This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Azerbaijan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Azerbaijan-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AzerbaijanWikipedia:WikiProject AzerbaijanTemplate:WikiProject AzerbaijanAzerbaijan articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iran, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Iran on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project where you can contribute to the discussions and help with our open tasks.IranWikipedia:WikiProject IranTemplate:WikiProject IranIran articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Poetry, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of poetry on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoetryWikipedia:WikiProject PoetryTemplate:WikiProject PoetryPoetry articles
@LouisAragon: Regarding this edit, the Latin version of the same language already exists, so I don't see how the possibility of transliterating it differently matters here (or even less, warrants full deletion of the transliteration). I didn't add the Persian transliteration because I don't know Persian; however, you are welcome to do so. Transliteration is useful as it enables readers to comprehend what is written in a script they are unlikely to understand. — Goldencall me maybe?16:24, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Then why add another transliteration? Also, while we're on the topic of names, "Izzeddin" is definitely not the common variant used by sources when when spelling the name during this era. That would be "Izz al-Din", also used by EI2 (spelled "Shaykh Izz al-Din Asfarayini"). Spelling it as "Asfarayini" is very uncommon though, as the vast majority of sources use "Isfarayini" [1]. Iranica uses the Modern Persian transliteration "Sheikh Ezz-al-Din Esfara'ini", but that should be avoided, as it's not a common spelling of those names in WP:RS. In other words, I suggest that this article be moved to 'Izz al-Din Hasanoghlu', and that "Sheikh" and "Esfarayeni" gets changed to "Shaykh" and "Isfarayini". --HistoryofIran (talk) 00:02, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Because the Azeri (and Persian) text differs from the English page title (especially if we move to "Izz al-Din Hasanoghlu"). I support renaming the article to "Izz al-Din Hasanoghlu" as that is also the name that I came across the most when researching the poet. — Goldencall me maybe?07:52, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Anachronistic stuff shouldn't be included IMO. Its unrelated to that specific figure or time period in history. I've seen it too often in ledes; Armenian translits at Urartian/Orontid/Artaxiad kings, modern Persian translits at Achaemenid-era rulers, modern Bulgarian Cyrillic at rulers of the medieval Bulgarian empires, etc. - LouisAragon (talk) 22:30, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The inclusion of transliteration/romanization does not imply that the person used the transliterated alphabet; rather, it is intended to assist people who cannot read Arabic/Persian script in understanding what is written in front of them. Most readers will find the text in the non-Latin name useless unless it is transliterated. Even some of the articles you mentioned (Achaemenid Empire, First Bulgarian Empire) use romanization/transliteration in the first sentence to help readers understand a script that they are unfamiliar with. — Goldencall me maybe?07:56, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I was following this discussion thanks to this. I have to say Golden, for me, it's honestly hard to believe that this is just a "transliteration" issue. Now we can all go back and forth about good faith this that and the other, but you have to understand that you have a history of adding Azeri names in articles where they don't belong, and good faith editors are rightfully confused by some of your edits post sock/tban. You literally have a sandbox of "This is a list of towns and villages in Armenia which had an Azerbaijani-majority population prior to their exodus during the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict." [2]. Most of it uses either non WP:RS literal irredentist sources like these [3], [4], [5], [6], [7] ("Azerbaijani village" btw), or this fucking WP:SPS lost count how many times I've seen it added by you (would be too much space to add all diffs), or this (wtf is "zangezur.com"??).
Anyway, I'm just saying considering the history and context behind a good chunk of your edits, and now seeing you adding Azeri names as "transliteration", you have to understand that it'll confuse some editors at the very least. My opinion in this matter is, if the name/"transliteration" is anachronistic, I'd rather have it removed. If rather, it is intended to assist people who cannot read Arabic/Persian script this is the issue, then the title of the article is more than enough. Most of English readers don't know how the fuck to read this İzzəddin Həsənoğlu anyway. ZaniGiovanni (talk) 11:47, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
