Talk:Fuzûlî

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fuzûlî article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Turkey, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Turkey-related topics. Please visit the project page if you would like to participate. Happy editing!
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	To-do list for Fuzûlî:	edit  · history  · watch  · refresh
No to-do list assigned; you can help us in improving the articles in the same category

This article is part of WikiProject Azeri, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Azeri-related topics. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of objectives.

Contents 1 Re: Arabic text 2 Comment 3 Newly Added 4 Monument

[edit] Re: Arabic text

I have added the Arabic script for names, terms, titles, etc. However, I am not at all well-versed in the script, so there may be mistakes. If anyone familiar with Arabic script (in its Arabic, Persian, and/or Ottoman manifestations) could check and correct any mistakes that may have surfaced, it would be greatly appreciated. —Saposcat 11:15, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comment

Great article. Should be nominated. nesimi 22:31, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I don't really know what it should be nominated for just yet, since in its current state it's neither up to good article or featured article status. Things that are currently lacking, for instance:

• the "Work" section currently there needs a lot more, specifically it should be mentioned that the mystical interpretation provided is only one way of looking at Fuzûlî's work, and a very limited one at that
• it needs to be established that the "Work" section is not original research; I don't think it is, since the interpretations provided can—I think—be seen to apply very generally across much of Persian, Ottoman, and Urdu poetry; however, this would need verification and support
• much more mention of many more of Fuzûlî's works should be made, and a discussion of their (and his) significance provided

In any case, I think the article is at least off to a good start, and I'm hoping to devote more time to it once I have delved deeper into Fuzûlî's œuvre (right now, I'm deep into Neşâtî, a fantastic Ottoman poet who doesn't even have a page yet, sadly); until then, any help that you or anyone else (perhaps the folks over at WikiProject Azeri?) could provide would be greatly appreciated. —Saposcat 14:19, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

I’ll see what I can do and I’ll spread the word with people at Wikiproject Azeri. And I think it would be just great if this article could be brought up to the standard of a featured article. May I also suggest you have a look at the article about another great Azeri poet Nasimi? I think Abdulnr made a good start on that one, but it needs work to be up to the standard the poet deserves. Grandmaster 16:51, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Again it is a superb article, at least amongs ones futuring Azeri personalities. Appreciate your invaluable attentioon on Nasimi, which I currently working on. abdulnr 21:13, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

I'll take a look at the Nasimi article when I get the chance, though I'll have to bone up on his work some before I dare add anything (I've only glanced at a few of his poems so far). Until then, I can do some copyediting and the like. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. —Saposcat 04:27, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

I think right now the article is good enough to be nominated to a good article. It meets all the criteria. Grandmaster 07:46, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

It still seems to me to lack the "it is broad in its coverage" criterion, insofar as the "Works" section is still terribly thin and needs fleshing out with other perspectives and more explanation. —Saposcat 08:26, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I think the works section indeed needs some expansion, but even without it it meets the criteria. This article could even be made into a featured article in future. But anyway, as usual, I trust your judgment. I’ll try to collect more material to work on it. Grandmaster 09:32, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Newly Added

Hi, I read this on "Britannica" thought it was interesting and as it's ofcourse Britannica its historically and factual and referenced by the top scholors.

Fuzuli Turkish poet and the most outstanding figure in the classical school of Turkish literature, born 1495, died 1556, both in Karbala. Resided in Baghdad most of his life. Fuzuli composed poetry with equal facility and elegance in Turkish, Persian and Arabic. Although his Turkish works are written in Azeri dialect, he had a thorough knowledge of both Ottoman and Chagatai Turkish literary traditions.

The works for which he is famous include his melodic and sensitive rendition of the classic Leyla and Mecnun. This celebrated allegorical romance depicts the attraction of the Mecnun (the human spirit) for Leyla (divine beauty). Fuzuli is the author of two divans (collection of poems), one in Azerbaijani Turkish, and the other in Persian. These anthologies contain examples of his most lyrical poetry, many concerned with mystical love and others lamenting the ephemeral nature of this world. His poetic expressions, characterized by sincerity, passion, and a pervading strain of melancholy, transcended the highly formalized classical Islamic literary esthetic. Fuzuli’s works influenced many poets up to the 19th century.

Reference: Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. IV, p.367, 1980 edition.

johnstevens5

[edit] Monument

I have another picture of the monument in Baku, featuring only the top part in more detail, but I’m not sure about it’s inclusion in the article, since we already have the picture of the whole monument. It could be redundant. What do you think? Grandmaster 06:09, 12 May 2006 (UTC)