Talk:Vikram Samvat

Untitled
How come the articles history is lost? --Vyzasatya 19:31, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Name change
Why was the article not changed to "Bikram Sambat" (instead of "Bikram Samwat"), since the article primarily deals with the calendar of that name in Nepal anyway? --SameerKhan 19:49, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

why
well the default name is Vikram Samvat, nepali speakers cannot pronounce "va" consistently. Bikram samvat is incorrect. either Bikram Sambat or Vikram Samvat should be written, even bengalis and biharis cannot pronounce "va" correctly. king vikramadita is seldomly written bikramaditya hence the default name of the calendar should be "vikram samvat". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.70.73.82 (talk) 19:09, 29 December 2009 (UTC)


 * It starts with Kartik, not chaitra —Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.40.104.158 (talk) 23:15, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Hindi is not my native language but due to Devanagari, I think correct transliteration must be Vikram Sanvat . isn't it?--Hariva (talk) 20:24, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * While the Anuswara is usually pronounced with 'n' sound in Hindi, it is also pronounced with 'm' sound at some places. In some other languages, for example in Sanskrit, the 'm' sound is the default pronunciation. - Mukt (talk) 16:36, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
 * That's true 2409:4043:2C0A:88CA:0:0:3189:3202 (talk) 14:59, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Move. Jafeluv (talk) 11:55, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Bikram Samwat → Vikram Samvat — The right Devnagari word is Vikram Samvat.Others are local dialects.Bengali etc languages pronounce Va as Ba.Mkrestin (talk) 16:28, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Support. Google Books results for "Bikram Samwat": 6; Google Books results for "Vikram Samvat": 2,480. "Vikram Samvat" seems to be a much more WP:COMMONNAME than "Bikram Samwat". Dohn joe (talk) 02:15, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Support as the clear COMMONNAME. Further to the previous figures, 5 of the 6 Google Books hits for "Bikram Samwat" are reprints of Wikipedia, and the other dates from 1977.  Google Scholar shows the same picture.  Kanguole 02:26, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Lunar Calendar?
Why this article list this calendar as lunar calendar? This is a solar calendar and not a lunar calendar.

If it is lunar calendar; can someone explain how it can have months with 31 or 32 days? Also please explain if it is lunar calendar how it is kept in sync with Gregorian Calendar? Nsdeonia (talk) 10:45, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Nepal Vikarm Samvat is not the same is Vikram Samvat in India
The traditional Vikram Samvat in India uses lunar months and solar sidereal year. The Nepali Vikram Samvat is a reformed solar tropical calendar. The article mixes both of them.

Malaiya (talk)

Vikramaditya was a Malava King
Coins and inscriptions of the "Malava" are found in the region around Ujjain. In memory of their victory over the Saka invaders, an era first known as the Krita and Malava samvat, and later on as the Vikram samvat, was founded in 57 BC.

At least the fact that Malava inscriptions were the first to use the Vikram Samvat era, needs to be mentioned in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.105.180.19 (talk) 07:04, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 20:19, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

Month number discrepancy
There is a discrepancy between the month numbers listed here and those used for writing dates based on the Vikram Samvat calendar. In Nepal if a receipt shows the date 2073/1/1 the month "1" corresponds with would be Baishakh. This appears to be correctly recorded on the Baishakh month page. Is there a reason for the month numbering discrepancy? Rmstrng (talk) 06:02, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Nepali Vikarm Samvat is not the same is Vikram Samvat in India
They are two different calendars. The month in Indian Vikram Samvat is strictly lunar (see Lunar_month with an average duration of 29.530587981 days.

Malaiya (talk)


 * It should be noted that the Nepali Vikram Sambat was only started in 1901 AD, where as the Indian Vikram Samvat is the classical one which has been in use for many centuries and have been used in thousands of historical books and inscriptions, and is still widely used. It is inappropriate to make the Nepali Vikram Samvat as the main topic in the article.

- Malaiya (talk) 23:25, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Title Change
Should be Vikrama Samvata. the ending -a is missing. Can someone please change this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:C4:4001:4748:88AD:9C14:370F:BF46 (talk) 20:58, 19 December 2016 (UTC)


 * The common Sanskrit spelling is संवत् (samvat), not संवत (samvata). See http://spokensanskrit.de/index.php?tinput=saMvat utcursch &#124; talk 21:02, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Proposed merger
I do not believe the article should be merged with Nepal Sambat. Vikram Samvat covers many regions in India. Nepal Sambat covers a separate country and calendar.

User:Malikhpur (talk) 16:56, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Merger proposal
Why is this a separate dedicated page talking about exactly identical subject as another one? Following wikipedia page is dedicated to exactly identical subject, both of of these pages should be merged into each other.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bikrami_calendar — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.223.53.104 (talk) 22:07, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Please discuss this merger proposal at Talk:Bikrami calendar and not here, in order to keep the discussion on one page. Richard3120 (talk) 16:07, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Vikram Samvat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140426123959/http://freepressjournal.in/vikram-samvat-should-be-declared-national-calendar/ to http://freepressjournal.in/vikram-samvat-should-be-declared-national-calendar/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:27, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Vikram Samvat (classical) and Nepali Bikram Sambat should be separated
The article is completely confusing. It will be hard to a reader to know what applies to the classical Vikram Samvat, and what applied to the modern reformed Nepali Bikram Samvat. Malaiya (talk) 20:39, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

The traditional Vikram Samvat calendar, as used in India, uses lunar months and solar sidereal years. The Nepali Bikram Sambat introduced in 1901 AD, uses a solar tropical year.

Malaiya (talk) 20:51, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Nepali Bikram Sambat: Introduced in 1901 AD. Solar tropical year. Used only in Nepal for official purposes.
 * Vikram Samvat (classical): ancient. Widely used on thousands of inscriptions for centuries, and still widely used in India. Lunar months, sidereal year. Used for determining the dates of most Hindu, Jain and many Sikh festivals.

Requested move 25 January 2018

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was: Not Moved. (non-admin closure) –Ammarpad (talk) 09:44, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Vikram Samvat → Bikram Sambat – Bikram Sambat is widely and officially used only in Nepal nowadays. ref. Sarbagyastha (talk) 08:34, 25 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Oppose. Although it has official status only in Nepal, it is used as a traditional calendar in India also. It is called Bikram Samvat in Nepal and also in some regions of India but common name is Vikram Samvat. Please also see previous move discussion above. Jakichandan (talk) 08:53, 25 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose "Vikram Samvat is" gets 4x the book hits of "Bikram Sambat is". Not surprising as this is "V" in English. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:02, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

_____ 
 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a Merge Proposal and / or Redirect.

Please do not modify it. The result of the request for the Proposed Merger of Bikrami calendar into this talk page's article was: Completed per Request. —    —     —     —     — '''Transclusion from misplaced discussion on source page talk:

Proposed merger
Why is this a separate dedicated page talking about exactly identical subject as another one? Following wikipedia page is dedicated to exactly identical subject, both of of these pages should be merged into each other.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vikram_Samvat — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.223.53.104 (talk) 22:07, 3 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Agreed. The two pages should be merged. utcursch &#124; talk 22:25, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Any thoughts on the name? Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 23:10, 15 October 2017 (UTC)


 * I don't really have a strong opinion on this, although I encounter "Vikrama Samvat" more frequently in sources on history-related articles. I'm OK with whatever is better supported by the reliable sources.
 * You might be interested in this. I remember that sometime back you mentioned at Talk:Vikram Samvat that the Vikram Samvat of Nepal and India are different. utcursch &#124; talk 00:12, 16 October 2017 (UTC)


 * I would support a merger of Vikrami Samvat into Vikrami calendar. The merger of Vikrami Calendar into Vikrami Samvat... I don't see any appropriate reasons/RS to do that. Do you? Alternatively, Samvat should just focus on the various versions of the zero year, and the various theories on what marks the zero year. Indeed, there are several versions of Vikrami calendar/samvats... all that needs to be carefully summarized with sources. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 11:17, 16 October 2017 (UTC)


 * I'm OK with that. utcursch &#124; talk 15:25, 16 October 2017 (UTC)


 * The Vikram Samvat article is very confused. It combines the classical India-wide Vikram Samvat which is based on Sidereal year with a modern revised Samvat in Nepal which uses the Tropical year without a clear distinction. I would suggest that Vikram Samvat be the article on the classical samvat, and Bikram Samvat be the article on the modern Nepali samvat, since in Nepal it is often spelled as Bikram Samvat.Malaiya (talk) 23:38, 27 October 2017 (UTC)


 * It should be noted that the classical Vikram Samvat varies between Northern (Chaitradi with Amanata months) and Western/Southern (Kartikadi with Purminata months). Malaiya (talk) 23:47, 27 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Why not explain all this in one article, and avoid WP:CFORK issues? Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 01:38, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

I also think it may be better to have a single article. Moreover are you sure that calendar used in Nepal is not same as calendar used  in India (specially in the regions like Sikkim and some other areas)? Jakichandan (talk) 09:45, 25 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Yes, it is better to merge all these pages belonging to Bikram Sambat or Vikram Samvat Prashant_Shahi 13:02, 10 March 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coolboi567 (talk • contribs)

— —  —  —  —  The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a WP:PM. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 23:36, 1 June 2018 (UTC) A copy of this template can be found here.

Conversion?
Small aside ... is there a template to handle the display and conversion of these dates? — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 07:29, 4 July 2023 (UTC)