Talk:Islamic calendar

Days of the week in Urdu?

The days of the week should just be listed in Arabic (without Urdu translations). As much as I love Urdu, this is an English language article about the Hijri calender, which is in Arabic. Urdu is not even the most common language spoken among Muslims, so better just leave that to the Urdu article (the Persian as well). The Persian days of the week could go in an article describing the Persian calendar system. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.108.75.198 (talk • contribs) 08:59, 3 June 2009

Reason for prohibition of intercalation of months

Does anyone have a good explanation as to why this was forbidden by Mohammed? Was it to reduce the importance of the Kalammas?

Why would intercalation be necessary? There doesn't seem to be any particular reason for that.

Intercalation is necessary to keep the months from circling around the year, as they do in the familiar Islamic calendar. With seven intercalated months evenly spaced over 19 years, the synodic lunar and tropical solar cycles line up with just a two-hour discrepancy. Intercalation keeps months and their holidays within particular seasons. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Faris Malik (talk • contribs) 16:07, 11 January 2016‎

Hebrew correspondence

starting from Tishri it gives you Safar-l-Awwal [now Muharram] and Al-Thani lay on fall/autumn. Safar derivative is Safra' that means yellow(ness) [of leaves]. then two Rabi's on rainy partition [Kislev/ Tevet]. then Jumada twins fall on winter. Jamada/ Injimad means Freeze also. then we have Rajab & Sha'aban and Ramadan that falls on hot Sivan [Ramadan meaning]. finally it ends on Elul (pilgrimage) Tabascofernandez (talk) 08:04, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Request for comment: Should the caption of the picture of the inside of a mosque mention a sermon which was delivered outdoors?

Should the caption of the picture of the inside of a mosque mention a sermon which was delivered outdoors? 151.227.21.236 (talk) 09:36, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

• No. The attribution is obviously wrong. 151.227.21.236 (talk) 09:36, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

• Yes The image caption is based on verifiable sources. This issue has been brought up numerous times in the past by the same person hiding behind various London-area IP's. See also Archive 2, Archive 3 & Archive 4. AstroLynx (talk) 12:24, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

• Why ask us??? This is not a matter of interpretation of WP policies; it is a matter of verifiable fact. I for one cannot even read Arabic. I don't anyway see why it should be unreasonable to mention an outdoor sermon; outside Islam there is nothing against an interior notice mentioning a scheduled outdoor event, is there? Why should it be a problem within Islam? If there really is a problem and it is a big deal, then surely it should be possible to present the image to a few Islamic scholars for comment? And to request them to clarify the significance and context? It should be possible online in several countries or universities at once, both in the USA and a selection of Islamic countries. Storm in teacup, I bet. JonRichfield (talk) 16:19, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

• The verified (not verifiable) fact is that what is effectively a fatwa on adding months to the Islamic calendar was not delivered in a mosque but a long way from the nearest building. The issue is whether it is permissible to caption a picture with a statement which is not true. Whenever this has come up in the past the decision has been that these descriptions must be supported by reliable sources and verified by them. Pictures which don't pass this twin test are removed. A good example is the ongoing RfC at Talk:Mount Athos. A picture of a flag was described as "the Mount Athos flag" when it is actually the flag of the Greek Orthodox Church. It wasn't considered adequate to provide a single reference saying this is the flag of Mount Athos when other sources say it isn't. Similarly, if one source (which has yet to be discovered) says the fatwa was delivered inside a mosque it's not permissible to exclude reference to other sources which say it wasn't. This is AstroLynx's argument and it's cherrypicking of sources to advance his POV (he has an affinity for this picture, which is displayed on his website). 151.227.21.236 (talk) 14:53, 13 July 2017 (UTC)