Talk:Commemoration of Husayn ibn Ali

Muharram is NOT a festival.

At least not a joyous occasion. I don't know why everyone thinks that. Muharram is the first month of the Islamic calendar. The tenth day of Muharram is called Ashurah (a day of mourning). For heaven's sake the Shi'ites do not celebrate the new year. They start their mourning ritual at this time. There are no festivities for the Shi'ites. You see many of the Shi'ites are Syed and claim direct descendence from one of the Imams. The death of the Imam is co-memorated like the death of an important family member. You would not celebrate the first of January as New Year's eve if your mom or dad died on that day, would you? So we do not celebrate the arrival of the New Year because our ancestors were brutally massacred on that day. This information is from the descendant of the son of Imam Husain..an Abidi Syed..ME so you can be sure this is accurate. If you don't believe me do your own research. Netpari 04:58, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

I can vouch for every single word he wrote, this comming from a sayed also. While some parts of the world start their new year with drunk parties and wild brawls, making the police go on their toes, we have our crime rate lowered due to the mourning of our relative. We dont celebrate, we mourn. --Striver 00:13, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

I changed the article name back to Festival of Muharram. Although you are right in that the observances are more solemn than festive, Festival of Muharram is a more common name and therefore should be used (see naming convention). joturner 16:27, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

There's much overlap with the Aashurah article here. —Charles P. (Mirv) 18:01, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

I noticed that too, But I don't know enough about this to be confident enough to edit it. --Irishpunktom\^talk 18:28, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Do you really think the Muslim New Year article is necessary? This article basically covers all that can/will be covered in the Muslim New Year article. Even the first paragraphs states that "Muslims around the world celebrate the new Islamic year, the Shi'ite sect has most visible celebration proceedings.". IMHO, you should either delete or redirect the Muslim New Year article to here Nil Einne 18:06, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

To Joturner and to anyone wishing to keep the current name "Festival of Muharram", the naming convention guideline is to be used as a guideline only. Even if we do use it, it is clear that if the name is misleading, it may be changed. In this case, I cannot imagine a more misleading name. In any dictionary or thesaurus, you will see festival meaning a joyous occasion. Do we intend this encyclopedia to be rational or not? I will change the name, and I hope that people are not too stubborn or irrational to change it back. The occasions in Muharram are clearly NOT festivals. Adamcaliph 02:00, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

The use of the word Festival to identify the Shi'a observance of Muharram is very inacurate. The name needs to be changed if the article is to be kept. Dnkrumah 11:31, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Merge

There are several articles about this issue including Mätam, Azadari of Muharram and Majlis-e-Aza. Unfortunately all of them are weak. Therefor I propose merging all of them in this article to make a good one. I chose this one due to the fact that I guess its name is more familiar for native speakers of English. Please add you idea below.--Sa.vakilian(t-c) 02:44, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Its better to merge them. AliFazal 11:26, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Given the comparative shortness of each of the articles, it makes sense to me as well. If the content does grow excessively long in the future, they could always be separated out again then. John Carter 14:36, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

That's fine, but matam is becoming rather taboo. Whilst I agree with the other two, the thing with matam is we'll have so many people fighting on that article it's going to bring down the rest of it, and just end up being a headache for us. I suggest we let people use matam as their battleground for the time being and at least have these two comprise one nice article. Eventually matam will need to be its own thing anyway, might as well not pain ourselves with bringing its controversy to a normal article now. --Enzuru 03:34, 12 October 2007 (UTC)