Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 10:53, 30 May 2006

Anti-Persianism by Arabs

There are a couple of thousand ethnicities in the world, and we can guess mostly every one of them has some animosities towards any two or three of its neighbours. So, let's have a bunch of 10,000 or so new articles of the format "Anti-X'ism by Y", listing all the world's complaints and injured prides, from unjust conquests a thousand years ago to unfair football fans and world-domination conspiracies today. I'll gladly make a start with "Anti-Württembergism by Badenese", taking the abovementioned essay as a model, as it is meticulously sourced, highly original and refreshingly frank in the way it spins all those disparate yarns into a coherent new synthesis of ethnic animosity. Not. -- Lukas 08:28, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• I'm concerned by the obvious anti-crapism of this AfD nominator...Delete! While the material in the article seems very well-sourced, it's irreparably POV. -- Scientizzle 08:35, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete "Anti-Persianism" gets 10 hits on Google. I'd agree that there has been animosity between Persians and Arabs in the past (under the Umayyads -- the Abbasids, who overthrew them, were allied with Persians) and recently (state-formation in Iraq, Iran-Iraq War, hostility between Sunni and Shi'a revived), but the article conflates past and present in a historically illegitimate way. It ignores twelve centuries of minimal or no friction between Arabs and Persians. IMHO, the section of older history is also grotesquely slanted and inaccurate. See the talk pages of Islamicization in post-conquest Iran for discussion of Umayyad language policies, etc. Material on oppression of Shi'a and Iraqis of Iranian background under Saddam is interesting (and depressing), but belongs in modern history of Iraq articles. Zora 08:53, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep If articles like Anti-Arabism and Anti-Semitism are okay then the topic is fair game as long as it is sourced. Term "Anti-Persianism" gets exactly 506 hits on Google and "Anti-Persian" gets 655. Maybe it could be renamed "Anti-Persian racism" which gets 453,000 hits on Google. Racism and bigotry cannot be denied or ignored, which is what it seems LukasPietsch wants to do. Khorshid 09:09, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

You need to put quotes around "Anti-Persianism" or you're going to be pulling up sites that don't actually contain the full term. Zora 10:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

The number of hints in English language does not count. The subject has been thoroughly covered in Persian and arabic sources. If Anti-arabism has more English hints, is just because there are 22 arab countries and one Persian country. --Sina Kardar21:45, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Comment - Excuse me for being maybe a bit paranoid, but are you a duplicate account by any chance? Account created just 8 hours before this nomination, less than 10 edits, none to this article - just how did you find this nomination within half an hour of its creation? Lukas 13:25, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete It is worthwhile looking at the reasons why this article was created and also how widely the term "anti-Persianism" is used - the only evidence for the use of this term is once in one article , but some of the material in this opinion piece has been copied and pasted into the "anti-Persianism" article, as I pointed out here . Out of 12 hits on Google, three are related to this article, indicating that this is original research. The chief problem I have is that this article interprets many actions against Iran as anti-Persian racism, when in fact only 50% of the population of Iran is ethnically Persian and these actions have political motives rather than racial ones. Criticism or actions against the Iranian state by Arab governments appear to be deemed anti-Persianism in this article. I suspect that the reason why "anti-Iranian" and "anti-Persian" are conflated is precisely because there is little evidence to support this polemic. There is more evidence to support an article on "anti-Iranianism" , although it would have to be broader than just sentiments expressed in the Arab world. At present, the article seems like nationalist posturing.--الأهواز 10:55, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I would just like to clarify my own position:

• I disagree with deleting all anti-X-ism articles.
• However, I am against the creation of articles based on an -ism that does not appear to exist outside Misplaced Pages
• I am in favour of an article on anti-Iranian sentiment, as I believe that this prejudice does exist
• However, I am against an article that focuses just on the prejudices of some Arabs and that there is a large amount of prejudice against Iranians elsewhere in the world
• So, I propose that this article be renamed Anti-Iranian prejudice or Anti-Iranian sentiment, be widened to include the hatred or fear of Iranians wherever it occurs (not just Arabs) and the matters relating to POV and copyright violations in the article are cleared up. If this is agreed, then I would vote to keep the article.--الأهواز 22:52, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't like the idea of "Anti-Iranianism" because then there is more than just a single ethnic group. There is definitely racism against Persians so I think renaming the article is a good idea, but it should stay focused on anti-Persian ideas. Problem with "Anti-Iranianism" is also that "Iranian" in this way only means citizens of the country of Iran, and not any ethnic groups. There might be some hatred because of that, being citizen of Iran, but the hatred is more directed against Persians, and not so much against other groups. So the aim of the article is valid since widespread racism exists in the Arab world - and especially Saudi Arabia, UAE, Yemen, Bahrain - against Persians and anyone seen as being "Persian" or "Persian-like". Khorshid 11:44, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• Comment... I am a little bothered by having Anti-Arabism and not this... not sure why (I don't know the subject well at all... just that there is mutual animosity that pops up from time to time)... It does get more google hits but... it is possible that the terminology is not as singular as with anti-Arabism... are there many different terms, maybe? I do think the article is not very good. It conflates anecdotal evidence into a tale.... I mean... quoting traditions like this does is quite dangerous... we need to be quoting secondary scholarship not trying to make our own (and if anti-Arabism suffers from the same problems they should be fixed as well). Are there any academic (relatively) non-partisan works on this? The only ones this seems to cite are related to Iran and not Persians in general... I don't vote delete because I don't know if there is scholarship on this... but, this article is dangerous because it masquerades as being fact when... well, it's just not. And sadly, I think non-neutral articles are looking more sophisticated and escaping scrutiny. gren グレン 11:41, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Khorshid Crazynas 12:20, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep peri norm. Valid topic. --K a s h 13:13, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• Comment: Uhhmmm, excuse me, keep per what? Lukas 13:20, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

* Comment: Uhmrmmmphmhm. You are excused. The topic is valid, its the title that may need changing. --K a s h 14:45, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. --Telex 14:06, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Which "norm" ??! --Sina Kardar22:30, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. term appears in only one article.--JChap 14:14, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

First of all the term exist in Persian language and articles and also the whole subject can be found easily in arabic articles. Second, you can find many hints by searching terms as "hate" and "persians" or "ajams" etc in English. The number of hints is at least comparable to the number for other anti-X-ism article (except for antisemitism which gives much more hints). --Sina Kardar22:30, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Delete. As most (if not all) of the information from the article is original research, inaccurate, and is extremely biased. It's nothing more than a political polemic, also the subject isn't notable enough to be worthy of an article, espescially of this size. --Inahet 15:23, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

You are the one who was involved in making Anti-arabism article !!! So you cann't vote for deletion of this article. --Sina Kardar22:30, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Comment. The reason why I got involved in editing the Iranian anti-Arabism section (a mere section, not a bloated article like this nominated one) was because anti-Arab Iranians were using that section to make racist statements against Arabs. I was new when I started to correct this section, and so I had little knowledge of what is considered acceptable, so I sought the advice of an admin and another user . I was advised to find reliable sources otherwise the information I had added would be considered original research. So I removed the information I had added to comply with Wiki policies . ZereshK, the sole writer of the Anti-Persianism by Arabs article, did not attempt to comply with Misplaced Pages policies (including NOR and NPOV), despite the fact he has been actively editing for a much longer time that I have. BTW, Zereshk writes politically charged, and what some might consider controversial articles for Iranian.com. I have nothing against him editing Misplaced Pages articles, but he should not enforce his own opinions at Misplaced Pages. And Sina, you can't tell me that I can't vote; where in Misplaced Pages guidelines do you base your claim? --Inahet 01:10, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep I think the key issue here is whether or not this is a notable social phenominon. I think it is, the article may need to be mantained by a more diverse group of editors. I think and RfC would suit this article more than a AfD. HighInBC 15:56, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep --Terence Ong 16:12, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and Move to Anti-Persian sentiments by Arabs. Also perhaps the article could be expanded to include other people like Azeris and Balochis, so the title could also be Anti-Iran sentiments by Arabs. —Khoikhoi 17:31, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Why just anti-Iranian sentiments by Arabs? As one editor stated on the talk page said "sentiments against IRAN and/or its inhabitants can have many causes and have been ubiquitously prevalent at different points in time, during the last two and a half millennia. Be it Babylon or Egypt or Greece in Antiquity, or the Arab Caliphates, as well as India, Afghanistan and the Ottoman Empire in more recent times." I don't understand why this is being protrayed as some kind of civilisational conflict between Persians and Arabs when Iran is an ethnically diverse country and there are many other disputes concerning Iranians and non-Arab countries.--الأهواز 17:47, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Both you and I know that today many Arabs have shown prejustice towards Iranians and vice versa. Just look at soccer games between Arab and Iranian teems. It's just like watching a game between India and Pakistan. The point it's a notable topic, and deserves to be mentioned. —Khoikhoi 17:54, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you that there are tensions and in some cases animosity and racism towards Iranians by Arabs, but my point is that the article conflates Iranian as a nationality and Persian as an ethnic group that comprises 50% of the Iranian nation. "Anti-Persianism" or "Anti-Persian" are terms that have been virtually invented by the article author, whereas Anti-Iranian sentiment is widely written about. How can one realistically argue that anti-Iranian attitudes expressed by Arab football supporters during a soccer match is evidence of hatred against the Persian people rather than Iran as a country? My other point is that anti-Iranian attitudes are not only evident among Arabs but other ethnic groups and countries. Why are Arabs singled out and anti-Iranian sentiments among Americans not dealt with? I have no objection to an article on Anti-Iranian prejudice, which is something I originally suggested on the Anti-Arabism talk page, covering all aspects of the issue and not just Arab-versus-Persian.--الأهواز 18:07, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep This article contains notable and factual information that is not present in any other articles. The phrasing and title of the idea conveyed "anti-persianism by arabs" is irrelevant. All previous arguments presented against this article seem to either quibble about the title of the article or bemoan the "irreparable" state of the organization and tone. Unless it is original research, the premise of the article, not content, should dictate its fate. I find the cumbersome title and POV style to be irrelevant in the discussion. Adambiswanger1 17:50, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Yes, but the "premise" is exactly it. The premise of this article is that "Anti-Persianism" (or whatever you call it) is a unified phenomenon across the eras, providing a single interpretative framework for each and every real or perceived grievance Persians have against Arabs, from mistreatments during and after the Islamic conquest, to the behaviour of football fans today. And this idea, I believe, is indeed irreparably original research and tendentious, no matter how well the details are sourced. Lukas 18:01, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
    • I don't think that the difficulty of the task (studying the animosity towards persians across time and in different contexts) warrants the deletion of the article. What is needed is good, hard work on the part of a scholar. Anti-persianism is one consistent entity across time, only manifesting itself in different ways, thus flustering the inability of some to view abstractions and concepts.Adambiswanger1 18:43, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
      • Huh? Assume the existence of the phenomenon and then go looking for it? Even though there's no evidence from google that other people believe there is such an entity? Isn't that the definition of original research? Zora 19:04, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
      • "One consistent entity across time". Wow, that's a big claim indeed. References that such is a legitimate perspective in scholarship? Lukas 19:05, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• Strong delete because this opens the door for a load of POVforks that are unencyclopedic IMHO. Also, I must agree with scientizzle. M1ss1ontomars2k4 17:58, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep Notable subject, there is an article named Anti-Arabism and many of the people who like to get rid "Anti-Persianism" article, are major contributors on Anti-Arabism . This looks like a POV nomination. --ManiF 20:03, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

The person who started the Anti-Persianism article has contributed to the Anti-Arabism article. The editor who nominated this for AfD has not contributed to either article. But this is beside the point. The article should be judged on whether it is worthy of an encyclopaedia article.--الأهواز 20:11, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Keep.--Zereshk 20:16, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

A little reminder to Iranian editors and a couple of leading sentences could be just enough to ensure a vote against deletion:

That's what we've been doing all along. But you still approve of the article's deletion. Revealing, Id say.--Zereshk 02:21, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep - article is a well-referenced piece of work discribing the historical events after the Arab conquest of Persia. Absolutely no reason to delete it! Tajik 20:41, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Interesting that this article is nominated for deletion when there are the following similar articles:

• • Anti-Americanism
  • Anti-Hellenism
  • Anti-Canadianism
  • Anti-Italianism
  • Anti-German sentiment
  • Anti-Arabism
  • Sinophobia
  • Francophobia
  • Anti-Semitism
  • Anti-Kurdism
  • Anti-Turkism
  • Anti-Japanese sentiment
  • Russophobia

I dont see any reason why this article should be different.--Nightryder84 21:10, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• Don't forget Anti-Romanian discrimination! ;) —Khoikhoi 21:11, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• Note: I'd indeed be happy to see most of these go too - except a very few where the concept is a well-established object of research, such as Anti-Semitism and arguably also Anti-Americanism. Lukas 21:17, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

The hostility of arabs toward Persian has beed "well established" and costed us the lives of many people. It is not acceptable to refer to English sources (for a conflict between Arabs and Persian speakers) to define what is well-established or not. --Sina Kardar21:34, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I'd like to create an Anti-Scottishism by the Irish, relating to the hatred of the Scottish planter population in Ireland. Then I'd create an Anti-Parisianism by the Bretons on account of Celtic Breton resentment of Parisian attitudes towards the Breton language and regional identity. The possibilities for these articles are endless.--الأهواز 21:22, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Fortunatelty there is enough room for you to write about subjects that you have expertise in them. If you are intereted and qualified, please do not hesitate to contribute.--Sina Kardar22:00, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• But, google the anti-Kurd or anti-Turk one... you get 132 hits and 66 hits... these are not terms in wide currency... which makes the article original research. It's not that there can't be expertise but when you put it under a specific title it has implications... such as that we are citing scholarly sources... I mean, the name is very important... we don't want to call the Yankee-Mets rivalry "Anti-Yankeeism by Mets fans"... there is a rivalry that may notably be mentioned somewhere... but giving it a name that is not in common currency is original research and not something we are supposed to be doing. gren グレン 05:00, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep as per User:Nightryder84.This page is a responce to Anti-Arabism article. Neutrality of wikipedia demands to keep this article. --Sina Kardar21:19, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep As per all of its supporters. Amir85 21:27, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Keep . The article is sourced and explains the phenomenon that has existed among Arabs for so many years. Sorry if it bothers some people but it is the reality. I as an Iranian acknowledge that anti Arab feelings have existed in Iran and among Persians and I ask the other side to do the same.Gol 21:47, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• Votestacking. Please note that, as often before, the Misplaced Pages:Iranian Wikipedians' notice board is again used for votestacking (). Lukas 21:58, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, I see no problem. According to my experience, on many issues about Iran, a very well organized network of wikipedians is heavily involved in intoducing bias and vandalising issues related to Iran. All of these guys are related to eachother and call eachother on voting. I have little doubt that these people are associated to political circles and receieve fund as they are working full time on wikipedia articles about Iran. Ofcourse there is no "official noticeboard" for them! --Sina Kardar22:09, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

People talk to each other on WP and there is no law against it. We were not told to come here and blindly obey and vote!! We were asked to get involved and since we have brains of our own we are capable of making up our own minds about the matter. I see nothing wrong with it. Gol 22:34, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, interestingly enough, Lukas also goes around calling on other editors to come here and participate as well: --Zereshk 22:26, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Lukas, please see a similar AfD: Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Turkish Kurdistan. One user was accused of votestacking, but if you see Misplaced Pages:Vote Stacking, you will notice that it's only a proposed policy, and by no means offical. —Khoikhoi 23:38, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• Strong keep. This is a well-documented and highly informative article based on historical and real facts. It should be nominated for the featured articles. Deleting this information is censorship. That providing this sort of information could be done regarding many nations and peoples is no argument to commit this censorship. I would very much like to know the history of tensions between the Irish and the English. If somebody will write a well-documented article about it in this encyclopaedia it would be a shame to delete that.

--Mani1 21:59, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Is this an edit war, or a serious discussion? The Anti-Persianism article was created in reaction to the Anti-Arabism article and now it has come up for AfD, there is a retribution by some editors, prompted perhaps by ). Incidentally, you made a serious mistake with the template. Take a closer look.--الأهواز 22:04, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• Comment: User:LukasPietsch's reason for deletion of this article is completely unsubstantiated. He is being selective. Otherwise I invite him to also call for the deletion of the entire corpus of these similar articles:
  • Category:Anti-national sentiment
  • List of anti-ethnic and anti-national terms

Thanx all.--Zereshk 22:11, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• Comment: User:LukasPietsch ommited my deletion nomination tag for the Anti-Arabism article after just a few seconds without giving me time to take the rest of steps technically needed for this nomination!