all over the world be it Lor, Afghan or Mazi etc, celebrate it as their National day This transformation you refer to is a POV and it excludes Iranian Kurds to start with

Regards --129.241.91.138 14:27, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please read the Newroz celebration by Kurds and read the citations. First of all the text states by the majority of the Kurds in mostly Turkey and Syria and Iraq; that the Iranian Kurds don't celebrate it the same way as the other Kurds (which no one has found a reliable source to state for or otherwise) does not invalidate it for the other Kurds (which are a majority of Kurds) which do have reliable sources. Please go read the citations; the political-ness of the celebration for the Kurds in Syria, Iraq and Turkey have been documented in the reliable sources in the article from multiple books, and that is how they are presented. Secondly, this is not a sporadic event, and your example is not at all germane. The sources clearly show that the celebration has been used differently for decades and is notable. Take for example, your statement on Ahmadinejad giving a certain speech; how does one decide if that statement should be in Wikipedia; well the guideline of notability comes into play which states "A topic is notable if it has been the subject of secondary sources. Such sources must be reliable, independent of the subject and independent of each other. The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered." So if the statement of Ahmadinejad was published by multiple reliable sources then it could be in Wikipedia, just as in other rallys have articles in Wikipedia such as the 2006 Tonga riots. In this case, not only is the event not a singular event, but the notability of the event for the Kurds has amply been shown by the numerous books and articles that have been published on it. Regards, -- Jeff3000 15:16, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
after reading this [9] (it is in persian)I decided that it maybe better to have both articles remain, and renamed the kurdish one to "Celebration of Newroz by Kurds in Turkey". It should not generalize Kurds of Turkey to Iraq or Iran, because in Iran never Norouz was prohibited and doesn't have the "hidden meaning" that kurds of turkey may have in celebrating it. --Pejman47 23:37, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Simple solution

Why dont we just create another article like Christmas worldwide, instead of having one article for each group that celebrates this holiday. Its the same holiday, we should not have so many seperate articles, whats to stop someone from making German Christmans, French Christmas, Chinese Christmas, etc...?Azerbaijani 21:29, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's a possible solution, but how many of these page exist so far to have the need to create a Norouz worldwide. -- Jeff3000 21:44, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Norouz is celebrated by and in many countries, there is no reason why we shouldn't do this. --Rayis 22:13, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It would be fine with a Newroz worldwide article. But this should not lead to an attack on pages dealing with specific variations and factors of importance of the celebration at some locations. We also have Philippine Christmas traditions and Polish Christmas traditions. (btw, most of it have been discussed before, 1 year ago a merge was also proposed, may I kindly suggest you all to read the talk page here) Bertilvidet 08:31, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This idea is just preposterous. We have articles like Philippine Christmas traditions and Polish Christmas traditions thus why not have Kurdish Newroz and Persian Newroz and a main Newroz article. Let's remember Christmas is an equivalent celebration to Newroz. Ozgur Gerilla 12:48, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, those are countries not an ethnic group. Secondly, they are based on different traditions celebrating a festival, however Kurds celebrate it the same. The article existed for a year and no reference has yet been provided to show that the traditions are different to how anyone else celebrates it; it was full of nonsense like "it is a kurdish word and not related to Iran or Turkey", which were not only politically motivated statements but also completley untrue and unreferenced rhetorics. Supporting Kurdish human rights is one thing, making up random facts is another --Rayis 15:52, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So what are you suggesting, that a countries tradition and celebration is unique enough to be on Wikipedia but not ethnic groups differences. This is not really logical. It's different; from the way Kurds centrelise the fire and symbolize it from the story. Keep the article and my team (WikiProject Kurdistan) will provide the necessary references. Ozgur Gerilla 16:40, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Its worth noting that this is not an AfD, but merely a proposal to merge. - Francis Tyers · 16:48, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fire is an important part of the festival and Norouz is a fundamental Zoroastrian festival, so of course fire is very symbolic in it. The legend behind what Norouz celebrate is exactly the same as Iranians. Any other difference is minor, please provide your references (reliable, neutral, third party sources) now, it has already been a year. --Rayis 13:26, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think creating Norouz worldwide would be a good compromise, with sections on regional celebrations by Kurds, Mazandranis, Azeris, etc. --Mardavich 13:42, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why the "worldwide"? The current article title "Norouz" is perfect for that purpose, with sections added for specifics in each area. I mean, "Norouz" is a worldwide thing anyway, so there's no point in adding the word! Shervink 14:20, 8 March 2007 (UTC)shervink[reply]
Not to replace this article, but to complete it with details about regional traditions of Noroz. --Mardavich 20:19, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Haft Sin

Haft sin is not just any 7 things starting with a sin. It is 7 specific items, all starting with a sin, and each one has a special meaning! Can someone please correct this (major) issue please. Ahmad 19:37, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I did a quick fix of this section and the original article. It still needs cleaning up though. Ahmad 20:01, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Last thursday night" ceremony ...

Visiting cemeteries , to clean up the tombs and to remember the passed ancestors , (Shab - Jomyeh Akhar sal : Last Thursday night of the year )is also a tradition of Norooz in Iran : It seems to have long history and it maybe related to the ancestor's worship of ancient times ( before Zoroastrianism) --Alborz Fallah March 9

Merge

The article, "Kurdish celebration of Newroz" should be merged into this section. It is the same holiday. Norouz is the ancient Persian new year. The celebration comes from the Zoroastrian religion. Kurds are one of the ancient Iranian tribes and event today their closest relatives are Persian people. Kurds share their culture and heritage with Persians and other Iranian people. There should not be a duplicate article....it is just confusing for people who are not familiar with the subject.Dariush4444 01:08, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We've had this discussion above. While they have originated from the same source, the Kurds now see Newroz as a national movement, which is highly politicized. They have created a new legend as the source of it (which is ficticious but is something they believe in). This is something unique to the Kurds, both in Turkey and abroad. I'm in the process of completely sourcing the other article, and the verifiable information shall not be deleted. -- Jeff3000 04:49, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Jeff, as much as I appreciate your efforts, that is your POV. As we discussed above, not all Kurds have the same point of view. When you say "Kurds now see" or "They have created", you are talking about a group of them, minority or majority obviously no one knows. However none of your sources refer to Iranian Kurds and how they see the situation, and also many of your other sources are not based on the matter alone but seem like random parts of books (a medicine for immigrants book?!) that refer to the celebration and should not be used to back up such generalised statements regarding all Kurds --Rayis 14:33, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
First you complain that there are no sources, and not that I've fully referenced the article, you complain that the sources are not good enough. The sources clearly pass by the criteria of reliable sources. Instead of complaining, I encourage you to also find sources, rather than wanting to delete attributed statements. -- Jeff3000 15:55, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Jeff I said I appreciate your efforts and then, I mentioned that some of your sources are weak and they shouldn't be used to support such generalised statements like Kurds have done this and Kurds believe that, which are not complaints, I am just pointing them out --Rayis 16:13, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology

The source provided for the etymology section was from an article in Online Encyclopaedia. At the end of the article, it states that This article is from Wikipedia. so I removed it. I am sure better sources can be found.Heja Helweda 19:19, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

THe Tajiks in China?

I get the impression that Noruz is a Persian-Turkish holiday, so do the Tajiks (who are Persian) who live in China celebrate this as well? Le Anh-Huy 23:28, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Haji Firuz!

Why is there no section about Haji Firuz? I cant find any good information about this guy anywhere. But from what I've been told, he's a slave who has been freed by the Persians and is celebrating Norouz through silly songs and laughter 216.175.76.251 06:42, 22 March 2007 (UTC)Sam[reply]

LOKK THAT VIDEO ABOUT NEWROZ IN TURKEY

Hier bitte etwas posten, das beweist, dass das Kurdische Volk unterdrückt wird!

Ich hab hier mal ein Video, das beweist, das die Kurden nicht mal Recht auf Newroz haben!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6uu5OPMPaI

Bitte drauf klicken und weinen!!!!!  :(

push the button!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Tradition?

From the article: "Nowruz dates back 15.000 years(!)" Gimme a break!

Move to Nowruz

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.


"Nowrūz" is the proper classic Persian transliteration. Although both "Nowruz" and "Norouz" are common spellings, "Nowruz" is closer to all the different pronounciations (not just the Tehrani pronounciation). Besides, many academic figures such as Yarshater use this spelling in English texts. Jahangard 01:39, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Noted at Wikipedia:WikiProject Iran, and re-listed. --Stemonitis 08:42, 17 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Name

There is a long-standing consensus for this page to be titled Norouz. There are many other transliterations of the word, and per Wikipedia guidelines WP:NAME, the name of the article should be named the one that is most popular in English language publications, which is clearly Norouz as can be seen by a search on Google. If you have reasons to want to change the name, you should discuss it here, as per Wikipedia:Requested_moves#Steps_for_requesting_a_.28possibly.29_controversial_page_move. Regards, -- Jeff3000 04:07, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Both "Nowruz and "Norouz are common spellings. WP:NAME doesn't advise blindly relying on googl hits. "Nowruz" is consistent with standard Persian transliterations (for example look at [10]). Also, "Nowruz" is the most common spelling in academic texts (search Google scholar), and English books (search in http://books.google.com). Jahangard 04:19, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, "Nowruz" and "Nawroz" are closer to the standard Persian transliteration and to the standard Persian pronunciation. I suggest whether Nowruz or Nawroz.Ariana310 09:36, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please see Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Arabic) (and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Persian), which started from the Arabic MoS). There are strict, standard, and primary translations, and while academic articles might follow the standard or strict transliterations, when there is a primary transliteration (like Mecca over Makkah) that should be used for the article title. Regards, -- Jeff3000 12:56, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The Wikipedia:Manual of Style (Persian) is not yet approved/confirmed; still waiting for which transliteration system to choose (Iranica, ALA-LC for Persian, or Broad IPA). Norouz is not a primary transliteration yet, so we should try to use the standard transliteration. Your example about Mecca can be the same as Morocco for Al-Maghreb. That is an English name for a city or country, not a transliteration.Ariana310 15:16, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There are some small differences among the differnt standard transliterations. However, in the case of "Nowruz", it is closer to all the standard transliterations (see [11]). About primary and standard transliteration, "Norouz" is not much more common that "Nowruz" and here we are choosing between two common spellings where one of them ("Nowruz") is consistent with the transliteration tradition and the other one is not. I also should note that "Nowruz" is indeed more common in English books (search in http://books.google.com), and the search result for English books is a better criterion for the usage in English. The reason is that on the web, many search results for "Norouz" are related to some Pinglish pages (not English). Also, for many of them, the main title of this page (which was "Norouz" since 2004) has been influential (for example, see [12] for the search results in June 2006). If we blindly rely on the Web search results, for Non-Western names, the first arbitrary spelling which is used in Wikipedia will be the most common spelling after a while and it doesn't make sense to consider it as a criterion. Jahangard 16:22, 7 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Jahangard, Nowruz is a much better choice. Shervink 15:35, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The standard Arabic transliteration is "nawrūz". This word is Persian, and according to all the standard transliteration schemes for Persian [13], it should be transliterated as either "nawrūz" or "nowrūz". Between these two, "nowrūz" (and its simple form "nowruz") is the most common in the English books (check on books.google.com), as well as the academic articles (check scholar.google.com), and is prefered in Iranica. Jahangard 18:42, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

It isn't the strongest majority I've ever seen, but given that this request has been repeatedly advertised and drawn out over more than two weeks, I don't think anything much could be added to it. I haven't seen much evidence of a "long-standing consensus", which only leaves Google-hits in favour of the spelling "Norouz". As pointed out above, this trend is reversed when studying only more scholarly works. This article has been renamed from Norouz to Nowruz as the result of a move request. --Stemonitis 11:27, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nowruz&oldid=183893718"