Jump to content

Talk:Onam

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

Merge proposal

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Consensus reached to merge article Qalb alasid (talk) 22:50, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need for an article on Onam and Muslims, this topic can be merged into the Onam article and written as a section in the Onam article. Onam is a festival of Kerala Malayalees, the term "Muslims" in this title represents all Muslims, but only some Muslim leaders and organizations in Kerala have expressed their views on Onam ~~ Spworld2 (talk) 11:57,19 August 2024 (UTC)

Onam (in this article) there is a section Onam and Muslim which is written only one line. It can be merge to that section. There is no need for an article for Onam and Muslim.
Why not write "Onam and Christian" and "Onam and Buddhism" like this??
Majority of the Muslims in Kerala celebrate Onam, Onam is a public festival of Kerala and this type of article is controversial, only a few Muslim leaders have commented on Onam, there is no need for an article. Spworld2 (talk) 07:45, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
According to this source, the majority of Kerala are Hindus. Whether it is controversial or not is not a criterion to merge or delete. The Muslim leaders who opposed the Onam celebration by Muslims represent the vast majority of Kerala Muslims. The reason why there are no writings on "Onam and Christians" must be because there are no enough number of reliable sources for that. Buddhists are extreme minority in Kerala. It seems only Muslims do not participate in the Onam celebration; that too due to religious reasons. Neutralhappy (talk) 19:49, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Currently there are 37 citations in Onam and Muslims whereas currently in Onam there are 64 citations. So, if merged, more than half of the number of citations (57.81%) will be solely of a section.
If we google "ഓണം ക്രിസ്തുമതത്തിൽ", which means "Onam in Christianity", we see few sources that talk about "Onam and Christianity". On the other hand, if we google "ഓണം ഇസ്ലാമിൽ", which means "Onam in Islam", several sources appear. The same is case with YouTube. Neutralhappy (talk) 19:20, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strongly Agree This article about hate speeches by some Islamic preachers on 'not to celebrate onam'. You can see many such hate videos and news reports on 'not to celebrate Christmas' . why should wikipedia have with an artcile on this? Also note that this is not about any cultural / celebration of muslims with nam but merely on some hate speeches by few Islamic scholars on 'not to celebrate onam'. According to islam celebrating other religious celebrations is not allowed and will get one into hell. It is a general rule in Islam and not specific to Onam. Nonsense article should have to be merged or deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.96.13.213 (talk) 17:52, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Unlike Christmas and other non-Muslim religious festivals, Onam is widely said to be celebrated by followers of all religions, including Muslims, though according to the overwhelming majority of Muslims in Kerala, Islam is against celebrating Onam. Besides, the Onam celebration by Muslims is widely criticised by Islamic scholars. So, a writing on this is necessary. The proposed merger might reduce the amount of the content taken to Onam from the article Onam and Muslims, and thus, not satisfying the curiousity of the readers to know the all and clear Islamic rulings on the issue. This is because several people apparently seem to think almost all Muslims or Islam is not against the Onam celebration by Muslims. This is understandable as the following sources say the Muslims celebrate Onam: Google search results for "Onam and Islam", 1—Journal of Kerala Studies, 2—The Neighborhood of Gods, 3—Fun with Festivals, 4—The Issues and Themes of Indian Politics, 5—Social Science Success Book 6 (A.Y. 2023-24) Onward, 6—When Peacocks Dance, 7—Kerala District Gazetteers: Alleppey. In conclusion, Onam is not like other non-Muslim religious festivals such as Christmas. Thus, a clarification is needed for Onam specially. So, I contradict your argument of "general rule". Neutralhappy (talk) 00:57, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: Per nom. Ken Tony Shall we discuss? 19:40, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support for reasons articulated by Neutralhappy and Spworld2. This article as constructed appears to be an unnecessary WP:POVFORK. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:33, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    But, as of now, I, Neutralhappy, have not given any reason for the merger; rather, I have given reasons not to merge. Neutralhappy (talk) 09:10, 11 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Its essentially a duplicate article with some additions that can easily fit here. Agree with nominator. scope_creepTalk 10:22, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. The meaningful part of the Onam and Muslims article consists of a single paragraph in the last section that is easy to merge into Onam article. The rest of the Onam and Muslims article described Muslims in general, totally WP:UNDUE here. --Викидим (talk) 07:01, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Your opinion that only the last section is meanigful is not correct since the rest gives a meaningful and clear Islamic view about participating in non-Muslim religious celebrations. Your use of WP:UNDUE is not relevant here, since WP:UNDUE deals with representing different viewpoints, based on their prevalence. WP:UNDUE states the following:

    Wikipedia should not present a dispute as if a view held by a small minority is as significant as the majority view.

    So, we cannot merge only a particular section with the Onam article so that it appears the majority of Muslims are of the opinion that the Onam celebration is permissible. Neutralhappy (talk) 09:08, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    (1) As an example, the section "Muslim groups in Kerala" does not mention Onam at all, so it appears to be completely off-topic. (2) If a minority of Muslims agree with X, there is no issue to state just that. An explicit use of the word "minority" will avoid the problem that you have mentioned (it appears the majority of Muslims...). Викидим (talk) 06:06, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    See this reply. Neutralhappy (talk) 15:20, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This is a long-term issue and there is enough content to warrant separate article. REDISCOVERBHARAT (talk) 03:12, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    A very large part of content (about 800 words out of 1200 or so total) does not appear to be directly related to the topic at all and discusses non-Onam-related issues (like Muslim denominations in Kerala). Once this padding is discounted, the short remaining text does not seem to warrant an article. Викидим (talk) 06:14, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There are different organisations in Kerala. Writing their opinion on the permissibility of celebrating Onam, in Islam, by mixing their views, without a header for each organisation, is not only difficult but also makes it less reliable about the Islamic view of celebrating Onam, since attributing the view becomes difficult. Hence, different sections for each organisation. To avoid the possible doubt whether the article Onam and Muslims has presented the overall view of Islamic organisations in Kerala or the view of the majority of Muslims in Kerala, the section "Islamic groupings in Kerala" is also needed. The section "Islamic groupings in Kerala" also serves as one that introduces who are "AP Sunnis" and "EK Sunnis", which is also needed. This is also understandable from this comment. Now, whenever sources about the view of the remaining Islamic groups in Kerala or elsewhere about celebrating Onam become available, their view can also be added under respective new sections. In short, without the section "Islamic grouping in Kerala", the article might give the impression that the article presents the views on the permissibility of Onam in Islam selectively, while also not considering the due weight. Neutralhappy (talk) 15:19, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Applying WP:DUE to the subject "Onam and Muslims" requires as a minimum using WP:RS that deal with both Onam and Muslims. In particular, general descriptions of Muslim organizations make little sense, unless the source mentions these structures in connection with Onam. It is even worse with religious leaders: unless they explicitly mention Onam, we should not write about them in this article, as this would associate them with a controversial subject without any RS to verify this connection in a gross violation of WP:BLP. Викидим (talk) 21:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Satanic

[edit]

As other false religions, it is of the devil 2A02:C7C:842A:4F00:D49D:5D15:D48B:9A27 (talk) 16:15, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The statement 'As other false religions, it is of the devil' is not appropriate for an encyclopedia article. Wikipedia strives to maintain neutrality and objectivity in its content. Onam is a Hindu festival celebrated primarily in Kerala, India, with deep religious and historical significance. It is recognized as a symbol of cultural unity. Personal opinions or judgments about religions do not align with Wikipedia's standards for neutrality. Anyasvrr (talk) 19:35, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 4 December 2024

[edit]

Change "Malayalis" to "Hindu Malayalis" in the 'Observed by' column. Anyasvrr (talk) 19:28, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: no reason given for the proposed change. M.Bitton (talk) 00:36, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Onam&oldid=1263771458"