Misplaced Pages

talk:Iranian Misplaced Pagesns' notice board - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Nepaheshgar (talk | contribs) at 15:46, 19 June 2006 (→Talysh). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 15:46, 19 June 2006 by Nepaheshgar (talk | contribs) (→Talysh)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Iranian Wikipedians' notice board

New & Improved. Please help with the portal. --Jpbrenna 9 July 2005 08:21 (UTC)

Thanks for your efforts. Unfortunately, the new page design is just "new" but I wouldn't call it "improved" because the new design has a "locked" look and feel whereas the old design is the simple, open and standard look and feel, which would encourage users to participate in it more. The idea of pages similar to this one is usefulness not page design artistry.
Sorry, I thought a to-do list would help. Actually, it looks like no one is participating under either format, which is sad. --Jpbrenna 02:02, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Newcomers

If there are any newcomers that intend to edit and make contribs on a regular basis, please let me know, leave me a message, or email me. We have a BIG need and deficiency in Iranian editors on WP. I cant edit everything all by myself. We need help.--Zereshk 22:37, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Attention all Iranian related editors

If there are any newcomers that intend to edit and make contribs on a regular basis, please let me know, leve me a message, or email me. We have a BIG need and deficiency in Iranian editors on WP. I cant edit everything all by myself. We need help.--Zereshk 22:35, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Iran on IDRIVE

I'm considering putting Iran on the Article Improvement Drive to help get it featured in a more timely fashion--plus it'll be improved by editors who may not usually be around the Iran corner of Misplaced Pages. Soliciting feedback… --Wikiacc 22:40, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Military attacks on Iran and claimed justifications

i hope i'm not intruding here - i admit that trying to prevent an attack on Iran would be advocacy and that my POV is that i do not want Iran to be bombed nor invaded. However, distributing NPOV information in the wikipedia, which might lead to peaceful resolution of threats and perceived threats, is IMHO consistent with wikipedia goals. After all, Ayatollah Jimbo said that the goal should be that we all love each other - how can we love each other if we know that by failing to distribute information, some of our governments are about to mass murder people in Iran? (i don't have any connections with Iran, except a few friends there, and i lived in Pune, India, for two years - my motivation is simply ordinary human ethics). Boud 16:10, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Reading "Lolita" in Tehran

is a book that has an article, Reading Lolita in Tehran, which at any time is either in one phase or the other of a long-running (but slow, thus no "3RR") revert war. I am unhappy with both sides: neither makes a serious effort to provide sources for his/her claims, and neither seems inclined to discuss (let alone negotiate) with the other. I wrote about this at the pump (please click!), but it now occurs to me that there could be a greater number of knowledgable (and Persian-reading) people here. Thank you for your attention to this. -- Hoary 11:26, 8 March 2006 (UTC) (reworded 14:53, 8 March 2006 (UTC))

Afghanistan & Tajikistan

This notice board should also include toppics regarding Afghanistan and Tajikistan, Tajiks, Pashtuns, etc ... all of those articles are sometimes attacked by "outsiders". I suggest to move this project to "Persian-speaking", like the "German-speakers notice board". Tajik 17:31, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Oh that's a good idea, but renaming the project to "Persian-speaking" would exclude the non-Persian speaking Iranians who may be interested to help and support the project. Regardless, you can post your Afghanistan/Tajikistan related notices on the project's main page for now, you can even add a separate section for Afghanistan and Tajikistan updates. --ManiF 23:07, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Tajik, I agree with you. But you can see what a mess we run into everytime we use the word Persian on Misplaced Pages. The ethnic secessionists take it as an insult.--Zereshk 19:03, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

I did not say "Persian" but "Persian-speaking". I believe that Tajikistanis, Afghanistanis and other Persian-speakers who are not citizens of Iran have more problems with the title "Iranian" than with "Persian-speaking". I consider "Persian-speaking" a more neutral title. Tajik 20:03, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
I hear you. Unfortunately, the western dominated users of Misplaced Pages see it exactly as the opposite. Stroll around on WP, and youll see a whole posse of users trying to separate the Kurds and the Azeris and every other ethnic group from Iran just by emphasizing on the ethnic usage of the word Persian. (e.g. claiming Persian only applies to fars province).--Zereshk 06:41, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Hamadan and ethnic population of Iran

Hi different (very small) separatist groups are making different claims on Hamadan (see the wikipedia entery). The below source I think is very accurate description. http://www.hamedanpolitic.ir/Group.aspx


--Ali doostzadeh 19:23, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Al-Khawarizmi

I have written a complete essay here on Khawarazmi's Iranian origin: http://www.azargoshnasp.net/wikipedia/khawarazmi.htm I am not sure how anyone can counter it. As per the user Zora, I notice her in every anti-Iranian discussion. Also one or two pan-Kurdists on a basis of complete anti-Iranian grudge are trying to hide Khawarazmi's Iranian origin. They are very naive and stupid because Kurds are also Iranian and part of the Iranian world, and Khawarazmi's Iranianness also means that Kurds have their share in the heritage of this Iranian. In fact Rumi, Nizami, Avicenna, Shahnameh, Kaveh, Zoroster and etc. are part of the heritage of all Iranians (Kurds included).


Updates...


Zidan mentioned an article about Khawarazmi by Prof. Len Berggren: http://genealogy.math.ndsu.nodak.edu/html/id.phtml?id=15655

I emailed Professor Len Berggren last week and he finally responded. His email address is: berggren@sfu.ca and this is his webpage: http://www.math.sfu.ca/~berggren/main.html

Here is his email after I enquired about this mistake.

Dear Ali Doostzadeh,

Thank you for your letter. You are, of course, right and I make the same point myself in a book I published (with Springer-Verlag) in 1986, titled Episodes in the Mathematics of Medieval Islam. I write, on p. 6, speaking of the early period of Islamic science, that "the Central Asian scholar Muhammad ibn Musa al-Khwarizmi came from the old and high civilization that had grown up in the region of Khwarizm . . . near the delta of the Amu Dar'ya (Oxus) River on the Aral Sea." (This book has been translated into Farsi, by the way, and is available in Iran.) The article you wrote to me was one I wrote at a time when I was not as aware of the wide ethnic differences within medieval Islam as I was when I came to write my book. Anyway, happy "Nau Rooz" and I wish you success in your researches. I was very impressed with the sources you have gathered and I look forward, when I have finished teaching this term, to having the leisure to read them carefully. Yours sincerely, Len Berggren

I can forward this email to anyone that is interested (alidoostzadeh@yahoo.com) or they may contact the Professor himself to verify it, if they wish. So Professor Len Berggren has totally recounted his mistake since at least 1986.


--Ali doostzadeh 19:23, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Abu Rayhan Biruni

Some pan-turkists might try to claim Abu-Rayhan Biruni, but this can easily be refuted. Biruni was a Iranian Khawrezmian and spoke no turkic. In his list of turkic month names (which are merely ordinals), he adds "I don't know what tehy mean and I don't knwo the (exact) order". his ordering in fact has errors. In his famous "chronology of ancient nations" he has the order of the old-turkic month names, which are just ordinals (readily recognizable in any variety) jumbled and adds a note that he doesn't know the correct order and doesn't know the origin of the names. Beside he alrady has mentioned that the people of Khawarazm are a branch of Persians.

--Ali doostzadeh 19:23, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Ibn Nadeem

I have changed the "Arab" to "Muslim" on the article: http://en.wikipedia.org/Ibn_al-Nadim Although I believe that most likely was Iranian, the Iranica article mentions that his ethnicity is uncertain.

--Ali doostzadeh 19:23, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

RFC

Requests for comment/Aucaman is still under review, but an advocate of User:Aucaman had moved the many users' comments and views from the main page to discussion claiming that the comments were all made in response to Zora and hence belonged in discussion. I have restored some of the comments weren't in response to Zora, but rather the case. Please make sure that your comments and views are posted under their own section if you'd like to express your views there. --ManiF 16:43, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

Sayed Mohammad Khatami

Could someone write a short biography on Sayed Mohammad Khatami? Cheers, —Ruud 01:53, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Geber

See my comments on the discussion page of Geber. His ethnicity is unclear and some put Al-Tusi and some Al-Kufi and some Al-Tartusi (he could even possibly be Greek/Roman). I have not seen anything from the pan-arabist claim that he was from Al-Azdi tribe. I think factually what we need to put is of Shia Muslim (perhaps of Arab or Persian or Greek or Sabian origin). --Ali doostzadeh 22:24, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Edits

I have been editing all the articles that refer to Persian scientists as "Muslim" scientists. The articles must include these peoples ethnic origin. Simply refering to them as "Muslim" is misleading. I got 1 message from user, "svest" telling me I will be blocked from editing. I will continue to add the correct information and facts to help fight their lies and propoganda. The articles have to include the Iranian origins of these men. I will file a complaint with Misplaced Pages against these specific members if they continue their anti-Iranian campaign.


Also, pan-turanists continue changing the article regarding the Safavids. They are trying to deny the Safavids Iranian origin and obvious Persian culture. We should keep making the appropriate edits in response.

The article regarding the Persian Gulf should not include any other name for the region besides the "Persian Gulf". The article states that, "Since the 1960s, Persian Gulf Arabs and their states have sometimes referred to the water body as the Arabian Gulf (which is in fact the ancient name of the Red Sea) but this is not commonly used in English and is not acknowledged by organizations such as the United Nations. See Persian Gulf naming dispute."

This section should be removed. The opinions of a few Arab nationalists should not be apart of this article. It is irrelevent what they call the Persian Gulf.Dariush4444 22:46, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

User; Ahwaz is spreading anti-Persian propoganda on the Arabs of Khuzestan article. I posted official CIA statistics to prove that his claims are false, but of course he changed the subject and started rambling on about his POV. Dariush4444 18:15, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Cunado19 changing Persian spellings to Arabic

He has been going through Iranian articles and changing the correct Persian transliterations of words to the Arabic transliteration. Examples: Mohammad -> Muhammad, Naser -> Nasir. He has also been moving articles based on the new Arabic transliterations he has introduced. We have to look up all his "contributions" (Special:Contributions/Cunado19) and undo them. --Houshyar 18:44, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Please see the conversation between Cunado19 and me here. --Houshyar 18:53, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

User: 65.34.171.49

Is making pan-Turkist attacks on Azeri articles. 69.196.139.250 20:42, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

User:Diyako is trying to make an alternative ficticious definition of Newroz

User:Diyako has created an article on a Turkic-Nowruz without mention of its Iranian history and roots. Soon we will here Nowruz has nothing to do with Iran too. His article is Nevruz. This should be merged or edited properly. He has gone on the Turkish discussions to promote it.

Here is what user:Diyako has written;

Nevruz is the spring festival among Turkic-speaking nations, from Turkey to Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan etc. It is very similar to the Iranian festival of Norouz.

According to Turkish legends Nevruz dates back to era of Gökturks.

69.196.139.250 20:57, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Rumi

Here is an article on Rumi's ethnicity I wrote a while back. I might periodically add more here. The reason I put it here is because if there is future edits, I can at least save it here.


We must analyze this issue from all the available sources. Here are reasons why Rumi was clearly Persian.

a) A good proof towards this are the verses of Sultan Valad. Sultan Valad, who is the son of Rumi claims he knows Arabic and Persian, but clearly says that he does not know Turkish and Greek well.

گذر از گفت ترکي و رومي چون از آن اصطلاح محرومي ليک از پارسي گوي و از تازي چونکه در هر دو خوش همي تازي


Also 99% of the work of Sultan Valad is in Persian, but he does have a few Arabic (7), Turkish and Greek poems (Lewis). In one of the Turkish ones he says the same thing about Knowing Persian and Turkish:

تورکچه اگر بيليديم بي سوزي بين ايليه ديم تات جه اگر ديله سوز گويم اسرار اولي


Which translates: If I knew Turkish, I would bring one word to a 1000 levels. But When you listen to Persian, the hidden secrets I tell wonderfully. تورکچه اگر بيليديم (If I knew Turkish) shows that Sultan Valad was not acquainted with this language.


b) Also there are some more points to consider. There are some harsh comments about Turks in the Manaqib of Aflaki. For example this one is in the praise of Greeks and belittlement of Turks, from the book of Aflaki:

There is a well known story that the sheikh Salah al-Din one day hired some Turkmen workmen to build the walls of his garden. "Effendi Salah al-Din", said the master (Rumi), "you must hire Greek workmen for this construction. It is for the work of demolition that Turkish workmen must be hired. For the construction of the world is special to the Greeks, and the demolition of this same world is reserved for the Turks.


When God created the universe, he first made the carefree infidels. He gave them a long life and considerable force in such a fashion...that in the manner of paid workmen they constructed the earthly world. They erected numerous cities and mountain fortresses...so that after centuries these constructions served as models to the men of recent times.


But divine predestination has disposed of affairs in such a way that little by little the constructions become ruins. He created the people of the Turks in order to demolish, without respect or pity, all the constructions which they see. They have done this and are still doing it. They shall continue to do it day in and day out until the Resurrection!" --- I am not sure how a person can be of Turkic ethnicity, but say such a thing!

c) There are some harsh comments about Oghuz Turks in the Mathnavi For example the Oghuz Turks are compared to Abu-Jahl.

آن ابوجهل از پيمبر معجزي خواست هم چون کينه ور ترک غزي (مثنوي)

آن غزان خونريز امدند بهر دهي يغما بر زدند (مثنوي)

Note the Oghuz turks are the main cultural-linguistic ancestors of modern Western Turks.

d) The مجالس السبعه Majale's As'saba or the seven seremons of Rumi are all in Persian. Which means that Rumi used Persian to preach the Friday sermon. This is significant since in every Islamic country, the preacher usually either preaches in his local tongue or in Arabic.

e) Rumi uses the word "Tang-Cheshm" (narrow eyes) for Turks. Genetically it has been proven that most of the Turkish speakers of Anatolia are not Turks, but former Greeks/Armenians who were Islamicized. But the Central Asiatic Turks who are of mongloid race, are the real Turks. Rumi mentions his eyes "Cheshmhaayeh Faraakh" (wide eyes, big eyes).

مولوي: ترك خنديدن گرفت از داستان چشم تنگش گشت بسته آن زمان

مولوي: دو چشم ترك خطا را چه ننگ از تنگي چه عار دارد سياح جهان از اين عوري


f) The best Biography of Rumi is written by Franklin Lewis, called Rumi Past and Present, East and West (March 1, 2000). The Iranian ethnic identity of Rumi is made clear in this book.


g) Balkh was a Persian speaking region before the mongols. For example see Zakhira-Khwrazmshahi for Persian phrases in the local Persian Balkhi tongue. Today it is mixed Tajik and Uzbek regions. But Uzbeks claim descent from Cheghniz Khan and were not in the area priorly.

در کتاب داراب نامه طرطوسي (بکوشش ذبيح الله صفا، تهران 2536، ج.1.، ص 163) آمده است: «و آن مرد لفظ دري داشت و همۀ جهان خواهند تا لفظ دري گويند، وليکن نتوانند مگر مردمان بلخ و هر که زبان اهل بلخ بياموزد.»

چنانکه عنصري مي فرمايد، بيت: چو با آدمي جفت گردد پري نگويد پري جز به لفظ دري»


h) The word Turk had a negative connotation in the Ottoman empire and people referred to themselves as Othmani and not Turk. The word Turk only became positive in Turkey after Ataturk. Prior to that the word "Turk" meant a wild person. It should be remembered that the Ottoman language, specially in poetry was more Persian/Arabic than pure Turkish.

i) Rumi as his name indicates means "Greek". But we know he wasn't Greek. Sometimes Rumi compared himself to Roman, Turk, Hindus, Zangs (Blacks). For example this verse:

گه تركم و گه هندو گه رومي گه زنگي// از نقش تو است اي جان اقرارم و آنكارم//

On the other hand in this verse he mentions he is not Turk:

اي تُرک ِ ماه‌چهره، چه گردد که صبح، تو آيي به حجره‌ي ِ من و گويي که: گـُل برو! تو ماه ِ ترکي و من گرچه ترک نيستم، دانم من اين قَدَر که به ترکي است، آب سُو آب ِ حيات ِ تو گر از اين بنده تيره شد، تُرکي مکن به کُشتَنَم‌ام اي تُرک ِ تُرک‌خو!

توجه کنيد: من گرچه ترک نيستم ولي دانم اين قدر که ترکي است آب سو.. پس ايشان ميگويند ترک نيستند.


In this verse he claims hindu: هندوي ساقي دل خويشم که بزم ساخت تا ترک غم نتازد کامروز طوي نيست

And Attar for example compared himself to Hindu or Turk or Zang.. as well:

کي توانم گفت هندو توام هندوي خاک سگ کوي تو ام

In Persian poetry usually Turk means a cruel, but yet beutifull lover. A Hindu means dark, like Dark mole or the night. Rumi means white and Zangi means Black. So these are symbolic words that should not be taken literally.

j) Finally Rumi lives by the Persian language and is alive by the Persian language/culture. And the Persian language is alive because of people like Rumi. Persian speakers of Afghanistan, Iran and Tajikistan are the ones that can read and understand Rumi. No amount of translation can do justice to his poems, because poetry is so closely linked with the language, that the translations will always be imperfect. It is true that in the Islamic empire of the east, people mixed and married. But the cultural language of this empire was Persian. Even the Seljuqs became Persianized and adopted Persian names like Kheykhosrow, Key-Kubaad and other Shahnama names. They mixed with other local Iranian dynasties and people. Rumi both ethnically and culturally was a Persian and mentions a lot about other Persian poets. For example he mentions Attar and Sanai profusely. Or he mentions the heroes of the Shahnama like Rustam and Esfandyar. So hypothetically speaking, even if Rumis parent were both Africans, he would be considered a Persian since what is at stake is cultural and heritage. Rumi could have had Arab, Persian, Turkic, Indian or whatver blood in him, but he was culturally Persian. For example how many citizens of Turkey or Arabia or Iran can claim that all of their ancestors were pure Turks, Arabs or Persian. Probably no one can. For example Ataturk himself was of Macedonian and Albanian background and was not Turkic. Yet he is considered a Turk because culturally he was Turk. So Rumi and his cultural background is also the key factor, even if we do not know Rumi's 50th ancestor and that is why Rumi belongs to the Perso-Islamic civilization and the Iranian world.

--Ali doostzadeh 00:21, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the helpful information. Peosonally, I am interested in explicit sources. Could please provide some exact sources, for example which part of the "Mathnavi" you quoted? That would be really great. Tajik 01:34, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
The parts of Mathnavi I quoted are from a CD version I have. They are from the Foruzanfar and Homai editions. As per the lines that Sultan valad explicitly states his lack of knowledge in Turkish, they are in his Diwan and I will post an article soon about this matter. --Ali doostzadeh 05:35, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

WTF?

Do we really need such articles?--Zereshk 02:56, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Extremely inappropriate. I say it should be removed all together. If anywhere, this type of article should be reserved at urbandictionary.com. It’s sad how pervasive the use of derogatory Persian has penetrated youth culture here in the West. --QajarCoffee 22:12, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Take a look!

Please take a look at the following article: Sex in Iran. --Mitso Bel23:13, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Old entries and comments from front page

I reorganized the front page with a new formal format, so I'm moving all the old entries and comments here. --ManiF 05:29, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

March

  • User:Cunado19 has been going through Iranian articles and changing the correct Persian transliterations of words to the Arabic transliteration. Examples: Mohammad -> Muhammad, Naser -> Nasir. He has also been moving articles based on the new Arabic transliterations he has introduced. We have to look up all his "contributions" (Special:Contributions/Cunado19) and undo them. --Houshyar 18:44, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
Please see the conversation between Cunado19 and me here. I have tried to reason with him, but he is being obstinate and believes he knows better although he does not speak any Persian --Houshyar 18:53, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Al-Khwarizmi, Khwarizmi's origin (Persian) is removed from the article again. Besides the usual Arab claims, User:Zora also claims that Khwarizmi may have been a Turk despite the fact that there weren't any Turkic tribes in Khwarizm back in 700-800. --ManiF 15:44, 11 March 2006 (UTC)


Persian People or Persian Speakers

Actually I am against the idea of the article Persian people. Everyone know well that Persian speakers call themselves Esfahani, Khorasani, Mazandarani, Larestani, Hamadani, Yazdi, Araki, Qazvini, Shirazi and etc. The name Persian as an ethnicity should be avoided. What we should have is an article about Iranian people and just mention that Persian is understood by about 95%+ of the population (I have statistics on this) as a first or second language. Then any relavent information can be put under Iranic speakers. Persian is a language, but Iranian is the ethnicity. Under the group of Iranian people we can say the majority of Iranian people speak Persian or related dialect/language (Baluchi,Kurdish,etc.) and these are termed "Iranians" and then we can discuss the Aryan history (Zoroaster, Medes, Achaemenid, Parthians, Persians) and etc. The term Persian should just be reserved for the Persian-Dari language and the Persia as a Western equivalent to Iran. That whole article on Persian people needs to be deleted since it can be hijacked by users that have ill intentions. Our ethnicity is Iranian as our Aryan ancestors have bestowed upon us for more than 3000+ years and Dari-Persian (Persian for short) is the common language of Iran which is one of the Iranian languages.

--Ali doostzadeh 08:28, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Mughals and Babur

Some help is need; wrong claims are put into the article, clearly contradicting the Encyclopaedia Iranica and Encyclopaedia of Islam. Thx Tajik 00:26, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Bakhtiar


Sock puppets

please look at User talk:Zanyar and . Bidabadi 17:51, 11 April 2006 (UTC)


The title for the page about Republic of Azerbaijan

I think Azerbaijan be a disambiguation page and for the country, the page should move to Republic of Azerbaijan. I've explained it in . please share your opinions. Bidabadi 20:33, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

spelling and the External link for Iranian Azerbaijan

Please share your opinion in Talk:Iranian Azerbaijan. Bidabadi 20:38, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages extension

If you are using firefox as a browser try the wikipedia extension:

It makes life easier. And if your perhaps not using firefox, you should, its the next best thing that happened to internet after wikipedia.

Attention

  • Cinema of Iran reloaded, after only 2 days, now we have 34 actors and 20 actresses and 44 directors plus 6 others... a very good and big work by Sasanjan. But we need help from everbody, adding photos, finding personal web sites, ...
  • Iranian Scientists: Why not to clean Iranian scientists articles from their Arabic forms of their names?, even some of them never has considered as Iranian or Persian nor mentioned any form of their Persian names, meanwhile e.g. encarta named Aborayhan Biruni as an Arab Scientist, what to do? do our bad habbits as usual or take a correct\serious action?Sasanjan 16:42, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

2005-2006 US-Israeli threats to attack Iran: risk of deletion

i shifted Mitso Bel's comment to the following:

since someone has already claimed on Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/2005-2006 US-Israeli threats to attack Iran that "votestacking" occurred here (on Misplaced Pages:Iranian Wikipedians' notice board) because of an overt request to "vote to keep" the article.

It seems to me reasonable that people knowledgeable about Iran - which in particular means Iranian people living in Iran - should be encouraged to participate in the discussion about whether or not to delete an article about threats to attack Iran. Let me quote Ayatollah Jimbo: Imagine a world in which every single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human knowledge. That's what we're doing. What's the point of giving free access to the sum of all human knowledge to the 70 million people in Iran if that knowledge excludes the claims that many of them are threatened with being killed? Isn't that part of human knowledge?

On the other hand, we still want people to make decisions in line with the WP:NOR and WP:NPOV guidelines, and the question remains whether or not the article 2005-2006 US-Israeli threats to attack Iran is a valid encyclopedic article. Many people believe it should be deleted.

So if you feel you can contribute to the decision either to keep or to delete the article, please do so in a way that respects NOR and NPOV. Boud 00:26, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Amir Abbas Hoveida

I have totally revamped the entry on Amir Abbas Hoveida. Can someone please proof read it? I might have omitted some information as well. --QajarCoffee 00:13, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

i know nothing at all about Hoveida (except what i just read ;) - i found one ambiguous sentence - see the talk page. Boud 21:25, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

The Azari-related articles in Great Danger

Azaris are thnic Iranians and if you go look at the talk:Iranian peoples or talk:Azerbaijani peoples|Azari]] you will see this is evident. In Latin AMerica a majority speak SPanish but they are not considered to be memebers of the EUropean ethnicity to which the people of SPain belong by anthropogists. Neither are the French speaking countries of Africa considered as French or European. SO why are Azaris being pushed as a different race or ethnicity from other Iranians? They do not look different, plus the genetic evidence proves they are the same peoples! I have given numerous examples. WHat is even sadder is that *personal attack removed* are trying to deny the use of the term Azari. I have pointed out that Azaris prounce it with an A in Iran and not e like the minority do in the Republic. He refutly denied it and pushed to have it stopped. Even on the Azari people articles the pan-Turkist delete the pictures of many Iranian Azaris becuase it frightens them due to the significant roles they playe in Iranian society and their loyalty to Iran. They will not allow any pictures of Iranian (Azaris), even though 75-80% of the worlds Azari population are Iranian. This is very unfair and has spilled over into attakcs on the Iranian peoples articles and others such as Tabriz. 72.57.230.179




Talysh

Some people are trying to deflate the number of Talysh speakers by using information from the republic of Azarbaijan. Please keep an eye also on this article. --Ali doostzadeh 22:10, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Tehran needs attention regarding new edits.

I just checked the page and there have been some new edits which are not very relative, for example one person put their own name (which I erased) and added some links (which still need to be erased). If someone could take care of it, it'll be much appreatiated! Mamnoon --(Aytakin) | Talk 17:06, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Azari articles being manipulated

Look at Azari articles; they are being warped. It would be nice if any of you join the Azeri Wiki page. 72.57.230.179

Would you please give specific articles? --Ķĩřβȳ♥ŤįɱéØ 03:51, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Sassanids vs. Rome (Byzantines)

I have written an article about the Sassanid Byzantine wars. Some of the information I actually got from Misplaced Pages but about 90% of it is from other sources. The article can be read here: http://www.allempires.com/article/index.php?q=sassanids_byzantines

If you think it is suitable, I can add it to the Perso Roman Wars section.Iranian Patriot 03:50, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

also, some one should clearly point out here that this report : 2006 Iranian sumptuary law , was a falsification and untrue. it is part of the policy to demonise the enemy before you attack (much like the run up to the iraq war). also, it should be noted that the owners of that paper are conservatives who support US policy in the mideast.Iranian Patriot 03:58, 22 May 2006 (UTC)


Pan Turkist attacks- Nizami and other articles

Nizami Ganjavi and pan-turkist attacks on the article

See the article. Some pan-turkists from Caucas want to steal Nizamis Iranian heritage and make a Turk! --Ali doostzadeh 20:01, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

More on Nizami Ganjavi

See the discussion page.. Pan-turkists are using wrong translations and wrong meanings in order to falsify a Turkic background for Nizami Ganjavi. I have already responded to their newest set of propaganda. Please keep a close eye on the article. --Ali doostzadeh 10:11, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Look at the Disfigurement of Iranian History

Are these okay edits on the part of this user?

The Azari-related articles are all massivly being deviated. Everyone should get proactive. 72.57.230.179


More

Ive noticed that some user(s) keeps removing the History of Iran template from some of the dynasty articles.--Zereshk 04:14, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Keep an eye on the Nizami article

Friends, The current republic of Azerbaijan has some serious identity problems and sometimes they claim to be Oghuz Turks, other times Caucasian Albanians, and other times Medes. A good example is this article Of course Iranian Azarbaijanis know their Iranian roots, but the people of that republic do not and have been effected heavily by negative pan-turkist propaganda. Keep an eye on the article because Nizami did not have anything to do with Turkish culture. --Ali doostzadeh 23:07, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

The Seeds of Discord are Being Planted

Iranians, Editors, People of Rational Minds, Academics... The seeds of propaganda are bieng planted: reports of the massacres of Azaris are being doctored. Look at what is weing said by editors from the Republic of Azarbaijan about Azaris, . They are really trying to forment biased articles. They have created to alternative articles about Shah Ismail I, one being a mythical Turk king. 72.57.230.179

Nizami

Friends thanks for your help. Keep an eye on the issue. In point 4 of my latest response I have shown why Nizami's other half was not Turkic. I think the issue is settled. --Ali doostzadeh 21:36, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

the dispute over Nizami might be settled ...

... but the POV-attacks on Babur, Alisher Navoi, Kizilbash, Safavids, Ulugh Beg, Timurids, and al-Farabi continue! Your help is needed! Tajik 21:43, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

With the exception of Al-Farabi who was probably Soghdian/Iranian, I think the Babur, Kizilbash, Ulugh Beg and Timurids were Turkic. As per Safavids, there is no doubt Shaykh Safi Ad-din Ardabili was Iranian Tat or Kurdish. But the later on Safavids were Turcophones and Uzun Hassan I believe is related to Shah Ismail (who was a mixture of Seyyed, Kurd/Tati, Greek and Turk). Let me know how I can help though. But Babur, Safavids, Ulugh Beg and Timurids were to a large extent Persianized/Iranianized and so we can include facts about this matter. What do you think? --Ali doostzadeh 23:08, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
The POV-issues in those articles are not only about "Turks and Non-Turks", but about POV minority-opinions ignoring authoritative sources, such as Iranica or Encyclopaedia of Islam. As for the Timurids being "Turks": NO, they were NOT Turks, but Mongols. They were Mongols who had adopted the Central-Asian Chaghatai-Turkic language and lived in a world dominated by Persian culture and language. That's why they are called Turco-Persians or Mughals (="Mongols" in Persian). See also the info given in the Iranica:
F. Lehmann, "Zaher ud-Din Babor - Founder of Mughal empire", Encyclopaedia Iranica, p. 320(-323): "... His origin, milieu, training, and culture were steeped in Persian culture and so Babor was largely responsible for the fostering of this culture by his descendants, the Mughals of India, and for the expansion of Persian cultural infleunce in the Indian subcontinent, with brilliant literary, artistic, and historiographical results ...", Online Edition, (LINK)
Tajik 23:49, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Okay I will definitely look into these issues. Of course we need to mention the Persian cultural influence and you are right. On Timurids you are correct. Let me know the current enteries that are controvrsial. I feel add some details on the funny book of Alisher Navai which compares the languages. The book has no linguistic and scientific value. . --Ali doostzadeh 02:41, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the help

Dear Friends, Thanks for the help. The article is currently locked and I hope no one agrees to unlocking it until the truth is apparent. And the truth is that Nezami Ganjavi's mother was Kurdish (hence Iranian) and his father although in my opinion is 100% Iranian, it can not be proven, so for the sake of neutrality we will leave that aside. Also he is a Persian poet because he wrote in Persian and contributed to the literature and culture. Also three of his stories are based on Shahnameh and I have made much comment on the talk page about his Iranian background. --Ali doostzadeh 23:08, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Interesting Observatoin

I could be totally wrong, but from what i have seen so far, it seems that we never say persian when refering to famous iranians of the modern period. When its about a famous iranian who is of persian descent, we just call him/her and iranian in the articles, but when its a fomous iranian of lets say azari descent the azari part is always mentioned for some reason. I say it should all say iranian, regardless of ethnic background, because they are iranian. how about every famous iranian after 1935 be called just iranian, regardless of ethnic background!

i mean, we dont say "george bush, origionally from english descent" or fredrick douglass "origionally from the something somthing ethnic group...." etc...

I say we call them all just iranians.Iranian Patriot 23:26, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

How about we take it a step further and attempt to use Iran/Iranian over most instances of Persia/Persian, even considering usage prior to the 1935 declaration. Some may see this as a revisionist approach but I don't see any reason why we shouldn't. Iranians should not be constrained by Western conceptualizations that directly produce an artificial feeling of self-worth. --QajarCoffee 08:20, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I have thought about that before but its not the right thing to do. the west thinks of iran as a creation only 70 years old. westerners usually do not associate iran with persia at all, and by writing iran instead of persia when referring to irans past will be a total shock to the system for them, and for many, they wont associate persia with iran. that is the problem. persia has been used to refer to iran by the west for 2500 years, we cannot expect them to associate iran with persia so easily.

what i recommend would only apply to people born after 1935, where iran first comes into western history. ethnic background should be included in everyones page who was born pre-1935, but not afterwards. modern iranians should only be referred to as iranians, simple as that. i think we should take a vote on this issue.

Qajarcoffee, us iranians know that persia is actually iran, but most westerners do not, and this is english wikipedia afterall. we are trying to preserve irans history, not make it even more confusing. im sure that iranian wikipedia only mentions iran, and not persia, but this is english wikipedia.

Its the same with the roman empire. it was called rome then but its now italy, but history still remembers it as rome. what you suggest would also have to apply to rome also, imagine calling it the italian empire instead of the roman empire, that would cause lots of confusion.Iranian Patriot 16:57, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I like the original idea --K a s h 21:39, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

so you agree with me that all iranians born after 1935 should be labled only as iranians. thats good, we should get more peoples opinions so we can start changing some of the articles.Iranian Patriot 22:40, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Agree.--Zereshk 06:24, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
It is the Westerner who deserves that “shock to the system.” They have led themselves into creating a dichotomy. Persia and Iran are not mutually exclusive, but how they are represented in the occidental’s imagination is more important than what it actually denotes. In this sense, they are. They are perceived as being distinct in character. With the Rome/Italy issue, the association has already been made clear. Is a “shock to the system” not education’s intended result? By continuing to stonewall any type of historical ‘integration’ on our part, we continue to perpetuate the notion that, in actuality, the two terms are not related.
You are right Iranian Patriot, we are operating on a Western format, but every article that is related to Persia, must be redirected to Iran. I believe this should be done in the introductory paragraph of every article in order to dispel confusion. An example: Born in Persia (present day Iran)--QajarCoffee 09:03, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes definetly, Iran should be mentioned in all the Persia articles, but i thought that was already the case, if its not, then we should mention that Persia is iran in everyone article. but what i am trying to discuss here is calling iranians, iranians, without the need for the ethnic background.Iranian Patriot 15:42, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

Everyone hates this man but Misplaced Pages is supposed to be about neutrality not character assassination and propaganda. The way it stands now, the article on Ahmadinejad is nothing but propaganda and opinion, such as the category "Anti-Semitic people". Almost every article on Misplaced Pages about a Muslim politician suffers from these problems. SirDiplomat 19:55, 18 June 2006 (UTC)