Revision as of 03:37, 4 March 2022 editMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:22, 7 February 2023 edit undoImeriki al-Shimoni (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users3,383 edits →Start date confusion: new sectionTag: New topicNext edit → | ||
Line 62: | Line 62: | ||
*It is unnecessarily insensitive to use the Christian calendar to benchmark the calendars of other religions. "Common Era" provides an acceptable degree of separation, even though their ]s are the same. | *It is unnecessarily insensitive to use the Christian calendar to benchmark the calendars of other religions. "Common Era" provides an acceptable degree of separation, even though their ]s are the same. | ||
I hope that this answers your query. --] (]) 12:12, 3 October 2020 (UTC) | I hope that this answers your query. --] (]) 12:12, 3 October 2020 (UTC) | ||
== Start date confusion == | |||
An issue with the epoch start is in the article as also mentioned in the '']'' and '']'' Talk sections above. The article's '']'' section gives the start as April 19, 622 CE (]), however most other Misplaced Pages articles I saw related to the topic which mention it use July 16, 622 CE, which seems to approximately agree with this article's '']'' section (around July 15 if you reverse the fractional number for year 1 into a date), plus any information I could find during a Google search point to July 16 (or July 15th if specifically pointing to sunset of the 15th which marks the start of the 16th if you have the modern division of the day in mind). This would not be a Gregorian versus Julian discrepancy since July 16, 622 CE Julian would be July 19, 622 CE as a ] date (the Julian was less out of synch in 622 CE compared to now, and even today their dates are '''not''' a full 3 months out of synch). From anything I could quickly find, it seems Julian Calendar date Friday '''July 16, 622 CE''' (proleptic Gregorian Calendar date Friday July 19, 622 CE) is the actual start date while the April date mentioned in the ''Definition'' section is incorrect. I am unable to check the citation given for the April date (the title has the appearance of a fringe religious book—"Chronology of Prophetic Events"—which makes me wonder if it is even an appropriate source). An explanation for the April date would be appreciated as, as far as I can see right now, there's nothing reliable supporting it. — ] (]) 18:22, 7 February 2023 (UTC) |
Revision as of 18:22, 7 February 2023
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Hijri year article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
{{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
Bad fork
Why is this a separate article from Islamic calendar? AnonMoos (talk) 16:37, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
- Because it's a separate WP:SCOPE? — LlywelynII 11:51, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
Typo?
Shouldn't "The year of the Hirja 622 ..." be "The year of the Hijra 622 ..."? 121.127.212.18 (talk) 04:02, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Conversion to CE?
Does the Hijri year use a lunar year of different length than the CE's solar year resulting in 2013CE-1434AH=579 instead of 622? RJFJR (talk) 04:55, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
OK, I'm seeing clarification at Islamic calendar. Should something about this be added to this article? RJFJR (talk) 17:26, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
there are two hijris in the article
Specify!
- "The first day of 1 AH corresponds to July 16, 622, denoted as "1 Muharram 1 AH"."
and then
- "In fact however, 1st of Muharram was April 18 in 622 while the Prophet left Mecca on June 21, arrived at Quba on June 28, and entered Medina on July 2 in the year 622."
Which one is it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adoczek (talk • contribs) 01:16, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
WP:ERA
This edit established the usage of the page as BCE/CE. Kindly maintain it consistently pending a consensus to the contrary. — LlywelynII 11:54, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Hijri year. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20040210040119/http://www.islamicity.com/Mosque/ihame/Sec2.htm to http://islamicity.com/mosque/ihame/Sec2.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:23, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Hijri year. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928110759/http://www.amperspective.com/html/hijra_calender.html to http://www.amperspective.com/html/hijra_calender.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:35, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
No such thing as a "Western" year.
I corrected it to "Gregorian" and someone reverted it without giving a reason. Grassynoel (talk) 10:32, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you for engaging in the wp:Bold, Revert, Discuss process. I did actually give an edit note.
- Actually you changed a number of names to Gregorian. I agree that "Western year" is un-encyclopedic and should be changed. Common Era should not.
- The Islamic calendar predates the Gregorian reform
- It is unnecessarily insensitive to use the Christian calendar to benchmark the calendars of other religions. "Common Era" provides an acceptable degree of separation, even though their epochs are the same.
I hope that this answers your query. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 12:12, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
Start date confusion
An issue with the epoch start is in the article as also mentioned in the Typo and there are two hijris in the article Talk sections above. The article's Definition section gives the start as April 19, 622 CE (Julian), however most other Misplaced Pages articles I saw related to the topic which mention it use July 16, 622 CE, which seems to approximately agree with this article's Formula section (around July 15 if you reverse the fractional number for year 1 into a date), plus any information I could find during a Google search point to July 16 (or July 15th if specifically pointing to sunset of the 15th which marks the start of the 16th if you have the modern division of the day in mind). This would not be a Gregorian versus Julian discrepancy since July 16, 622 CE Julian would be July 19, 622 CE as a proleptic Gregorian calendar date (the Julian was less out of synch in 622 CE compared to now, and even today their dates are not a full 3 months out of synch). From anything I could quickly find, it seems Julian Calendar date Friday July 16, 622 CE (proleptic Gregorian Calendar date Friday July 19, 622 CE) is the actual start date while the April date mentioned in the Definition section is incorrect. I am unable to check the citation given for the April date (the title has the appearance of a fringe religious book—"Chronology of Prophetic Events"—which makes me wonder if it is even an appropriate source). An explanation for the April date would be appreciated as, as far as I can see right now, there's nothing reliable supporting it. — al-Shimoni (talk) 18:22, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Categories: