| Revision as of 15:54, 12 October 2011 editAlf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers28,976 edits →thousand and one nights: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:27, 12 October 2011 edit undoKhodabandeh14 (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers6,674 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
| okey dokey, artichokey! as you see, i go by that common name too. — ] (]) 15:54, 12 October 2011 (UTC) | okey dokey, artichokey! as you see, i go by that common name too. — ] (]) 15:54, 12 October 2011 (UTC) | ||
| ==User Atabek== | |||
| Hi, | |||
| *I have reported user Atabek here . If you have any opinions please share it here, as I mentioned part of the recent ordeal that occured in dab's page. | |||
| *In addition, you can look at the discussion in anti-Turkism (if you wish but probably do not). I thought this quote from the late ] might be of interest. | |||
| ]: ”In fact as much as early rulers felt themselves to be Turks, they conntected their Turkish origin '''not with Turkish tribal history but rather with the Turan of Shahnameh''': in the second generation their children '''bear the name of Firdosi’s heroes''', and their Turkish lineage is ivariably traced back to Afrasiyab—weather we read Barani in the fourteenth century or the Urdu master poet Ghalib in the nineteenth century. The poets, and through them probably most of the educated class, felt themselves '''to be the last outpost tied to the civilized world by the thread of Iranianism.''' The imagery of poetry remained exclusively Persian." (Schimmel, A. (1975), “Turk and Hindu: A Poetical Image and Its Application to Historical Fact” Speros Vryonis, Jr. (ed.), Islam and Cultural Change in the Middle Ages, Undena Publications: 107–26." | |||
| *By the way incase you are wondering, the most recent scholarly opinion (by Mahmud Omidsalar of UCLA who is a Shahnama specialist) is that the difficulty between Mahmud and Ferdowsi was more due to Sunni vs Shi'ite thing. This is also mentioned by chronicles close to that time. Other poets of his court praise him as the King of Iran fighting battles against Turanians. The reason modern Turkish nationalist do not like the Shahnama but the Saljuqs, Ilkhanids, Ghaznavids (the sons of Mahmud), Timurdis, Safavids, Ottomans loved it (without exaggerating, they gave it as gifts to their sons and had professional Shahnama singers in the courts..) did is due to the fact that modern nationalism based on language is a 19th century phenomenon in the former Ottoman empire, Caucasus and such identity was almost non-existent prior to that. So that is why including Shahnama in such unrelated article is ridicolous as "Turk/Turan" in Shahnama has a different meaning than what that article is about. --] (]) 23:27, 12 October 2011 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 23:27, 12 October 2011
Ardashir I
Would you take a look at my talk page and the article's talk page and see if you can contribute? Be gentle please. Thanks. Dougweller (talk) 17:56, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Ghain
Hi Folantin. Your edit makes Persian alphabet table appears first, up, then Arabic under it. Check your browser settings or other settings, because all the browsers I tested the page on, I don't see the tables next to each others as you described.
- Click on the following link to see how your edit makes the tables appear on Firefox and Google Chrome (Persian appears first, up, then Arabic under it) http://www.7daypic.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/Display/Folantin%20edit.png
- Click on the following link to see how my edit makes the tables appear on Firefox and Google Chrome (Arabic appears first, up, then Persian under it) http://www.7daypic.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/Display/Mahmudmasri%20edit.png --Mahmudmasri (talk) 15:32, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
- Hm, I'm using a version of IE (the latest one, I believe) and in the current version I get the two boxes side by side, Arabic on the left, Persian on the right. So there's obviously some technical issue here. Odd...--Folantin (talk) 15:51, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
Il Tigrane
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— Jeanambr (talk) 08:04, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
Arbcomm and uninvolved user
Hi, as an uninvolved user can you make a comment on point 7 here: --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 11:36, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
- I'm flattered to be included in that small group of neutral editors but I'd have to decline as I can envisage it being something of a "poisoned chalice". Plus, I'm trying to reduce my involvement in Misplaced Pages. Anyhow, it doesn't look like the ArbCom case will go ahead. Your best bet is to try to get existing sanctions enforced. Cheers. --Folantin (talk) 08:57, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
thousand and one nights
okey dokey, artichokey! as you see, i go by that common name too. — alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 15:54, 12 October 2011 (UTC)
User Atabek
Hi,
- I have reported user Atabek here . If you have any opinions please share it here, as I mentioned part of the recent ordeal that occured in dab's page.
- In addition, you can look at the discussion in anti-Turkism (if you wish but probably do not). I thought this quote from the late Anne Marrie Schimmel might be of interest.
Annemarie Schimmel: ”In fact as much as early rulers felt themselves to be Turks, they conntected their Turkish origin not with Turkish tribal history but rather with the Turan of Shahnameh: in the second generation their children bear the name of Firdosi’s heroes, and their Turkish lineage is ivariably traced back to Afrasiyab—weather we read Barani in the fourteenth century or the Urdu master poet Ghalib in the nineteenth century. The poets, and through them probably most of the educated class, felt themselves to be the last outpost tied to the civilized world by the thread of Iranianism. The imagery of poetry remained exclusively Persian." (Schimmel, A. (1975), “Turk and Hindu: A Poetical Image and Its Application to Historical Fact” Speros Vryonis, Jr. (ed.), Islam and Cultural Change in the Middle Ages, Undena Publications: 107–26."
- By the way incase you are wondering, the most recent scholarly opinion (by Mahmud Omidsalar of UCLA who is a Shahnama specialist) is that the difficulty between Mahmud and Ferdowsi was more due to Sunni vs Shi'ite thing. This is also mentioned by chronicles close to that time. Other poets of his court praise him as the King of Iran fighting battles against Turanians. The reason modern Turkish nationalist do not like the Shahnama but the Saljuqs, Ilkhanids, Ghaznavids (the sons of Mahmud), Timurdis, Safavids, Ottomans loved it (without exaggerating, they gave it as gifts to their sons and had professional Shahnama singers in the courts..) did is due to the fact that modern nationalism based on language is a 19th century phenomenon in the former Ottoman empire, Caucasus and such identity was almost non-existent prior to that. So that is why including Shahnama in such unrelated article is ridicolous as "Turk/Turan" in Shahnama has a different meaning than what that article is about. --Khodabandeh14 (talk) 23:27, 12 October 2011 (UTC)