This
level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Text and/or other creative content from this version of Shahnameh was copied or moved into Draft:Baloch in heroic Shahnameh with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Apart from the first sentence, this seems to be refered to as "the" Shanameh throughout. Should it be or not? Titles of works usually do not, but old traditional works sometimes do (cf. the Iliad)
Hi there RegentsPark! As you know, I added a footnote containing a proper reference to Davis's translation; you removed this on the grounds that Wikipedia shouldn't cite primary sources.
I get where you're coming from here, but I don't think the rigid application of this principle is very helpful in this case. Readers are likely to come to this article because they want to know what translations of the Shahnameh to read (which is what I did). The fact that the 'translations' section doesn't actually give any of the bibliographic details for the translations makes it less useful than it could be.
We could list the translations separately under 'further reading', but that strikes me as unnecessary duplication and also not very helpful to a reader who, looking for information about translations, goes to the 'translations' section.
So I suggest that adding proper bibliographic information about Davis's (and others') translations back in to the 'translations' section is a practical and elegant approach. How does that sound? Alarichall ( talk) 16:27, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
The Shahnameh wasn't written for Sultan Muhammad Ghazi, in fact, Ferdowsi started writing the book long before Sultan Ghazi came to throne. Please fix that part. 176.216.189.77 ( talk) 14:39, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change "Zal's son" to "Zāl's son" 77.99.26.246 ( talk) 21:03, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
This
level-4 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Text and/or other creative content from this version of Shahnameh was copied or moved into Draft:Baloch in heroic Shahnameh with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 4 sections are present. |
Apart from the first sentence, this seems to be refered to as "the" Shanameh throughout. Should it be or not? Titles of works usually do not, but old traditional works sometimes do (cf. the Iliad)
Hi there RegentsPark! As you know, I added a footnote containing a proper reference to Davis's translation; you removed this on the grounds that Wikipedia shouldn't cite primary sources.
I get where you're coming from here, but I don't think the rigid application of this principle is very helpful in this case. Readers are likely to come to this article because they want to know what translations of the Shahnameh to read (which is what I did). The fact that the 'translations' section doesn't actually give any of the bibliographic details for the translations makes it less useful than it could be.
We could list the translations separately under 'further reading', but that strikes me as unnecessary duplication and also not very helpful to a reader who, looking for information about translations, goes to the 'translations' section.
So I suggest that adding proper bibliographic information about Davis's (and others') translations back in to the 'translations' section is a practical and elegant approach. How does that sound? Alarichall ( talk) 16:27, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
The Shahnameh wasn't written for Sultan Muhammad Ghazi, in fact, Ferdowsi started writing the book long before Sultan Ghazi came to throne. Please fix that part. 176.216.189.77 ( talk) 14:39, 21 February 2022 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change "Zal's son" to "Zāl's son" 77.99.26.246 ( talk) 21:03, 26 November 2023 (UTC)