Jump to content

Talk:Nowruz/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3

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)

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)


The goldfish: I'm sorry but the bowl with a goldfish is not a persian tradition. It's more or less a modern occurence (since around 80 years)leading to abuse and death of millions of goldfish. Looking at the natural distribution of the grey carp (which was domiesticated by the chinese to the goldfish) we can see that you can not find them in the near east where Iran is placed. You can only find them living in east Asia. How could it be possible for the ancient persians to get that fish from kilometers far away just to put them on their Haft-Sin table? So the information given here is wrong. It would be nice to change that. But in ancient persia they did have a bowl filled with fresh water! Inside that you could find a red apple or a pomgranade. If you look at old paintings of the Haft-Sin you will see that but you will never find a goldfish on them. Thank you! Saman02 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saman02 (talk • contribs) 16:01, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Concerning Goldfish

This article (published by Mehr News Agency, 12 March 2010), in Persian, argues that goldfish has no deep historical root in the Iranian Haftsin. It states that goldfish was introduced in Iran as late as some 70-80 years ago, together with tea, from China. A very relevant information in this article is that in the painting by Kamal ol-Molk, in Golestan Palace, of a Haftsin, there is no goldfish to be seen. The article further states that the colour red, now-a-days represented by goldfish, is in the Zoroastrian traditions represented by pommegranate and red apples.

It is perhaps relevant to mention that Mehr News Agency is very genuinely concerned about wildlife, state of the historical monuments, etc. They often provoke hostile comments by the officials for their unapologetic reports. Examples of their positive campaign for wildlife are this ("... living animals that die innocently"), this ("death of goldfish"), and this ("Recommendations of animal husbandry concerning buying and taking care of goldfish"). --BF 17:28, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

See WP:RS. A. Shahbazi (2003) mentions ".. if one considers the sofra of Nowruz as a whole and disregards the letter sin, its essential items perfectly afford reasonable explanation as the reflections of the pastoral and sedentary conditions of ancient Iranians and of their beliefs,..The Kara Māhi, which swims in the Vourukaša sea and wards off harmful creatures (Boyce, Zoroastrianism I, p. 89), is represented by the fish in the jar. This analysis, which can be taken much further, shows that the essential objects of the Nowruz table are very ancient and meaningful..". Xashaiar (talk) 17:44, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Several points are in order. First, the main issue is "Goldfish", and not just some fish (my above comment has bearing on "Goldfish"). Second, "Vourukaša sea" is a metaphor (see Vourukasha), and not some sea somewhere, even though some people have identified it (incorrectly in my opinion) with some existing sea, notably with "Arabian sea", of all seas! Third, the name "Kara Māhi" consists of two words, "Kara" and "Mahi", where "Kara" is the Turkish word "Ghareh" (قره), which means "black", thus "Kara Mahi" means "Black Fish", which clearly is different from "Goldfish", which is red. I am only aware of "Ghareh Broun" (قره برون), meaning "Black Nose", which is just the Persian "Tas Mahi" (تاس ماهی), which is a kind of sturgeon. Clearly, no one puts a sturgeon on the Haftsin table. Fourth, the article by Shahbazi, to which you have referred, contains remarks relating to Qoran on Haftsin, dish prepared in the name of Fatemeh Zahra, etc., all of which relate to Islamic traditions, so that they cannot have been part of the "Zoroastrian traditions" to which I explicitly referred in my original comment hereabove. Fifth and last, nowhere have I said that the statement published by Mehr News Agency has to be taken as revealed fact, even though it makes sense to me. With my comment, I only meant to suggest that the issue needs to be looked into, as goldfish on Haftsin may indeed be an addition to it not older than 70 to 80 years. --BF 20:25, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
That may require WP:OR?... I am not making any remark on the disputed original date of "goldfish on haftsin table". The point is that as Shahbazi (pointing to Boyce comments) makes clear: "fish has an ancient Iranian significance and related to Zoroastrianism". This little "fish" has "sometime ago/for some reason/somewhat" become goldfish. I do not care about colour (this one is gold). Xashaiar (talk) 22:01, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
You are perfectly entitled to care or not to care! If you really do not care, as you claim, why do you write comments here? To be sure, my comments are not directed to you, but to all who care about details. The photograph that you present with "this one is gold" (i.e. this), has the photograph of Ahmad Shah Qajar hanging on the wall (king between 1909 and 1925), while Kamal ol-Molk was active in the court of Ahmad Shah's grandfather, Naser ad-Din Shah Qajar (king between 1848 and 1896). Assuming that the drawing dates from 1930, it is 80 years old, which therefore cannot contradict the statement by Mehr News Agency. I should however add that the copyright statement of the drawing states "before 1970", so that it could date from 1969, making it entirely devoid of any historical significant in the context of the discussion at hand. --BF 22:56, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Your comment on the date is uninteresting. Why did you assume the painter of that Haftsin is somebody that your most advanced imaginations can introduce to you?! By this I mean: painters who paint historical images do care about the time that their paintings are going to represent. Therefore please do not make comment like "before 1970 hence I am right". I do not want this article to be khamenized. Therefore I am entitled and should respond to any irrelevant comment by any user. please educate yourself by visiting the front page of this very encyclopedia where it says "free". If you have any source (I mean "source" and not press tv or Khameni office that you usually bring) that contradicts Shahbazi then add it without discussion. Xashaiar (talk) 23:47, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
ps. Fish has also significance in Christianity. The early Christians, before Christianity became state religion, used to depict Jesus Christ as a fish; it was their code to let other Christians know that they were followers of Christ. It could be that this symbolism has its root in Mithraism (the religion of Mehr), with which Christianity has many similarities (there are some who claim that Jesus Christ spend some of his early years in India, acquainting himself with Mithraism --- there are even some shrines built after him in the area). The question is whether fish has in some ways reached us (and Haftsin in the form of goldfish) through Mithraism, or through Christianity. It is important to realise that Zoroastrianism went against Mithraism (and suppressed and supplanted it in Iran), declaring some of their gods as demons (see e.g. Daeva). --BF 23:29, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
Xashaiar: You are as rude and unschooled as it can get! Even after I told you so earlier today, albeit in a milder manner! As for your term khamenized, what is it supposed to imply? Is saying something about goldfish on Haftsin prohibited by your command or by the command of those who oppose Khamenei? What closed minds one does not encounter here on Wikipedia! Your callous and self-righteous cries on this page are deafening! You just behave as if you had the last word on every subject matter Iranian, and when you lose the argument, you begin to insult! Earlier today, you rudely removed the flag of a country from the entry of Nowruz (using that hubristic pronoun "We", as though you represented all who have a right to Nowruz) that has as much right to Nowruz as any other nation in the area, claiming that it was inappropriate! Who gave you all this right to decide on the rights of other people? To fill Wikipedia pages with stale chauvinism and bigotry is not a characteristic of someone steeped in Iranian Culture! If you spent less time roaming Wikipedia, and insulting people, you would have known that it was Mehr News Agency that brought the building of new buildings near the Anahita Temple in Kangavar, Kermanshah, to public attention. It is Mehr News Agency that is constantly hammering on the care about Persepolis, about the Lions of Khuzestan and about countless other worthy causes. Last week they were in a fist-fight with a government Minister about Persepolis! Mind you, it is not your evident small-mindedness that I am complaining about (after all, that is entirely your business how small-minded you wish to be), but about your utter ignorance as to how to write in response to others (I told you earlier this morning that in an earlier occasion you used the word "bloody" in your response to me, clearly utterly ignorant about the meaning of this word). You just accuse me of Khamenizing Wikipedia for having dared to raise an issue regarding goldfish on Haftsin on a talk page of Wikipedia! You just terrorise people as a means of covering your palpable limitations on so many issues. You have just drown my original message on this page with utter irrelevancies regarding "Kara Māhi" and a third-rate drawing showing a fish on a Haftsin table, with no historical significance whatever! This is naturally what happens when one only cuts, pastes and mindlessly insults others when losing arguments. --BF 01:26, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Look the situation is this: Do you have anything to say, using RS (which means no Press TV, No Khameni Office, No Hale-noor endorser), that contradicts Shahbazi's statement? You do not seem to have. Xashaiar (talk) 12:15, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
You seem not to understand even the most fundamental thing: I am not answerable to you, or to anyone else! I placed a remark on this page, expecting someone knowing about the underlying details to clarify my point. What have Press TV, Khamenei's Office, and this whole charade (betraying you as nothing more than a person with with a narrow world view) got to do with my original comment? Why do you think that you are entitled to make yourself a nuisance to people here on Wikipedia? Where have you got the right to bully people? This is a talk page, not a bullying playground!!! Do you understand this, or are you so deprived of logic to even understand this? Now, go away and save your insults for those who might count you for something! --BF 17:28, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
I guess you need to read 1. WP:forum. 2. WP:civil. in fact you are insulting me. (Read you last two comments once more). Khamenei things was to remind you that please do not bring Mehr news agency, Press TV, Khamenei office here. Because from my experience with your discussions you have used these as source. This is unacceptable. You have done this (and once I just ignored it) but you did not stop and are adding from these sources everyday. I am not able to ignore the presence of nonreliable sources such as Press TV and Mehr news agencies and I can delete them whenever I want. I am entitled to do this because of WP:RS. And according to what criteria flags of all countries should be there? Populations matters? Historical facts matters? According to any of these and wp:undue the flags currently displayed are chosen correctly. If anyone wants to add flag of X, they can but they must state a reason why flag of (Armenia, Georgia, India, Iraq, Kashmir, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kyrgyzstan, Macedonia, Pakistan, Serbia, Syria, Uzbekistan) are ok not be displayed but flag of X has to. Xashaiar (talk) 17:51, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Happy Nowruz to both of you. Baa ham digar bishtar mehrabaaan baashid, maa iroonihaa keh beh joz hammihanaanemaan kaseh digar nadaarim. I have not even read this argument. On the term KaraaMaahi in Avesta, that is just incidental resembelence with the Qara in Turkish. Here is the fish [1]. "'I invoke the Kara fish 89, who lives beneath waters in the bottom of the deep lakes". It says: "The Kar-mâhî, the Ratu or chief of the creatures that live in water". The etymology here for Kara is probably "Large, gigantic". In some NW Iranian language "Kara" (Taati of Qazvin and etc.) means large and is related to modern Persian "Kalan" (a large amount). --Pahlavannariman (talk) 14:45, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Nowruz

It is absolutely wrong to call Nowruz only Iranian new year. Nowruz has been celebrated for the past 3000 years in many countries. Nowruz was created during Zoarastarian whose capital was current Balkh province of Afghanistan. Revision and correction is necessary. Thank You Yasin Samadzada —Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.218.155.210 (talk) 16:33, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Ergenekon Myth of Turks

You should add it to page. According to one of the famous and most popular myth of Turks, Ergenekon Myth, Turks exited from Ergenekon Valley in Nevruz. Turkic people are celebrating Nevruz because of this Myth. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18:44, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Source ?! --Alborz Fallah (talk) 20:31, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

The source is the Ergenekon Myths itself, its a written Myth whoever can read. It's not Kurdish fest, it's Turkish fest. Kurds adapted Nevruz from Turkic people. There is no historical evidence that there is a Kurdistan an in there Newroz celebrated by Kurds! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.140.225.241 (talk) 21:17, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

"Secular version" in Albania?!

There is this part in the article where it states "Also all Albanians celebrate a secular version of Nowruz, called Spring Day." There are two mistakes here. 1. Albanians do not celebrate "a Spring Day", it's called the Summer Day, it's an ancient Albanian-Illyrian pagan festival with its own set of traditional local rites to be performed according to each region nationwide. 2. It's not "secular" as in some juxtaposition with Eastern religions, because its an autocthonus tradition of the old Sun Cult (the main cult of Illyrians). Any resemblances of the Summer Day festival with the Sultan Nowruz of the Bektashis, are just that, resemblances; mainly due to the fact that Albanian Bektashis have incorporated Albanian rites in their Sultan Nowruz, but they don't relate to each other. Someone should remove that sentence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.91.116.237 (talk) 10:18, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Flags

Some users are adding the flag/s of the country/ies of their choice. The countries/regions that are listed there include about 18 names. What are the criteria to choose two-three countries and add their flags to the list of other 4 flagged ones? I think reasons like this in edit summary do not address the issue. Xashaiar (talk) 04:03, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

These are countries in which Nowruz is a national holiday and almost everyone celebrates it eagerly. You may add other central Asian countries too. However this is less the case in Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan. Turkey and Pakistan do not deserve to be in the list.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 11:03, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
You are doing OR. Where did you get the idea that "principal" means "where Nowruz is a national holiday"? Also due to wp:undue the flags you are adding do not belong there. Please before violating wp:3rr revert your own edit. Xashaiar (talk) 17:44, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
Xashaiar stop creating tensions on the Nowruz day. Your edit has no logics. I do not know why is Nowruz mopre important in Tajikistan or Iraqi Kurdistan than it is in Republic of Azerbaijan. If there is an OR it is yours, necause you are selecting and excluding countries based ob uor own taste.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 19:08, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
Please do not accuse me of creating tension (There is a more civil way of dealing with disputes). You say " I do not know why is Nowruz mopre important in Tajikistan or Iraqi Kurdistan than it is in Republic of Azerbaijan" which if you change a bit you get your answer " I do not know why is Nowruz important in Republic of Azerbaijan as it is Tajikistan or Iraqi Kurdistan". You must give a reason why 1. you ignore wp:undue 2. why you choose some flags and ignore other flags (this may be reinterpreted as not neutral). Xashaiar (talk)
It is you who select the flags. I have included all countries in which Nowruz is a national holiday. Cheers.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 22:33, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
I asked you please indicate a reason. I removed the flags that 1. You have not provided any source and reason for their inclusion. 2. You ignored wp:undue. I remind you that Reverting is not a dispute resolution. I finally chose the Wikipedia front page wording in "On this day" which is "Nowruz in Iran, Central Asia, and Zoroastrianism". This wording is good. Xashaiar (talk) 16:05, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
Xashaiar, I said what is the reason. You failed to give a reason why you include those flags and exclude the others. You often create tensions and honestly I never understand yyou. Like attributing a Zoroastrian Atashgah to Hindus and now this. You have an agenda to minimize the Iranian Cultural sphere. I will undo your edits more and more. Please stop your immature edits.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 16:53, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
You did not give any reason. You just mentioned "national holidays" which I mentioned as OR. Also please reach consensus before reverting. I chose the Wikipedia front page wording which I believe is neutral. For the second time you are accusing me of creating tension. Please do not and I remind you that accusation is uncivil and a result of not assuming good faith. I can not continue this discussion if you use words like "immature" and continue to accuse me. Assume good faith. This is essential in wikipedia. Xashaiar (talk) 18:16, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
That was enough reason which I gave you. Still your selections are strange and you could not give a reason nor a source for that. National holidays are just national holidays. I would give sources if each country had a separate article. And only Sources for Azerbaijan , Afghanistan and Iran are mentioned now in this article. Simply you are discriminating between nations and you cannot even say why you are doing that.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 23:17, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

As long as the turkeys flag isn´t among the other flags, i am satisfied. But check out this site.....why do they say that newroz is celebrated in turkey? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newroz_as_celebrated_by_Kurds // kakhajir —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.113.211.197 (talk) 02:05, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

I agree. By the way not only Turkey but also countries such as Pakistan and India should stay away from this tradition.--Babakexorramdin (talk) 09:21, 26 March 2010 (UTC)


On Goldfish

This is the verdict of one of the highest Zoroastrian institutions the world over, The Association of The Mobeds of Tehran. Specifically, they state:

نتیجه : همانگونه که از چند سال پیش به آگاهی همکیشان رسانیدیم و هر ساله می گوییم: گذاردن ماهی زنده ، درسرسفره هفت سین، به هیچ وجه ازسنت زرتشتیان و ایرانیان باستان نبوده و نمی باشد.


Translation:

"Conclusion: In accordance with the information that we have been providing to our co-religionists since a number of years, which we repeat every year, placing a living fish on the Haftsin table has never been and is not a tradition of Zoroastrians and of ancient Persians."

I conclude by reproducing part of the e-mail message that I have forwarded to Jimbo Wales in connection with the blocking of my Wikipedia account, first for 48 hours and subsequently totally unlawfully for further 2 weeks, following the dispute on this page, and some other relevant issues concerning some abusive editors:

>> Visiting the main Wikipedia entry of Nowruz, one will encounter the
>> following statement:
>>
>> "As an essential object of the Nowruz table, this goldfish is also "very >> ancient and meaningful" and with Zoroastrian connection.[45]"
>>
>> This statement has been added by Used:Xashaiar to the entry on 16 March
>> 2010. This statement is false, and Ref.~[45] states nothing of the kind. ...

Clearly, someone should now take the trouble and remove the falsehood that User:Xhashiar has peddled on the main page, and worst of all, falsely attributed it to the Iranica article by Shahbazi, namely this one:

>> "As an essential object of the Nowruz table, this goldfish is also "very >> ancient and meaningful" and with Zoroastrian connection.[45]"

I do not do that myself, as I do not wish to have any involvement with Nowruz any longer.

--BF 06:00, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

Jewish holiday of purim

The article suggests that the Jewish holiday of Purim probably comes from the Persian New Year. This is not true. The Jewish calendar is based on the lunar cycle, and therefore runs on a completely different schedule than the regular everyday calendar. The holiday of Purim takes place on the 12th Jewish month of Adar, on the 14th day. This is based on the historical fact that, when under persian rule, the persian king and his main officer had planned to kill all the Jews in the persian empire —Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.157.145.41 (talk) 17:17, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Please, before opening a new section, look at the article and see if there are the same article. In this situation, for more information and reasons read the Purim part of this page. P. Pajouhesh (talk) 00:37, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

small correction

Along with Ismailis,[79] Alawites and Alevis, the Twelver Shi’a also hold the day of Nowruz in high regard.

This sentence should read Along with the Twelver Shia, the Ismailis, Alawites and Alevis also hold the day of Nowruz in high regard. Putting the Twelver Shia last in the list makes it seem as if they are the minority group. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.84.68.252 (talk) 05:55, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

 Done. Irānshahr (talk) 20:26, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

patrani macchi

Minor nit. "patrani machchi (chicken steamed in a leaf)" should be "patrani machchi (fish steamed in a leaf)", in the "Nowruz in India" section.

71.189.190.114 (talk) 19:24, 19 March 2012 (UTC)Dorab

OK. I will edit it. Palaxan (talk) 20:15, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Nowruz and Purim

The Jewish festival of Purim was NOT adopted from the Persian New Year. It is a holiday celebrating the annulment of a decree to annihilate the Jewish people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.116.169.56 (talk) 22:36, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

necessity/proportionality...also-called section

is it really necessary and proportionate to have to many alternative latin spellings??Eugene-elgato (talk) 14:26, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

al çarşambası / Chaharshanbe Suri

I know this topic is more about politics and appropriation than information and knowledge. I was using wikitaxi for years now, with a downloaded wikipedia; so my wikipedia does not update itself with every edit. I have learned from it that in turkish "Chaharshanbe Suri" was called "al çarşambası". Apparently some people think that it's irrelevant or even inappropriate to add this piece of information to a "free encyclopedia". If I was to read today's article I wouldn't be able to learn "al çarşambası", I wouldn't have words in turkish to talk about "Chaharshanbe Suri". I learn a lot from wikipedia, I would really like people with goals other than sharing our knowledge to leave it to 'lovers of knowledge'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IIIIIIIII (talk • contribs) 18:30, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

Merge

May Newroz be a kind of Kurdish adaptation of Mehregan, since it doesn't share main Zoroastrian approach of Newroz-myth of Jamshid or the first movement of universe-, and if Mithraism was their worldview before Zoroastrians-Indo Iranians-had come? Parthians had done that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.130.12.219 (talk) 02:47, 23 June 2013 (UTC)

  • 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)

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)

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)

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)

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)
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)

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)

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)

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)
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)
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)

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

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)
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)
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)

Navroz or Navreh in Kashmir is the original Aryan New Year. Thus belongs to Rigvedic-Zoroastrian civilizations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.88.88.203 (talk) 17:39, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

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)
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)
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)
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)
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)
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 [2] who seems to have been banned for a year for many disruptions to Iran-related articles --Rayis 21:54, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
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)
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)
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)

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

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, etc.), as well as non-Iranians (Turks, Uzbeks, Turkmen, Azeri, Kazakh, Kyrgyz 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)

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)
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)
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)
Already discussed Jeff. It seems like we have consensus too --Rayis 22:19, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
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)
6/2 is not consensus? I appreciate an admin's point of view. --Rayis 22:26, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

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)

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)
The first vote was not anonymous, it came with my nomination --Rayis 22:41, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

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)

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)
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)
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)

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)

I just realize that substantial amount of information about the Kurdish celebration of the article has been removed from its article, see [3]. 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)
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)

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 [4]; it was for a long time illegal for the Kurds to celebrate the new year in Turkey [5]. 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 [6]. Furthermore, the believed source of the holiday has changed and Kurds celebrate some other Kurdish legends [7][8]. While this new source, is for the most part probably fictitious and created ([9]) 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)

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)
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)
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)


"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)
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)

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)

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)
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)
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)

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)
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)
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)
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)


  • 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)

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)


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)

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)
after reading this [10] (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)

Zoroastrianism

Is there a source for this sentence: "Among other ideas, Zoroastrianism is the first ever monotheistic religion that emphasizes broad concepts such as the corresponding work of good and evil in the world, and the connection of humans to nature"? And Judaism certainly emphasizes these broad concepts. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 01:15, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Norooz name

I think the name should be changed to Norooz as that's how most people spell it; a simple Google search will confirm it.--RidiQLus (talk) 01:24, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

No. A simple search: [11] Zyma (talk) 11:08, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Neutrality

The article claims that Nowruz is solely a Persian holiday. It also a very important public holiday in Azerbaijan, Georgia, Turkey, and all the Turkic nations in Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan). The lead section should be neutralized. Nataev (talk) 19:45, 1 March 2013 (UTC

Historically and culturaly Nowruz is an Iranian festival.(especially Persian since this tradition came to be known in the world in time of Achaemenid empire). so if the Turkic people were influenced by persian culture and adopted nowruz that doesn't make them the owners of this tradition. they just became persianized in this particular case. after all in turkey the nowruz is just celebrated by kurdish people (a sub group of iranian people) whose most of the time are being suppressed by gavernment because of the celebration.Parsia2013 (talk) 14:29, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
The Persions don't "own" the holiday as you're suggesting. Could you find support for your claim about the Turkish gAvernment? Nataev (talk) 18:48, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
Well, as to the origins of this holiday, the clue lies in the name itself: nowruz is made up of exclusively Persian words. There is also this source:

http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/nowruz-index — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.79.143.139 (talk) 02:34, 9 March 2015 (UTC)

NEW YEARS DAY IN KARNATAKA, TELANGANA AND ANDHRA PRADESH STATES CONSISTING OF NEARLY 200 MILLIONS OF PEOPLE

New Years Days in India

Ugadi or Yugadi is celebrated as the first day of the year by people of Andhra Pradesh, Telangana and Karnataka states. On this day new Samvatsara, which is cycle of sixty years, starts. All sixty Samvatsaras are identified by unique name. The name of the year which commences on 21.03.2015 is called 'Manmadha'

Ugadi is celebrated as Gudi Padwa by the people of Maharashtra. Both Ugadi and Gudi Padwa are celebrated on the same day. The day is first day of the first fortnight in the first month, according to Luni-solar counting it is first day after no-moon day. The month is 'Chaitra' the fortnight is shukla which is first fortnight of every month. the name of the day is 'Padyami', which is the first day of the fortnight (paksh). Thus the Chaitra, shukla, Padyami is the new years day in South India. In the North India, it is counted from the Padyami which follows Full Moon Day, marking beginning of the Krishn paksh which is Second Fortnight of the month.

Ugadi is New Year according to Luni-Solar calendar. Luni-Solar calendars consider the position of the Moon and the position of the Sun to divide the year into months and days. The counter-part of Luni-Solar calendar is Solar calendar which considers only position of the Sun to divide the year into months and days. Because of that Hindu New Year is celebrated twice in the year with different names and at two different times of the year. The Hindu New Year based on Solar calendar is known as Puthandu in Tamil Nadu, Bihu in Assam, Vaisakhi in Punjab, Pana Sankranti in Orissa and Naba Barsha in West Bengal.

The day begins with ritual oil-bath followed by prayers. Oil bath and eating Neem leaves are must rituals suggested by scriptures. North Indians don’t celebrate Ugadi but start nine days Chaitra Navratri Puja on the same day and also eat Neem with Mishri on the very first day of Navratri.

Etimology

Ug-Aadi: Ug is the Age, year. Aadi is beginning. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anjaneya Prasad Nimmagadda (talk • contribs) 03:27, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

Ethnic groups over country

To prevend an edit war, I will suggest changing the infobox list of countries to a list of ethnic groups celebrating Nowruz. Like this [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nowruz&oldid=652913623. The reason for this is that all countries in this world with a Farsi, Kurdish, Azeri or Uzbek diaspora can be added to the list, making it a very long, but also a non-representive list. The objective of the list should be, to show who celebrates Nowroz and not where. --Ahmetyal (talk) 20:42, 21 March 2015 (UTC)

And yes the list of ethnic groups celebrating Nowruz can also be long, but still very representable. --Ahmetyal (talk) 20:45, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
First. what is a Farsi diaspora?! Second, your ethnic version will be a large list and will lead to new edit wars. Because this celebration is popular among Iranian peoples (Iranics), some Turkic peoples, and the others. And those groups have a lot of ethnic groups(sub-groups). Plus, some of those ethnic groups have sub-branches. And those countries are multi-ethnic. For example, If you want to replace Iran with ethnic groups, then you should mention a lot of names. Inbox should be a quick info section, not a huge box that confuses reader. The country/region format includes all of those ethnic groups. Also, current edit war is a typical pov-pushing. Just personal opinions and nationalistic rants. I think if you want to improve this article, you should work on "Nowruz around the world" section and its sub-sections. You can add more details about a specific ethnic group or diaspora. --Zyma (talk) 05:48, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Nowruz in more north

It would be nice if someone could add some section about Nowruz celebrations in Dagestan, as it's widely celebrated there by the many ethnic groups. Orangesaft (talk) 12:45, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 23 March 2015

Hi,

Nawroz is not the new your only for Iran. Nawroz is celebrated in Afghanistan for thousands of years. It is celebrated with more events than Iran. The first paragraph says that Nawroz is the new year in Iran, It should be New year in Iran, Afghanistan and few other countries. Please make the edit or we will edit it.

Thanks,

Rowinaria (talk) 18:56, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

 Not done, on this article, Iranian (or Persian in some other articles) is a cultural term. It means Iranic. It's not same as Iran+ian (Iranian). Please see Iranian peoples. --Zyma (talk) 19:09, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

"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

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)

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

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)

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 [12]). 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)
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)
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)
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)
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 [13]). 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 [14] 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)
I agree with Jahangard, Nowruz is a much better choice. Shervink 15:35, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
The standard Arabic transliteration is "nawrūz". This word is Persian, and according to all the standard transliteration schemes for Persian [15], 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)


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)

This video is just published on Youtube by a prominent Iranian-American comedian, Maz Jobrani in which he advocates for spelling Norooz not Nowruz. Maybe, we should also reconsider the name. Xyzrt (talk) 18:30, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

Nowruz is a Persian/Kurdish/Iranian day

The Turkish government is trying to present it as a Turkish holiday. However, Nowruz is mentioned as part of the Persian calendar by Abu Rayhan Biruni and many other historians. Not a single source from 1000 years ago mentions Nowruz as a Turkish holiday. At the time of Abu Rayhan Biruni there was no Turks in Turkey, Iran, Caucasus, Cyprus. Also the name makes it clear that Nowruz was a Kurdish/Iranic/Persian holiday passed unto Turks. So its Iranian significance in the early Islamic era and pre-Islamic era needs to be mentioned. No other culture called it Nowruz prior to this. I wrote this because up to 5 years ago, Kurds were being killed for celebrating Nowruz in Turkey. —Precedingunsigned

You are correct... there was no Anatolian or Azerbaijani Turkish ethnicites 1000 years but Biruni and Masudi mentions Nowruz as a Persian holiday more than 1000 years ago. However if other peoples and governments want to celebrate it, it will not change the fact they got from Iranian peoples. So the issue should not be political

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Nowruz. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:19, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Bogus in the lede

The user who added the statement that its also a "Kurdish new year" alongside "Iranian" in the lede, is unfortunately adding blatant bogus. This "source", aka, "new article", the "International Business Times", which first of all completely and utterly fails WP:RS, also doesnt state anything about its origin or whatsoever. Furthermore, its contradictionary as well, as some sentences later it states: "Newroz is an important festival marking the arrival of spring and the Persian new year." In other words, bogus at best, and I'm afraid nothing more than an attempt to impose historical revisionism/to push in an agenda (which is disruptive per definition). Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 09:56, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

I think it's better to re-write the lead section. It needs a new revision. Because the other other cited sources ([16] and [17]) are not WP:RS too. The lede should be based on expert sources like Iranica (Nowruz index). The current lede is misleading and confuses readers due to misrepresenting of sources and povs. As I remember the lead section was stable until 2015, before these edits [18], pov and personal analysis [19]. --Zyma (talk) 15:38, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
Persians and Kurds are those who see it as a new year. There is nothing contradictory there. It is mainly celebrated by Iranian people but also by Turkic people. Ibtimes is not a unreliable source. Prove calling it as a Kurdish new year is blatant bogus with sources if you think so. I agree with Zyma, but also other sections should be reviewed.Ferakp (talk) 15:46, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
All nice, but Nowruz is not a Kurdish festivity. It has no Kurdish origins. The fact that its observed by them (amongst other ethnic groups), doesnt make it a Kurdish festivity. David Sim is not a scholar/authority (e.g scholar, iranologist, historian) and therefore I removed him. There wasn't even such thing as "Kurd" prior to the Medieval Ages, so how on earth (just some logical thinking and a search) is this ancient festivity, that long predates the Medieval era, in any way gonna be "Kurdish" in identity/origin?
Encyclopaedia Iranica;
  • "it should be remembered that “Kurd” in the sources of the 10th-11th centuries refers to all the transhumants of the Zagros region including the Lors."[1]}
Historian James Boris;
  • The word “Kurd” first became an ethnic identity in the 12th and 13th century.[2] However, he further states that the term was even then also being used as a communal sense.[3]
Feel free to bring this up again if you can bring up any authoritive source that states that Nowruz is a "Kurdish New Year" (which has obviously a different meaning compared to the statement that Nowruz is observed by the Kurds). Bests - LouisAragon (talk) 17:13, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Ch. Bürgel & R. Mottahedeh 1988, pp. 265–269.
  2. ^ James, Boris. (2006). Uses and Values of the Term Kurd in Arabic Medieval Literary Sources. Seminar at the American University of Beirut, pp. 6-7.
  3. ^ James, Boris. (2006). Uses and Values of the Term Kurd in Arabic Medieval Literary Sources. Seminar at the American University of Beirut, pp. 4, 8, 9.

We should add "Norooz" as part of the subject

Iranian-Americans are a nascent diaspora, most of us having immigrated only in the past four decades. We are coming to our own, lifting our heads from the business grindstone and beginning to establish ourselves in other realms of diaspora influence and acceptance such as politics, philanthropy and culture. By doing so, we are promoting our beautiful arts and culture by sharing our rituals and festivals. The most uniting, revered and unanimous of these is Persian New Year or Norooz. ‘No’ means ‘new’ and ‘rooz’ means ‘day,’ perfectly apt since Persian New Year coincides literally with the Vernal Equinox, the very instance that spring season commences in the northern hemisphere. Norooz is the most enduring of all Iranian institutions: it has survived 2500 years, changes of religion and government, and the post-Islamic-Revolution exodus abroad.

The early civil society abroad took shape in the form of dance, music and language lessons and the small mom and pop shops began celebrating Norooz. As the diaspora became larger, its desire to take care of its elderly and connect its youth to its culture grew exponentially. Through many efforts, community centers began to emerge, Iranian studies were set up in universities (PARSA Community Foundation alone helped initiate or grow 12 such programs), and sizable Norooz celebrations were launched in schools and city halls, museums and parks, and most recently, the White House.

The term used for these events was Norooz and occasionally Norouz (The French had cultural influence in Iran for decades and many Iranians spell the ‘oo’ sound as ‘ou’). Iranian Alliances Across Borders, NIPOC, NIAC, Tirgan, Iran Heritage Foundation, in other words, the most prevalent organizations in the U.S. and Europe, used one of these. NIAC, the largest grassroots Iranian American organization with supporters in all 50 states, still uses the Norooz spelling. Iranian Alumni of Stanford University and the Alborz Farsi School, which celebrated annually at Quinlin Community Center, use Norooz. Payvand.com and Iranian.com, two of the most popular information sites use Norooz. The popular website 7rooz, which means seven days, uses rooz as the spelling for day. Roozonline is another popular site about human rights and political reforms. Roozvideo shows Iranian videos 24/7. Iranian Chamber of Commerce uses No-Rooz. There are books with rooz used for the word day, and so on.

A few years ago, in the search to choose one term between Norooz and Norouz, some folks introduced a third term, Nowruz. This was the spelling used in Encyclopedia Iranica, a body of work that uses transliteration, a process of translation that is not concerned with sound, phonetics, or pronunciation, rather, by a literal translations of individual letters in a word, using diacritics. This source spells Norooz as Nowruz. Wikipedia notes: “Transliteration is not concerned with representing the sounds of the original” while “conversely, transcription notes the sounds but not necessarily the spelling.” First, 'now' does not sound anything like 'no' and secondly, the macron above 'u' is not used in common daily language. Even if it were, it would indicate a long 'u' which would be read like cute, not coot. Academics have questioned Encyclopedia's decision to use transliteration methodology, however patriarchy and politeness (tarof and roo-dar-bayesti), which dominate Persian culture, have precluded them from challenging the mandate. No one can find the spelling of ‘ruz’ to represent ‘day’ anywhere except the Encyclopedia Iranica.

It was a great milestone when the United Nations, U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate recognized Persian New Year, regrettably though, it was with the complicated Nowruz spelling.

Several years later, we have not seen unification, rather a division around the usage of Norooz. All of this flies in the face of the KISS principle which is so vital to picking a name and building a strong brand. Regrettably, this change only confused recognition of our nascent community, not helped it.

The explanations given for this new term have included:

Those who are academic know that they need to read the word Nowruz while imagining a line above the letter ‘u’ making it an ‘oo’ sound; The Encyclopedia Iranica knows best; We do not want to use the negative word “no” in the beginning of our New Year as it is negative; and There are people outside of Iran, in Tajikistan, Afghanistan, etc., who celebrate Norooz and hence we need to take their pronunciations into consideration. The plain facts are:

Most of the world is not academic. Also, only Iranian academia, who is already familiar with the word for Persian New Year, reads Nowruz as Norooz. Others read it as now-ruz, which can rhyme with cow-buzz. Encyclopedia Iranica is a priceless body of academic work. And yet its transliteration methodology can at times distort pronunciations of Persian words, which is not conducive to spreading one's brand; I would normally agree that starting a word with “no” can be a branding challenge and yet we’re not creating a brand new word here. We’re constrained by the original word, which, in earnest, starts with no. While we respect all the people in the world that celebrate Norooz, from Albania to India and elsewhere, we are the Iranian community of North America. The United States President and the Canadian Prime Minister - who represent 365 million people - being able to say Norooz, without training, for their New Year messages might be a good tradeoff for the local variations in Albania and India. Aiming for a universal word in vastly different local languages and dialects is impractical. As members of diaspora, we all want acceptance and influence. We want to infuse our culture and rituals in the mainstream consciousness. So why is it that we take the common names associated with our culture, like the name of our country of heritage, the name of our language and the name of our new year so haphazardly? How we self-identify matters most. Is it Iran or iRan, Persian or Farsi, Norooz or Nowruz?

If we follow smart branding principles, the right answer would probably in the following principles:

Picking a spelling that is pronounced by non-Iranians the same way that it is uttered by Iranians, without necessitating unscrambling, decrypting and guesswork; Avoiding spellings that can easily be mispronounced; and Making it memorable which means consolidating the brand instead of diffusing it. American Companies spend an average of 10.4% of their revenue budget on branding and marketing- some as high as 30%. Large companies spend billions of dollars by having focus groups and A/B testing to get just the right name and building just the right brand for drugs, cars and cosmetics. Countries hire their own branding and marketing companies to help build affinity and encourage tourism. In a recent Steve Jobs biography, it said that he picked the name Apple because it sounded “fun, spirited and not intimidating.” In 2010, the Y.M.C.A changed its name just to ‘The Y’ in order to simplify their branding to become warmer and more welcoming. I am sure you have come across other examples.

The festive Norooz season is just 8 weeks away. Literally millions of greetings will be exchanged among people, governments, nonprofits and businesses. We need to take immediate action to make 2016 Norooz as powerful and impactful as it can. This presidential year, when the Iranian diaspora is under attack and the visa waiver program threatens our free movement and prosperity of our businesses, we need to act with a sense of urgency and resolve. Here is what you can do:

Use Norooz spelling for your greetings, invitations, social media posts, etc. Use Norooz for events that you plan yourself or for which you volunteer. Request organizations you support to use the easy spelling of Norooz. Let your friends know to do the same! Thank you and Noroozetan Pirooz!! HNHousehold (talk) 20:18, 25 March 2016 (UTC)Noosheen Hashemi

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Nowruz/Archive_2&oldid=1251907683"