Talk:Shahnameh

Definite article

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)

Lots of pics

This article is rather saturated with images, at least from the laptop pov. A gallery section might be a good idea. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 05:08, 5 December 2025 (UTC)

Infobox image

@Idris Shirazi Hi Idris. How are you? I think this image is a little rough:

I propose a lovely story of shahname like this one:

With this caption: "Meeting of Zāl and Rudaba" or some other love stories of Shahnameh. I think Ferdowsi is also a good love story writer. Rudaba is described by him like this:

ز سر تا به پایش گلست وسمن

به سرو سهی بر سهیل یمن

همی می‌ چکد گویی از روی تو

عبیرست گویی مگر بوی تو

I think this image makes this article more user-friendly. Thanks, Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 15:59, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

Hmmmm that is a nice image. Give me a second I want to send some other ones Idris Shirazi (talk) 16:03, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

The image is indeed rough, and not even from the Shahnameh. Idris Shirazi has already been told dozens of times to use the talk page and reach WP:CONSENSUS. HistoryofIran (talk) 16:04, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

Told dozens of times by you in particular, don't refer to yourself in the third person. Idris Shirazi (talk) 16:05, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

Doesn't matter who tells you, you still have to comply with them. HistoryofIran (talk) 16:06, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

Still don't refer to yourself in the third person though thats a little weird. Idris Shirazi (talk) 16:06, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

You don't care about WP:NPA either, as you're still commenting on me. How I refer myself should not concern you, and I'm clearly not the only one who have told you to follow WP:CONSENSUS. HistoryofIran (talk) 16:08, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

Ok dude Idris Shirazi (talk) 16:15, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

Dude join the debate what do you think about my rationale i put

Do you see where I am coming from now? Idris Shirazi (talk) 16:29, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

Also just for anyone reading, the image is from the Shahnameh. Its from a set of illustrations specifically for a Shahnameh. Idris Shirazi (talk) 16:34, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

You deleted the message HistoryofIran but you said "If someone just draws a mythological figure, it doesnt mean its from the Shahnameh"

In case you were skeptical, @HistoryofIran : https://archive.org/details/rustem-u-sohrap-099/Ru%CC%88stem_u%CC%88_Sohrap004_.jpeg Idris Shirazi (talk) 16:41, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

Regardless, not typical Iranian artwork, not from a typical Shahnameh. This is after all, an Iranian epic, not a modern European one. "I guess I'm concerned with attracting the attention span of my fellow Gen Z who have fried dopamine receptors." I can't take this serious. Now let's make room for others to comment as well. HistoryofIran (talk) 16:50, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

> Not typical Iranian artwork

example of a similar illustration style from a native iranian - illustration converged on this style internationally in the late 19th century so its not so much "european" as "late 19th century illustration"

It is actually very reminiscent of some late 19th century Qajar-period illustrations.

This illustration style was also used in Baku and Tehran newspapers very frequently by natives.

Now, I truly understand yor point that it is an Iranian epic, not a modern European one. But why does that mean we cannot use artwork from European artists who were inspired by reading the text? We are on English Wikipedia after all - the experience of these Western artists encountering the Shahnameh and feeling inspired by it is precisely the experience we want to create for English wikipedia users. And honestly, I don't see why we should be closed off to art from foreigners anyways if its doen with respect for our culture.

> I cant take this serious

Please do because I didnt say that as a meme, I meant it seriously. Gen Z has seriously fried attention spans, that doesnt mean we dumb anything down at all, but it means if we can make things more familiar and more striking i think it serves the goal of spreading our culture. Idris Shirazi (talk) 16:58, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

And to be clear, im not saying "remove all medieval Persian miniatures from any shahnameh related article" or anything like that, but I believe Shahnameh infoboxes should all feel EPIC and STRIKING not quaint and ornate. The poem itself is epic and striking. Idris Shirazi (talk) 17:03, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

Hooman, can you explain exactly what you mean by "rough"? Do you mean "rough" as in brutal, or "rough" as in not good artistically? Idris Shirazi (talk) 16:06, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

@Idris Shirazi In this picture, someone is going to die and someone starts crying on him. That's not appropriate for Shahnameh. It depicts a sad story. Personally I don't like it. Hooman Mallahzadeh (talk) 16:11, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

Well the Shahnameh has a lot of death and crying :)) Its sad sometimes but that is also epic, you know? The fact that it made you feel visceral emotions is a sign that its doing its job in my opinion

But tell me more, are you concerned with presenting it as a violent story or something? It is a violent story Idris Shirazi (talk) 16:17, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

Let me explain my reasoning:

Right now, a lot of the Shahnameh pages are completely lacking. I'm reading a translation of the Shahnameh right now, and I am planning to improve it all drastically as I go through it.

One of the main hopes I have is to make it as attractive as possible to a non-Persian audience. I really want to emphasize that this is my main goal. I genuinely believe that we CAN present this in a way that makes it look super fascinating to a person with no experience with our culture.

Persian miniatures are great and they are a part of our tradition. Some of them like the one you added there are beautiful for sure. But they are a bit "quaint", for lack of a better word. They don't pack the punch that the story gives. The story is EPIC, and I want the EPIC nature of the story to be clear immediately.

If you want romance how do you feel about this one?

Im not saying I want to remove all Persian miniature style from Shahnameh articles at all. I just think by nature, they are a little quaint. I guess I'm concerned with attracting the attention span of my fellow Gen Z who have fried dopamine receptors. I need to get them hooked first, and then the miniatures can be an acquired taste within the article. That is my rationale Idris Shirazi (talk) 16:14, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

The illustration of Rostam killing Sohrab gives off Vinland Saga vibes its so cool Idris Shirazi (talk) 16:45, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

I have to go for now, but I cast my vote as follows

First choice

Second choice

And if you guys really think that it MUST be specifically a medieval Persian miniature, then I support what Hooman has proposed over what we currently have.

Idris Shirazi (talk) 17:18, 7 December 2025 (UTC)

Added an entire "Historical Analysis" subsection

I added an entirely new "Historical Analysis" subsection and expanded it quite vastly with a variety of different scholarly sources and perspectives. Any future editors are more than welcome to contribute to it with whatever information they find relevant or interesting - lots of academic analysis exists out there on the topic. I encourage interested editors to add info there, on that section. HarvardJock🏫 (talk) 22:35, 2 May 2026 (UTC)