User talk:Nepaheshgar/Archive 1

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! deeptrivia (talk) 03:16, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help

It is very important that you please go to the following page and help me combat anti-Iranianism made by one particular user who is doing possible sneaky vandalism, yet certainly disruptiveness on most Persian related articles due to political and Zionist reasons, which have no place in an encyclopedia. The link that suports banning this user is, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Aucaman, and also Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-03-02 Persian people. This would be appreciated. Zmmz 06:52, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Go here,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Genetic_origins_of_the_Kurds, and vote `strong delete` please, so a certain user would no longer be able to use some psuedoscience genetic test about `Kurds`, and constantly insert in the Iranian people article. We also need a lot of help on the Persian people, Iranian people, Persian Empire, and the Al Khwarizmi, Al Biruni article and discussion pages.Zmmz 06:52, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, if you haven`t done so already, then go to the following links and quickly vote either ``Strongly delete``, go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Stub_types_for_deletion#.7B.7BKurdistan-stub.7D.7D_.2F_Cat:Kurdistan_stubs, and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion#Category:Kurdistan. Also, please go to, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Aucaman_and_User:Heja_helweda_and_User:Diyako. ``I support`` the blocking of user Aucauman, Diyako, and Heja Helwelda, all three of whom are strongly political and doing sneaky vandalism to most of the articles relating to Iran, or Persia. This is [so] tiresome. Thanks Zmmz 06:52, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Use your judgement. No one can tell you what to do here except when you violate Wikipedia policies and guidelines. In fekr karde khodesh faghat inja Iranie vase hamin harchi bekhad mitoone rejebe Irania bege. Aucaman^Talk 07:24, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To Aucaman-Please Read and Respond

I recommend that the user Aucaman read my two new postings about Aryan and either withdraw his comments or respond. I will copy & paste my arguments (and they were written by me personally) again. As per the Pan-Kurdists I have left them a message on the "Persian" people article, and I hope it will be sufficient for them to remove all their nonsense.

Message 1:

Zora is completely wrong here because the exact opposite case is true. Aryan is used in the Academic sense. See the Encyclopedia Iranica enteries on Aryan and Arya. (Articles 1631 and 1637) by two of them most eminent Iranian linguists of all times (Sir Harold Baily and Rudiger Schmitt). But as per the word Aryan, I urge people to read the articles by the eminent scholar Asko Parapola[1]. I have written on this issue of Aryans in the previous page. The fact of the matter is that Emil Beneviste considers this term to purely ethnic in the Old-Iranian sense. Furthemore the Greek inscription of Shapur clearly calls him the King of the Arya Ethnos. See the article on Eran Shahr in the Encyclopedia Iranica: "http://www.iranica.com/articles/v8f5/v8f545.html" as well. All this is sufficient proof enough that the Aryans were an ethnic group who are the linguistic and cultural ancestors of modern Iranians (speakers). Also racially, the arab and turkic invasion did not have much effect on Iranians and so we can assume that Iranians are mainly of Aryan+pre-Aryan stock. There is no way anyone can deny the high academic standard of Encyclopedia Iranica and eminent scholars like Asko Parapola and Gerhad Gnoli (see the book 'the idea of Iran'). For example look at this recent article (Parpola, Asko, 1988. The coming of the Aryans to Iran and India and the cultural and ethnic identity of the Dasas. Studia Orientalia 64: 195-302. Helsinki: The Finnish Oriental Society.). And as per the comment of Zora, Professor Parpola is not just a linguist. His work encompasses "archaeology, historical linguistics, history, cultural anthropology, and historical population genetics." and he is a major Academic with many refrenced articles. In fact it is safe to say that he is the top researcher in topics dealing with Aryans. When you have published a single article like that of Prof. Parpola, then please argue that Aryans were not a group of people. But today Aryans are the primarily linguistic/cultural/racial ancestors of modern Iranians. Here is another recent article by Professor Gerhad Gnoli of Italy that uses the term Aryan clearly in the Academic sense: [2] . I request all debates about the historical validity of Aryans be removed since it is used frequently in Academia to refer to the ancient Iranian Persians and Medes.

Message 2:

The term Aryan is an ethnic term in the Iranian languages.

According to the The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition:

It is one of the ironies of history that Aryan, a word nowadays referring to the blond-haired, blue-eyed physical ideal of Nazi Germany, originally referred to a people who looked vastly different. Its history starts with the ancient Indo-Iranians, Indo-European peoples who inhabited parts of what are now Iran, Afghanistan, and India. Their tribal self-designation was a word reconstructed as *arya- or * rya-. The first of these is the form found in Iranian, as ultimately in the name of Iran itself (from Middle Persian r n ( ahr), “(Land) of the Iranians,” from the genitive plural of r, “Iranian”). The variant * rya- is found unchanged in Sanskrit, where it referred to the upper crust of ancient Indian society. These words became known to European scholars in the 18th century.

As the dictionary correctly asserts Aryans means the Indo-Iranian branch of Indo-Europeans. Let us review some of the old sources that explicitly establish why Iran (the land of Arya) and Iranians are Aryans (Iranians) and why the Academia still uses this terms for the Indo-Iranians. Herodotus in his Histories remarks that: “These Medes were called anciently by all people Arians; “ (7.62). So here we have a foreign source that refers to part of the Iranians as Arya.

Native sources also describe Iranians by this ethnonym. Old Persian which is a testament to the antiquity of the Persian language and which is related to most of the languages/dialects spoken in Iran including modern Persian, Kurdish, Gilaki and Baluchi makes it clear that Iranians referred to themselves as Arya.

The term "Ariya" appears in the royal inscriptions in three different context: As the name of the language of the Old Persian version of the inscription of Darius the Great in Behistun; as the ethnic background of Darius in inscriptions at Naqsh-e-Rostam and Susa (Dna, Dse) and Xerxes in the inscription from Persepolis (Xph) and as the definition of the God of Arya people, Ahuramazda, in the Elamite version of the Behistun inscription. For example in the Dna and Dse Darius and Xerxes describe themselves as “An Achaemenian, A Persian son of a Persian and an Aryan, of Aryan stock”.

Note that first they describe their clan (Achaemenid) and then tribe/group (Persian) and then their ethnicity Arya. So here we have good references that both the Medes and Persians referred to themselves as Aryans. The Medes and Persians were people of western Iranian stock. Western Iranian languages and dialects including Kurdish, Persian, Baluchi have their roots in the Old Persian and Median languages and are prevalent languages of Iran today. The OP inscriptions date back approximately to 400-500 B.C. Concurrently, or even prior to Old Persian, the word Airya is abundant used in the Avesta and related Zoroastrian literature whose origin lies with the eastern Iranian people.

The Avestan airya always has an ethnic value. It appears in Yasht literature and in the Wideewdaad. The land of Aryans is described as Airyana Vaejah in Avesta and in the Pahlavi inscription as Eran-wez. The Avesta archer Arash (Arash-e-Kamangir) is called the hero of Airya people. Zoroaster himself is described from the Airya people. The examples of the ethnic name of Airya in Avesta are too many to enumerate here and the interested reader is referred to the following site: Avesta.org.

Let us now briefly touch upon some more pre-Islamic evidence. The ostraca (an inscribed potsherd) from Parthian Nisa time period (approx. 2100 years ago) provides us with numerous Parthian names related. Parthian, like Persian, is a Western Iranian language. Some of the names of the people at that time that begin with prefix Arya are given by:

Aryabaam-Aryabaanuk, Aryabarzan- Aryabozhan- Aryaxshahrak- Aryanistak- Aryafriyaanak- Aryasaaxt- Aryazan

The etymology of such names is fairly known. The documents from Nisa as well as other Parthian documents prove that the Parthians employed the Zoroastrian calendar. The names of the months back then is exactly what we use today with a slight modification in pronounciation:

Farwartin- Artewahisht- Harwataat- Tir- Hamuraat- Xshahrewar- Mihr- Aapaaxwini- Aatar- Dathush- Wahman - Sapndaarmard

Strabo, the Greek geographer and traveler of the Parthian times also mentions the unity of the various Iranian tribes and dialects:

...and the name of Ariana is further extended to a part of Persia and of Media, as also to the Bactrians and Sogdians on the north; for these speak approximately the same language, with but slight variations.

Moses of Khorenat’si the Armenian historian of 5th century A.D. also denotes the Parthians, Medes and Persians collectively as Aryans. So ancient neighboring people have consistently referred to Iranians as Aryans. Both Armenian and Greeks are Indo-Europeans but only Indo-Iranians have been known as Aryans throughout history. This is a clear evidence that Aryan was not just some religious title in the Iranian world, but it actually referred to an ethnic group.

From the Parthian epoch we transition into the Sassanid era. Ardeshir the first, the founder of the Sassanid dynasty, on the coins minted during his era describes himself as "Shahan shah Aryan" (Iran). Where Aryan exactly means the “land of the Arya” which is synonymous with land of Iranians. His son Shapur, whose triumphs over his enemies are the stuff of legends minted coins with the inscription: “Shahan shah aryan ud anaryan” (The king of Kings of Iran and Non-Iran). The reason for anaryan is that he expanded the empire beyond the Aryan lands.

The trilingual inscription erected by his command gives us a more clear description. The languages used are Parthian, Middle Persian and Greek. In Greek the inscription says: “ego ... tou Arianon ethnous despotes eimi” which translates to “I am the king of the Aryans”. In the Middle Persian Shapour says: “I am the Lord of the EranShahr” and in Parthian he says: “I am the Lord of AryanShahr”. Both AryanShahr/EranShahr here denote the country of Iran.

The name IranShahr has been widely referenced after the Arab conquest by many authors including Tabari the great historian and Abu Rayhan Biruni the great scholar. So the word Eran actually is derived from Arayanam of the Avesta and it means the place Ary/Er (Parthian and Middle Persian respectively). As the suffix “an” denotes a place holding for example Gil+an means the land of the Gil (Gilak) who are an Aryan ethnic group of modern Iran. It was mentioned that Darius the Great referred to his language as Aryan.

The Bactrian inscription of Kanishka the founder of the Kushan empire at Rabatak, which was discovered in 1993 in an unexcavated site in the Afghanistan province of Baghlan clearly refers to this Eastern Iranian language as Arya. Interestingly enough, Bactrian (Bakhtari) was written using Greek alphabets.In the post-Islamic era one can see a clear usage of the term Aryan (Iran) in the work of the 10th century historian Hamzeh Esfahani. In his famous book “the history of Prophets and Kings” he writes: “Aryan which is also called Pars is in the middle of these countries and these six countries surround it because the South East is in the hands China, the North of the Turks, the middle South is India, the middle North is Rome, and the South West and the North West is the Sudan and Berber lands”.

What has been touched upon so far is just some of the evidence that clearly establishes that Iran and Aryan are the same and furthermore that Iranians have always referred to themselves as Arya in history. The term "Arya" has never been applied to other branches of Indo-European people. This term exclusively denotes the Iranians and Indians. The eminent linguist Emile Benviste asserts that the Old Iranian Arya is documented solely as an ethnic name. Aryan denotes a cultural-linguistic community. Racial anthropology on the other hand points to the fact that Iranians as well as many other Aryan speakers like Kurds and Afghans are part of Caucasoid Mediterranean subtype commonly referred to as Irano-Afghan. So the title "Aryan" is perfectly fine to use by Iranian speakers and the word Iran and Aryan are just pronounciation of the same word. The abuse and crimes of the Nazis has nothing to do with the historical name of the Iranian people since the Germanic people are not Aryans. This term is still widely used and accepted in the Academia as mention by the articles above.

I have no problem with the use of the word Aryan if there's enough context for it. The term has been used by ancient Iranians. In the future you might want to refrain from posting long messages because (1) they take too much space (2) people are less likely to read long arguments. Aucaman^Talk 08:31, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

well this is a heavy topic and so it will be long and tedious. In fact there is more evidence from ancient time that I have not put in here. Do a google site search for example in www.avesta.org under the word "aryan" and you can see numerous uses in Zoroastrian literatue. The Europeans were looking for some identity outside of the Judeo-Christianic civilization and thus they tried to claim the historical legacy of Aryans(Indo-Iranians, and modern Indians and Iranians). So I am not sure why that article on Persian origin is full of disagreements about this term! --Ali doostzadeh 08:42, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is a little more complicated. Some users here, without even knowing me, have already made up their mind about who I am and have decided to revert every edit I make without even thinking. They constantly follow my contributions (even the ones having nothing to do with their interests) and revert them. They also engage in racialization, something I don't like. I'll expand on this some other time. Aucaman^Talk 08:57, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Ali doostzadeh, don't allow anyone to intimidate you, please be bold and continue to argue your case and contribute to wikipedia in any length you wish, within Wikipedia's Policies and guidelines. --ManiF 10:07, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Shaddadids

dear ali,

I disagree with you on this, but I respect you. I think we should remove for the moment origin of this dynasty, simply say, it is islamic dynasty, until we come up with a better result.

(Hetoum 20:54, 8 March 2006 (UTC))[reply]

Actually you are right, Shaddadids were Kurdish. Altough the Rawandids were of Arabic background who later assimilated to Iranian culture.

--Ali doostzadeh 18:40, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Khwarizmi

Salam ali,

I noticed you have a deep understanding of islamic history. Is there a possibilty that you can scan us the page from al-tabari book, where it mentions his name? Maybe from the context, we can judge if al-tabari meant two persons or one!. I dont care if he is an arab or persian, i just want to know the truth!! Jidan 05:00, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I have put up a portion of Tabari and Ibn Nadeem here.

Ibn Nadeem

الخوارزمي واسمه محمد بن موسى وأصله من خوارزم وكان منقطعاً إلى خزانة الحكمة للمأمون وهو من أصحاب علوم الهيئة وكان الناس قبل الرصد وبعده يعولون على زيجيه الأول والثاني ويعرفان بالسند هند وله من الكتب كتاب الزلزيج نسختين أولى

Tabari:

واسمه هارو1 وكنيته أبو جعفر.

وذكر أنه لما اعتلّ علته التي مات فيها وسقى بطنه أمر بإحضار المنجمّين، فأحضروا؛ وكا1 ممن حضر الحسن بن سهل، أخو الفضل بن سهل، والفضل بن إسحاق الهاشميّ وإسماعيل بن نوبخت ومحمد بن موسى الخوارزميّ المجوسيّ القطربّليّ وسند صاحب محمد بن الهيثم وعامة من ينظر في النجوم، فنظروا في علّته ونجمه ومولده، فقالوا: يعيش دهراً طويلاً،

 Thank you very very very much!

Now I can see why Rashed came to the conculsion that the "wa" must have been omitted. Jidan 11:25, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, are you a historian professor or something like that? ;-) Jidan 12:43, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Salam Ali, I really hope we can disagree also on the future! Since this is the best way to learn ;-). May I know please what your profession is? BTW: Im a student in electrical enginneer/microelectronics. Jidan 07:10, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wasalam.. I am also student in EE doing PhD now. --Ali doostzadeh 15:07, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I thought you might be interested in this.Endorse if you agree with the case. --ManiF 03:14, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, do you have a MSN id? --ManiF 07:33, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi what is an MSN id? Also I have given ample enough evidence on Aryans in the Persian wikipedia entery. I think any balanced editor would take our side, so I am wondering if there is a balanced arbitrator for that thread? -- Ali_doostzadeh

Yes, but add you name here and endorse the statement if you agree with the description. My msn ID is manif@hotmail.com, please add me. --ManiF 15:42, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Iranian Wikipedians' Notice Board (WatchDog)

Please bookmark this page, for daily updates on the status of the Iran-related articles. Read notices posted by others or add your own notice by updating "Urgent view". --ManiF 16:18, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, can you move your comments from the mian page to here. The main page should be used for the notifications and a brief description. --ManiF 20:28, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, try not too write too much texts in the discussion page. Be brief, factual, and to the point, because readers usually don`t bother to read long texts.Zmmz 04:37, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alhazen

Hi Ali doostzadeh.

Do you have some historic sources in regards to Alhazen's ethnicity? --ManiF 07:09, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with Al-hazen is that we have no source on his ethnicity. He probably was born in Basra, which means it could go either way. Since there was a lot of Persian christians and jews and Zoroastrians in Basra during the Islamic era. I will do more research but I doubt either side can come up with something definitive. Just like on Geber there is nothing that is definitive. --Ali doostzadeh 06:51, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please vote !

Dear Alireza, please see the following page:[3]

Thanks. --Sina Kardar 14:15, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Th user Diyako is definnityl anti-Iranian and has an anti-Iranian agenda.

Nevruz is not very similar to the Irnian festival of Norouz it is Norouz!

He has claimed the Kurdish flag has nothing to do with Iran and is a crime to fly in Iran. The Kurdish flag is based on the Iranian flag it is even in the memories of the founders of the Mehbad Republic who wanted to showcase their Aryan and Mede heritage. Back then Kurds only had a oral history about their only know ancestors the Mede and Mede heritage, before other ancestors were accepted. The Sun is also very significant element of ancient Iranian and Zorasatrianism. Diyako is misleading everyone. Go to Kurdistan 20 years ago let alone 50 they will say we are Aryans and our own blood relatives are the Persians. The Kurdish flag is not banned in Iran and is based on Iranian colours. This user also claims the Iranians are only a lingustic group after he saw that the tide was against him that Kurds are in definition an Iranian people so he worked to undermine the definition of Iranian people and even Persians with user:Acuman.

69.196.139.250 21:14, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HAPPY NEW YEAR

D iyako Talk + 10:26, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your Comments and Citations Needed

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Geber#Settling_the_Issue

--ManiF 22:21, 22 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Can you please send me your e-mail address to manif@hotmail.com. Thanks. --ManiF 13:08, 24 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year

Sorry for delay, but anyway ! هر روزتان نوروز , نوروزتان پيروز Amir85 18:38, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to all Friends

Thanks to all friends for ther Nowruz greetings.

provocative?

Respected ustad

can u give my latest argument in the kurdish people article a quick read and see if it can be supported?

with respect

btw your links were extremely informative and interesting

Hi

Please take a look at the history sections of Persian Jews and participate in the discussions if you can. Better and more neutral sources would be appreciated in regards to treatment of Jews in Persia. --ManiF 03:00, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See Talk:Persian_Jews#article_is_inaccurate_and_politcally_charged. We are discussing this version of the article. --ManiF 21:28, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Iranian Azerbaijan

Hi there,

I just wanted to let you know that user, khoikhoi (MOD) keeps including the very offensive term, "south azerbaijan" on the Iranian Azerbaijan page. We should not let him post this propoganda and false information. That term has no place in an encycolpedia article. It is not relevent to the content. What a few seperatists call that region should not be shown here. If we dont stop this, people will start including the "a#abian gulf" as an alternate name on the Persian gulf page.

KhodahafesDariush4444 04:21, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Doroud

Welcome back man, -- - K a s h ^{Talk | email} 20:20, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hello Ali. Shoma chetur hastin? I saw the beautiful poetry you added at Talk:Nezami, and I wanted to add one of the verses to my user page. However, you mentioned that is is rude to translate many of the poems, would it also be the same to post something like that on my user page? And why exactly is it rude? I hope you don't mind my questions, I'm just a bit curious, that's all. Bedrood. —Khoikhoi 01:17, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thanks a lot for all the info! Very interesting. BTW, have you seen these recent edits by a new user? Should they be reverted? —Khoikhoi 15:30, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well actually some of the verses that user brought did not exist! and they were not even written in correct Persian. My long response was for that sort of user where I addressed every point and the ethnic background of Nizami should be couple of lines and the discussion of it should be in the discussion page. That is why I did not put my long several page article on Nizami in the biography.--Ali doostzadeh 23:18, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see. Thanks agian. —Khoikhoi 05:27, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice job. He/she is pretty rude however. I'll ask them to stay civil if they continue. I was born in California. How about you? —Khoikhoi 05:12, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Nizami

I don’t know this user yet, he’s a new contributor. But I think it’s possible to resolve any problems by discussing the issues between the involved parties. Regards, Grandmaster 05:22, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, have you seen this? Remind our friend that Wikipedia has a policy of no original research. —Khoikhoi 14:29, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I've seen people on the Rumi page trying to push that he was a Turk. [4] (?) Also see Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, particularly the "Wikipedia is not a soapbox" section. Khoda-hafez, doosteh man. —Khoikhoi 00:05, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool what part of Iran? BTW, I suggest you talk to InShaneee, an admin about this guy's incivilty. —Khoikhoi 02:30, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I have to disagree with you there. If we locked articles like that it wouldn't be much of a "free encyclopedia". And if one professor wrote it, it would probably be biased towards his point of view. That's what I like about Wikipedia, you can edit whatever you want as long as you follow Wikipedia policy. —Khoikhoi 02:43, 26 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BTW...

You know how to revert edits, right? —Khoikhoi 00:16, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See this. —Khoikhoi 00:17, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Correct! As for the article, I agree, very unfortunate. —Khoikhoi 20:27, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that was really interesting. Speaking of Persian, do you think this map it totally accurate? If not, you can just talk to the creator, and he can fix it. See my comment at the bottom of Talk:Nezami. —Khoikhoi 00:58, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here we go again...

Please check out the bottom of Talk:Rumi. :( —Khoikhoi 01:23, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your work on Nizami was Great

Keep an eye on all the Azari related articles. Please take a look at Shah Ismail. As you know Pan-Turkists try and say he was a Turk who took over Iran instead of he was the King of Iran.

This was written[5] and this was the response [6].

Here is the translation: How are you. To soon to give a complicated comment. These protests have been forming a long time coming and they are ripening, this wan not and necessary the only occasion, so that it would splash out to the streets. The basic problem is the fact that they [Iran?/Persians? I don't know who, but he says they] reject tp the Azaris the right to thei national identity, the right to the development of their own language and distinct culture. You can see even here, in the consideration of articles, Iranian Azarbaijan and Azarbaijanians. Some Iranian participants insist on saying Azaris are an Iranian ethnicity, although it is widely-known that Azaris are Turkic. This is what is being represented or occuring in Iran itself. Conflict apparently on this basis, people [Azaris] require the protection of their cultural rights.

These is only the tip of the ice berg. 72.57.230.179

Look at the Disfigurement of Iranian History

Are these okay edits on the part of this user?

[7]

[8]

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

When are we Going to See Proof that Azaris are Genetically Turkic

Please keep an eye on Azari and the talk:Azari. I have started the following in the discussion.

It has been ages since these citations have not been verified. Verification is needed. If not delete the material. the amount of time granted has been generious. The Azaris Iranian background has been verified through various scientific and academic sources, but the Turkic claim has not. The only think that has been verified is the Turkic langauge. 72.57.230.179

In regards to this

Don't forget that Wikipedia has a no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. —Khoikhoi 05:50, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aryan invasion theory

Hey man, I know you are busy else where but if you get time have a look at this article. The words India and Indian is mentioned 60 times but the word Iran is only mentioned 4 times! it looks like there might be a serious POV issue. Thanks, --K a s h ^{Talk | email} 10:53, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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, [9]. They are really trying to forment biased articles. They have created to alternative articles about Shah Ismail I, one being a mythical Turk king. WE should merge the article and get rid of the Pan-Turkist fiction! 72.57.230.179

Please watch the Azari people article

Certain editors are adding fictious cliams. I see you are a hard working editor. We could use your editorial help in fixing this article and cleaning it up with the heavy POV. Thanks again 72.57.230.179

Nizami

Hi Ali. I thought we agreed on a compromise version of the intro, what happened now? Grandmaster 06:12, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Johnstevens5

I have reported this user because of constant anti-Persian, Turkish-nationalist POV and the Babur, Mughals, Timurids, Alisher Navoi, Ulugh Beg, and al-Farabi articles. --> [10]

Tajik 15:35, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please also take a look at Babur. I am really tired of reverting User:Johnstevens5's nonsense always and always again! Tajik 19:58, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And check out the conflict at Azerbaijani language—he's trying to say that there are 120 speakers of it! :p —Khoikhoi 05:55, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sheikh Khazal

Ahwaz keeps reverting me on Famous Iranian Arabs saying that Khazal was ruler of the whole province, which is not true, and that he was governor of the province, which I also know is not true. There was always a Persian governor in Shushtar. No book I have ever read called any of the Kaabis "governor". I think this person has a serious anti-Iranian POV with his own fantasy history because he keeps calling Khazal the "ruler of Arabistan" which is nonsense. Arabistan (Khuzestan) was/is an Iranian province under control of central government. Only Mohammereh and surrounding towns were controlled by Khazal. I think this Ahwaz should be watched since I think he is inserting errors in these articles. Khorshid 12:34, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Khorshid: It would be nice if you could make your accusations against me either on my talk page or the talk page of Famous Iranian Arabs, instead of conspiring against me and making allegations that breach Wikipedia rules.--الأهواز 13:20, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

wa alykom asalam brader!

Im fine thank you and you? Sorry for replying late. You can send me an email by going to my userpage, under the toolbox menu, you will find "E-mail this user". But to do that you have to enter your email address under "my preferences". This way is better than writting your email openly, because then you get less spamm email. Jidan 11:44, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Azeris problems

Yeah I'm trying to keep an eye on the additions, but people just keep adding stuff to the article for reasons I can't fathom. Even after I explained how it needs to be done we get more additions like the ones you pointed out. Not to mention silly arguments over wording. I think the next time I write an article I'll choose a less controversial topic. Thanks for letting me know. Tombseye 04:47, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I can use another genetic study if that's the case. Is it on the Azeris in Iran (I hope) and what language are you translating it from? I'll try to squeeze it in as that is, at least, more relevant than details about the newspaper's editor which is another superfluous addition. Really tiresome to deal with this. Plus the references added weren't properly formatted even. Geez. Thanks for your help though. Tombseye 05:06, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Problem with the study. I'm not sure how readers will take a study that can't be read in English, although I don't doubt the veracity of the claims or anything. Also, formatting it as a reference is somewhat difficult given the language barrier. Tombseye 06:16, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, another strange problem came up. I kept your study and then found that for some reason the article was blanking out the beginning of the medieval history section inexplicably. I reverted back before your additions and it was okay again. I can't figure out what happened. Anyway, we'll talk about this further later. Ciao. Tombseye 06:31, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Are you talking about the Iranica article? All of it is there and I can email it to you if you wish. Also the source for that article, ISNA (Iranian Students News Agency) , 06-12-2006, news-code: 8503-06068 . I will email Cambridge University if you wish to get more updates as well. But I think what I provided is sufficient. --Ali doostzadeh 06:40, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, the Iranica stuff was just fine. I read it all and added it. I fixed your addition to the genetics section so that it is okay in the article now and is properly added to the notes section etc. Cheers. Tombseye 07:05, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ahmad Khan Nakhjavan

Hi Ali. I came across the information about Iranian general Ahmad Khan Nakhjavan in the Internet: [11] [12]

I would like you to ask you as a person with a great knowledge of history of Iran do you have any idea if general Ahmad Khan Nakhjavan has anything to do with Nakhchivan? It says that he was the first commander of Iranian air forces. I know that khans of Nakhchivan served both in Russian and Iranian armies and some of them were high-ranked commanders. I wrote an article about Hussein Khan Nakhichevanski, who was the adjutant-general of the Russian emperor. So it is interesting for me to know if this person is related to the khans of Nakhchivan or not. Also I noted that the name and surname Nakhjavan are very popular in Iran. Does the word Nakhjavan mean anything in Farsi? Grandmaster 11:27, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your responce, Ali. Interesting fact is that he's Khan Nakhjavan, not just ordinary person, that's why I thought about his relation with the rulers of the region. Regards, Grandmaster 19:48, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nava'i

Thanks for the information. Please feel free to put that info into the article. It is a reliable source from an academic ... make sure you quote the words exactly. Thanks. Tājik 10:33, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Azeris reworking

Yes, I saw that and I also some comments from Tony and I'm trying to rework things and copyedit for more brevity and clarity. It may take until tomorrow though. Tombseye 09:34, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I was looking at something similar in Encyclopedia Americana which I own. Both give the same run-down so I am taking care of it. At any rate, I'm reworking it as we speak. Will also try to edit the rest of the article by tomorrow to shorten it and fix the sentences further as Tony1 makes some good points. Ciao. Tombseye 09:47, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Up the Good WOrk

Your work is valued and appreicated. Thank You 69.196.164.190

Re: Nizami

Hi Ali. I always supported a compromise version and I think that your suggestions make a lot of sence. I just need Adil to have a look at it and say what he thinks. Right now we are busy with Nagorno-Karabakh and a couple of other controversial topics, but I think he will express his opinion very soon. It's time to end the dispute over Nizami. Grandmaster 17:00, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Salam Ali! I was actually about to edit the article when you left me a message. I noticed you've been changing the spelling from Nezami to Nizami, shouldn't the title be moved first? Of course we're probably going to have to get consensus on every little thing. Anyways, I still don't think we should have the entire text of "The Labors of Ferhad" in the article. What do you think? —Khoikhoi 03:10, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, you're not borthering me. :) Where is the Wilson book referenced in the article? Also, what exactly is this article about? —Khoikhoi 03:44, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, can you do the same thing for the Iranica articles about Ganja and The Book of Alexander (author, page numbers, etc.) As for the haft payka, what part of article is the ref at? I still can't find it... —Khoikhoi 03:52, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, here's the Amazon link you gave me, but it doesn't say by Wilson, it says by Nezami himself. Is it still the correct one? If I cite it, what is Wilson's first name? —Khoikhoi 04:20, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alright...I...think...I...am...done! BTW, is "The Labors of Ferhad" a separate poem from Khusraw o Shirin? I'd like to add it to Wikisource (see the profile for Rumi for example). —Khoikhoi 04:34, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, it just seems to me to be a bit messy. Anyways, if you think it's fine then I guess it's ok. —Khoikhoi 04:44, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nezami Mausoleum

Why did you delete 90% of the article? —Khoikhoi 04:52, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see now—it's not about the mausoleum, but Nezami himself! —Khoikhoi 04:53, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, partially. If you look at Langston Hughes, it has the full text of some poems, but it has it in an un-messy format. —Khoikhoi 20:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

References

Hi. To add a ref, here's an example.

I like cats.<ref>Smith, Britannica, 2005</ref>

It then automatically shows up at the bottom. However, to add a ref for something that you'll use mutliple times throughout the article, the first time it would look like this:

My grandma hates cats.<ref name="johnson">Johnson, Thomas. Columbia, 1996</ref>

And then the second time (and third, forth, etc.) that you want to use that in an article, use this:

My grandma also hates dogs.<ref name="johnson" />

Hope that helped. —Khoikhoi 16:58, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think you should start a new article called Khusraw and Shirin, and then have it just as a summary in the Nezami article, linking to it. Good luck! :p You can make it as long as you want it—I guess that's where you can include the full text of that poem The Labors of Ferhad. —Khoikhoi 23:19, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good work!

Khaseh nabashi! I have read with great interest many of your recent comments and regretfully I havent had any time for WP lately but I am glad there are people like you who are more interested in fact than politics! Especially the Kurd and Khuzestan issues (its true many of the claims about the last one have no statistics!) have been headache for everyone. Please keep up the good work my friend. Khorshid 09:13, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Picture of Azari Refugess

Although I am concerned and upset about both Azari and Armenia refugees and beleive they are essentially the same people, on an academic basis I question this picture being posted on this article. It seems to be POV, and once again the article seems to be getting a non-neutral, biased Republic of Azarbaijan tilt to it again. I object to the posting of this picture and I also ask all editors to consider the changes being made recently. 69.196.164.190

Kurdish people

They are claiming a lot bullshit about our people, we should manifest some facts.

1) Kurds are an Iranic people, thus they are Aryans 2) Kurds are the decentens of Medes (Gorani/Zazaki speakers instead of Parthians, look the similary between Gorani and Pahlavi) 3) Kurds history/culture/language is rooted in the Iranic history/culture/language

We should point this out and proof it by scientifcal sources! If we have done this, we should show rebut every point, which is wrong. After this we can begin to change the whole article. We should make a proto Version and, when it is finish we are going to replace the old version by our own.

I will later also do this on Wikipedia Germany based on the fact we got by the English version.

I think it will be a lot work, but we can be strong and do the job, if we work together.

Sipas --ShapurAriani 21:26, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kurds are Iranic people

Thanks! my friend..--Muhamed 17:13, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me

Can you explain to me why most the pictures of Iranian Azaris has been removed from the Azari article? I will ask Kash maybe ghe knows. 69.196.164.190

Salam

Lotfan yek nim-negahi ham be Al-Biruni vaa Avicenna ham dashteh bashid, yek nafar hala gir dadeh be Farsi bodan in dou nafar, dar haali ke tamam encyclopediaha har dou raa Fars vaa Irani ghlamdad mikone. --ManiF 04:44, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Persian Code

Thanks Ali.

Hey my friend, it seems that someone is trying to Circumnavigate around your work

Take a look at this article. It basically is going against the facts you proved and presented on Nezami.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azerbaijani_literature

69.196.164.190

Just to fill you in with the tragic situation in many of the articles; here is an example I strongle recommend you read careful to observe the reaccuring behaviour and strategum being used to officiate false information of an unhealthy nature, I am sure you will not be suprised, but I think it will be educational for you to review; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Nagorno-Karabakh

Listed below are some highlights and important points of the discussions, plus the course of action or follow up on the ireegular editing;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Nagorno-Karabakh#Just_the_facts.2C_ma.27am.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Nagorno-Karabakh/Archive10#POV_Problems

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Nagorno-Karabakh#resettlement_information

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Nagorno-Karabakh#Intro

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Nagorno-Karabakh#In_regards_to_the_Recent_Editing

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Nagorno-Karabakh#Grandmaster.2C_Azerbaijan_SSR_existed_before_NK_was_created.3F

Upset statment by the Article Mediator;

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Nagorno-Karabakh#ok

Action taken; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RR#User:AdilBaguirov_reported_by_User:TigranTheGreat_.28Result:_Protected.2C_review_needed.29

Action taken; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RR#User:Grandmaster_reported_by_User:TigranTheGreat

As a note I must also say that this behaviour is not needed, but can be corrected and hopefully in a positive way and through positive methods. It is the behaviour that is bad, as for the editors we do not know them outside of their editing or Wiki-characters and it can be safe for me to stress an anology through the age old maxim, "hate the sin and not the sinner." You can make your own conclusions from reading this material, and hopefully it will also formulative effective behaviour and edits from yourself in the near or distant future. Once, again I apprecite your conduct and editing as I do many other good editors who contribute to such a positive and stimulating, prodocutive environment on WIkipedia.

69.196.164.190

Thanks for the information. The NK issue is very heated and I think we can expect both sides to act very nationalistic. It is definitely not an issue I have any inclination or even time to get involved it. --Ali doostzadeh 03:18, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are certainly most welcome. Although the NK issue diverges from the area you prefer to edit it; it does illustrate the behaviour and edit waring you have seen first hand. It might not come as a suprise if you recognize anyone or any particular formats of argument that seem to have been used against you. I thought letting you observe and note this argument would strengthen your hand the next time such tactics were used against you while editing. In continuation of this nexus, I would monitor the section http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azerbaijani_literature because the sma bevaviour is being exhibited. 69.196.164.190

Thanks for the headsup. We have some aggressive POV pushers with regards to some Azerbaijani related issues. Although this could be the case for other issues as well. On the issue of Azerbaijani literature, the neutral POV which is actually our POV as well has standard Academic backing. Literature means contributions of that language. Persian or Kurdish or Arabic literature can not be considered part of Azerbaijani Turkish literature. --Ali doostzadeh 22:02, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect user:Countdown may be a sockpuppet of a radical user you have delt with many times. 69.196.164.190

Thanks again. --Ali doostzadeh 03:51, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Persian literature

Hello Ali. Since you seem to be a talented writer, I want you to do me a favour ;) Please take some time to integrate The Book of One Thousand and One Nights into the Persian literature article. Right now, it's missing (can you believe that?!?!?!). Thanks. :) Tājik 15:46, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kiumars reply

Ali, let them bark, as it says in Farsi مه نور فشاند و سگ عو عو کند The perfection of a language is not in the number of characters or verbs but how you can express different ideas in that language easily and how flexible and adaptable it is. Traditional Chinese language has more than 5000 characters and millions of words and verbs (but nobody knows them or can speak it, even educated Chinese!), English on the other hand has only 27 characters and less than a 100,000 contemporary words (most English dictionaries cover 60k-70k words) but is the most flexible and widely spoken language on the earth!

PS: Iran's Bisotoon (In Kermanshah) Registered in World Heritage List http://www.iranian.ws/iran_news/publish/article_16679.shtml PS: I understand that Hercules’s head and arm are broken and missing now, it is a shame because when I was a child we lived in Kermanshah and we used to go to Bisotton almost every weekend (and Tagheboostan at least 2-3 nights a week) and we (the kids) would sit on the statue and kiss it! It was a very beautiful, friendly and lovely statue. Ahhhh, good memories! cheers, Kiumars 22:45, 13 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. Ali jan my email address is kiu1234000@yahoo.co.uk Looking forward to receiving your email. Kiumars 11:37, 14 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ali Re your message: hey bro I sent you an email.22 July 2006 (UTC) I have not received any emails! I only received two emails from you on the 15th. Kiumars 12:07, 24 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Scythia

Articles you might want to look into: Scytho-Iranian theory and Scythian languages. Also, this may be helpful to you in the Scythian languages page, to counter the sumerian argument [13]] Khosrow II 17:54, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. You might want to look here: [14]. --Ali doostzadeh 19:34, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blanking out information

I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that maybe you haven't been here long enough to see how things work... But if you absolutely must blank out entire paragraphs from an article that have been there for years, it is customary and courteous to paste them onto the talk page for discussion - no matter how ludicrous you personally feel them to be. If you simply hide or censor stuff where no one can see it, it is playing with the records and may be considered vandalism . ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 19:35, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have a good point. But actually relating the Medes (the three wise men) (Magians) to Hungarian Magyar is on the border of real insanity. And by the way the information goes against Wikipedia's policy of NOR. The actual article is just cut & pasted from a hungarian nationalist site: [15]

NOR means users are not to use wikipedia for their own research... It doesn't mean using someone else's published resarch that you don't like or approve of... ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 19:39, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually the definition is wider. NOR also means that you can't make your website (specially a non-specialist) and then cut & paste information from that website and then claim it is a reliable reference. Else every topic in Wikipedia could be in chaos. As you can see the portion I blanked out was a word for word cut & paste (and I might without reference) article by a Hungarian nationalists: [16]. Please read that article as you can see it goes against all scholarly opinion. And by scholarly I do not mean my opinion, but opinion of current scholars in the field. I can assure you that the ancient Medes were not related to Hungarian Magyar. Wrong information needs to be erased. --Ali doostzadeh 19:42, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request help

Hello, I started this article: Iranian Theory Regarding Azeri's and I was wondering if you could help me finish it, or add on more information. Then once its complete I will link it to here: [17]

ThanksKhosrow II 20:45, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Azerbaijani people

Please keep an eye on this article. I had put an "accuracy" tag on top pf the "Medieval period" section where it is claimed that "Turkification of Azerbaijan began with the Seljuqs". I've shown on the talk page that authoritative sources - most of all Iranica and Britannica - do NOT support this claim and - in fact - contradict it. It is a known fact that the Seljuqs were Persian-speaking and considered themselvs Persians. The Turkification of Azerbaijan and Anatolia began AFTER the fall of the Seljuqs, NOT with their advent. Tājik 20:51, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You might wish to check Britannica again:

The Seljuq invasions in the 11th century changed the composition of the local population and resulted in the linguistic dominance of Oguz Turkic dialects.

Encyclopedia Britannica [18] Grandmaster 07:44, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Linguistic dominance could mean ruling elite. A better and more specialized source is the book from Peter Golden. Although the Seljuq period was the start of Turkification, nevertheless, prior to the mongol era, the area was definitely predominantely non-Turkic. Probably Turkic took majority during the rule of Aq-Qoynlu dynasty. --Ali doostzadeh 14:24, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But Ali, I don't see any problem there. The article only says that Turkification began in Saljuq era, and you agree with it. And authoritative sources such as Britannica and Iranica also say the same. I think the dispute has been resolved. Take care. Grandmaster 06:33, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree. Turkification did start in the Seljuq era or I would say a good influx of Turkomens came to the area (as some books mention and even differentiate between Turkomens and the Tatars, Turkomens being Muslim Oghuz tribes and Tatars being Turkic/Mongolic tribes that were pagans). Culturally though the Seljuqs supported Persian culture, probably due to the fact that there wasn't an equivalent Turkic culture at the time, since Turkic culture was mainly nomadic and over several centuries, nomadic Turkic tribes settled down slowly and mixed with the locals..--Ali doostzadeh 22:28, 3 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

True. I think the article says just that. And here's the quote from an authoritative scholar, who says the same thing:

Only in eleventh century, with the influx of the Oghuz Turkic tribes under the Seljuk dynasty, did the country acquire a significant proportion of Turkic-speaking inhabitants. The original population began to be fused with the immigrants, and gradually the Persian language was replaced by a Turkic dialect that evolved into a distinct Azeri Turkish language. Turkification was slow and complex, sustained by successive waves of incoming nomads from Central Asia.

Tadeusz Swietochowski, Russia and Azerbaijan: A Borderland in Transition. ISBN: 0231070683

So yes, Turkification started in Seljuq era and continued for a few centuries. Some areas were Turkified quicker than the others. But that's what happened. Grandmaster 04:51, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of the 3 theories, in my personal opinion all 3 are accurate, but none has prevalence. The Azerbaijanis are a mixture of those 3 elements, i.e. ancient Turkic, Caucasian and Iranian people. It is hard or maybe even impossible to precisely establish the proportion of each element, but all three are important parts of Azerbaijani mentality. Grandmaster 05:02, 4 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stuff

Hey Ali! I've added the pages to my watchlist. Anything else I can do? —Khoikhoi 23:52, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This appears to be a copyvio, and I have listed it as such. As you know, copying and pasting from other websites to make articles is against Wikipedia policy. Cheers. —Khoikhoi 02:19, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apology

I apologize again for our misunderstanding re:Medes. If you had removed it as a "copyvio" (copyright violation) in the beginning and stated that it was a copyvio of such and such a site, I probably wouldn't have got so confused about your intentions. In future I will try to look at matters more deeply before jumping off the handle like that. ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 01:30, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Languages

Hi There! Can you translate my name in what language you know please, and then post it Here. I would be very grateful if you do (if you know another language apart from English and the ones on my userpage please feel free to post it on) P.S. all th translations are in alpahbetical order so when you add one please put it in alpahbetical order according to the language. Thanks!!! Abdullah Geelah 16:04, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article up for deletion

see here: see here: [19] Khosrow II 17:33, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ali, I understand that you initiated renaming the Scytho-Iranian Theory into Ethicity of the Scythians. This renaming is incorrect, because the Scytho-Iranian Theory article's subject is not a discussion of the Ethicity of the Scythians, but of the hypothesis itself, its history, contents, premises and structure. In this aspect the renaming is a deletion of the subject by surrogate excision, and should be against Wikipedia rules. I understand that your suggestion was a good-heart attempt to compromize with ardent opponents, but the end result is not a compromize, but a substantially deletion of the subject.

The Ethicity of the Scythians is a separate subject that can be treated in light of the Scytho-Iranian and non-Scytho-Iranian theories, and which addresses the subject of ethicity without detailing the substances, history, and structure of the competing theories.

Please educate me on the restoration procedures. Khosrow II, with a mobilized cohort, vandalized the article a dozen of times, received the last vandalizm warning, and switched tactics from brute force to undermining by deception. First attempt to use copyright label failed, and now it is a subject substitute, which is a straightforward deception for an article that does not address the ethicity subject. You can notice that all the objections are not constructive and rest entirely on ideological beliefs, while the objection methods are solely distructive.

Please help me to reverse the renaming, or better do it yourself.

Thank you, Barefact 15:49, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Actually I did not change it and it was an administrator who changed it and it is not against Wikipedia rules. Again Wikipedia is not a place for debates. There is a universal acceptance of Scythians as Iranians by all scholars and Encyclopedia 2006. Nationalistic theories which go against universal scholarly knowledge are considered original research in wikipedia and should be deleted in my opinion. --Ali doostzadeh 18:45, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Should I understand your reply as you distancing yourself from the change, and pointing to the administrator as the initiator? Should I understand your reply as supporting the reversal of the change? I would be very grateful for your consent. You understand that the subject of the Scytho-Iranian Theory article's is not a discussion of the Ethicity of the Scythians, and these subjects are not intercheangeable. Would you advise me on the proper procedure to make this reversal?

Thank you, Barefact, ~

I did not reverse my opinion. The administrator took the initative on changing the article. Also I would read the NOR policy of Wikipedia. --Ali doostzadeh 01:57, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar!

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		Ali, I am incredibly impressed with your dedicated level of research and hard work in the Scytho-Iranian theory AfD. Keep up the great work! Srose (talk) 02:37, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There's no need to thank me. You are quite deserving. If you ever need anything, please let me know! Have a wonderful day! :) Srose (talk) 13:11, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mir Ali Shir Nava'i

Hello Ali. Some ID has copied the one quote you had once posted into my talk-page, into the Nava'i article. It seems like he has simply copied that from my talk page. Could you pleas etake a look at the article and maybe correct spelling, source, etc ... that would be great. Thanks. Tājik 12:24, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request

Hello, I was wondering if you had any internet articles or information on the change of the name of Shirvan/Arran to Azerbaijan in 1918 that you could give me links to. Thanks, I need them for this article: Republic of Azerbaijan Controversy.Khosrow II 15:45, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure why there is a controversy about this but perhaps it should be mentioned in just the Azerbaijan republic article. Here are some sites:[20] Note the 1911 Encyclopedia only refers to the historical Azerbaijan. Shaikh Mahmud Khiyabani changed the name of the Iranian Azerbaijan province he ran to Azadestan, this change was adopted because the Caucasian Azerbaijanis declared their republic to be the republic of Azerbaijan, and the sheikh was thereby repudiating their northern neighbor’s invitation to join them. ( `Ali Azari, Qiyam-e Sheikh Mohammad Khiabani (Marvi: Tehran (?), 1362=1983), p. 300.) I would also do a search for world map. I would also look at this: [21]. [22] [23]. Also I would read this: [24] Also the quote by Barthold is very good since he was a major scholar. From the last site: Barthold disclosed the reason for choosing to apply such a name. In page 782 of the second volume of his Collected Works, he noted: "The name 'Azerbaijan' was adopted because it was presumed that through the establishment of the Azerbaijan Republic, the Iranian Azarbaijan and the Azerbaijan Republic will eventually become one." As can be seen, the name 'Azerbaijan' was used with a specific goal that became manifest at a later period. Somewhere else in this same volume, Barthold wrote: "Wherever and whenever a name should be required with which one can refer to the whole region of the Azerbaijan Republic, one can use Aran" (page 703).

There is a controversy, because the people to the north of Iran's border are not Azeri's. the name change was politically motivated by pan turks in 1918. Thank you alot, how did you find these? i've been searching for a long time. what key words do you use when you search?Khosrow II 16:34, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem.. It is true that the people of caucus are not "Azerbaijanis" in the historic sense, but they are now called Azerbaijanis due to Rasulzade's mistake. Although very few sources do mention modern Arran (Azerbaijan) as part of Armenia or Georgia or Azerbaijan, due to having the same ruler or governor. Still historically Arran and Shirvan have been separate from Azerbaijan. Send me an email and I'll send you some sources from Dr. Touraj Atabaki's book where Rasulzadeh even admitted this mistake. alidoostzadeh@yahoo.com

Also as you can see Shaikh Mahmud Khiyabani protested the name change. As did Taqizadeh.. If you read Persian let me know. --Ali doostzadeh 16:55, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I added the information you provided. Thanks again. I will also be e-mailing you later.Khosrow II 19:44, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

did you get my e-mail?Khosrow II 00:23, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ali, we may have to fix the History of Azerbaijan page. I suggest the history of Iranian Azerbaijan be put into the Azerbaijan (Iran) page, and have the history of the R. of Azerbaijan in the other page.Khosrow II 14:39, 17 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Drood. Khoobi? Ali when do you want to start the new article on Turkish and R. of Azerbaijan historical revisionism?Khosrow II 20:46, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Khosrow lets finish the current article first and then move on to that.. Although we must confirm that it is state policy and not individuals that are doing this. For now that embassy link from the republic of Azerbaijan makes it seem like it is a state policy to distort historical facts and even call Zoroastrianism as a Turkish religion! This is what really made me upset recently..--Ali doostzadeh 20:51, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another Turk I talked to on another page (see here: List of Turkic states and empires --Go to Talk page) says that the Turkish education system says that non-Turkic regions are Turkic regions just because a minority of Turks live there (Dagestan, Crimea, etc...). Another example of revisionism.Khosrow II 15:34, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Accusation

You are beinga accused. See here: [25]Khosrow II 23:58, 16 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright map

I'm not sure, the page says, "No parts of this document may be republished in any form without prior permission by the copyright holder." You should probably ask Kilhan if he has permission or not. —Khoikhoi 17:50, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ossetic grammar

Please check out a skeletal Ossetic grammar at my userpage. I figure we could work on it at that namespace until it's complete enough to move to the article namespace. If you know any other people would be competent to help, please let them know. --Jpbrenna 18:19, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Turkic map

See the discussion at Talk:Turkic peoples#The map. —Khoikhoi 18:52, 20 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barefact

I would start a subpage at your userpage (like I did for the Ossetic grammar) and start documenting any disruptions and abuse on his part. I would then talk to an administrator --- I've gotten in a few tussles on here, but nothing that wasn't eventually smoothed out, so I don't know anything about banning people.

The most egregious action on Barefact's part --- that I have seen, anyway --- were his false accusations of sock-puppetry against you and your friend, for which he had no evidence. I would consider that an attempt to game the system.

Get some thing together and then notify an admin --- he should be able to tell you what your options are. Good luck!

--Jpbrenna 04:26, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Barefact keeps writing his controversial material in Scythian article, and threaten me with exclusion etc. What can be done about it? best regards Arash the Bowman 13:56, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Email

Hi, I am sorry for not responding sooner, I have been distracted... I think my email should be set up, if you go to my user page or talk page and click "Email this user" in the tool box it should reach me... ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 18:24, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ossetic language dispute

This has really gone on far too long, I suggest this be resolved at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation. What do you think? —Khoikhoi 00:28, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there is any academic dispute. To claim that Ossetic is non-Iranian is really a one man show vs all scholars... He even disfigures Abaev's quote in English which is available online! I am going to bring the compendium article on Ossetic from 1989 and then keep going at it with this user until everyone realizes that he just won't quit until he is banned. I have even brought a statement from a great scholar from University of Chicago. He also abused the Scythian article and tried to remove the reference to their Iranic hertiage which is again verified by Britannica 2006 and every modern source.. Its not about a dispute but about someone wanting to push wrong information from his site: www.turkicworld.org on specific Iranian enteries such as Scythians, Alans, Ossetic.. He even claimed 1/3 of Persian is Turkish (which is laughable). I am against POV (even see the former article on controversy of name of Azerbaijan republic where I reasonably compromised with Grandmaster) and have asked Khosrow to do the same. --Ali doostzadeh 00:32, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that there is no academic dispute, but there is definately a dispute between Barefact, you, and the rest of the Iranian editors. If you really want to keep going at it with him like you claim, you might also try to think of some ideas for compromise. Perhaps a section in the article called "fringe theories"? :-p But seriously, maybe an section called "alternate theories" and then start it as, "while virtually all linguists classify Ossetian as an Iranian language...". As for the Scythia article, I agree Wikipedia articles are not debate arenas. Another place to go is WP:RFC. —Khoikhoi 03:56, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure if fringe idea is good.. because barefact has shown that he disfigures quotes. Also I do not see the dispute as Iranian editors vs barefact, but as all scholars who have labored years in philology vs barefact. I am not a political person but I am more interested in history/culture and that is why accuracy is important. There is no way one should give credibility to any sort of view that is against 100% of what all scholars say. Even the Abaev he keeps claiming actually has stated clearly that Ossetic is an Iranian language. I think the RFC idea is good, but for now I am awaiting to show the compendium article on Ossetic which is impressive and a friend of mine should have it available on the internet soon. It is very complete article and once I get my hand on it, then barefact will look more ridicolous than he is now.. Although I already have th upperhand, that article is very complete on all aspects of Ossetic grammer. Some articles are not worth compromising on when 100% of scholars say something else. Too bad I do not know any Ossetic Wikipedians and it seems I have to stand up for the truth here which I will..--Ali doostzadeh 06:53, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to stop this insane war, and have proposed a number of compromises, to no avail. I already stated that I accept the arbitration by a scolar already selected by Ali doostzadeh, and would accept any neutral arbitration. I agree with Ali doostzadeh that fringe idea is not good, but for a totally different reason. For the critics of the Scytho-Iranian theory, the Iranian theory is a fringe accepted only in some corners of our large world. But to dismiss offhand the Iranian theory as a fringe would be a non-encyclopedic biaced position, unfair to its creators. It should be given a place under the sun, since it is a phenomena of our reality. Barefact 15:32, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First of all pan-turkists are not scholars they are just the butt of jokes. Secondly Ilya is busy for two months but afterwards he might be available. But my friend Khodadad who is an expert on this matter will come to join that entery soon. You are not a scholar and do not have the credibility to criticize any theory. Actually your comments like 1/3 of Persian is Turkic shows that you are just pan-turkist ultranationalist agitator. And also Wikipedia as you said is an Encyclopedia and will reflect the viewpoints of academics and not crackpot theories who claim every from Arabic to Zulu as Turkish. --Ali doostzadeh 15:59, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, what a language Barefact 16:42, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing wrong with realistic language. You need to leave you unscholarly theories on your webpage until you can actually convince real encyclopedias (like Britannica). I told you before Wikipedia has a policy of NOR (No original Research). --Ali doostzadeh 16:46, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your message: I don't really want to get involved, sorry. :( —Khoikhoi 01:44, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Either go to InShaneee or maybe WP:AN/I. —Khoikhoi 01:55, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

map

Salam,

The situation (tafraqeh afkani) has long been going on on WP. That's why I stopped contributing to WP. WP is basically a platform for posting every stupid anti-Iranian propaganda on the internet. And if that's not enough, you get stalked by some users and admins just for trying to fix the inaccuracies.

My solution was to help upstart and start contributing to WikIran, a specialized encyclopedia and an alternative to Wikipedia, where all admins are Iranian, and none of this agenda editing is tolerated.

I tried fighting this biased and unfair system on WP for 2 years. When even the admins take sides in editorial disputes and help suppress Iranian editors and the facts about Iran with the most ridiculous pretexts, you know then that WP has failed.

Bekhosoos zamaani ke doostan dar WP Farsi az posht be adam khanjar mizanan.

Khoda vakili arzeshesho deegeh nadareh.

Be cool.--Zereshk 16:27, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About Persian Page

when you click at persian you go to disambiguation page. Is it not better to redirect it to Iranian peoples or anything else and above that page we give a link of disambiguation page. Iranian Peoples ham be Iranian peoples redirect nemishe! --Pejman47 22:05, 3 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

This appears to be simple vandalism—that's why the bot was reverting him. He just got blocked. —Khoikhoi 01:35, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mughals

Hi Ali. Could you please have a look at Turkic peoples where a user is trying to "Turkicize" the Mughals. He is constantly claiming that Timur and the Mughals were Turks, and that all facts and sources proving their Mongolian origin are wrong.

Tājik 09:36, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ansari

Here it is:

Image:Anooshehansari parcham.jpg

--Zereshk 17:49, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal

What do you think? [26]Khosrow II 00:36, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Help needed on this article Turko-Iranian. See history and Talk page to catch up on things.Khosrow II 20:49, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hi Ali. Could you look at my comment on Talk:Gandhigiri? Thanks. deeptrivia (talk) 05:55, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation for Scythian-related articles

Admin Alex Bakharev agreed to mediate our dispute over Ossetian Language, Scythia, and other disputes, to prevent future resorting to editing wars. Mediation is a required step in the WP conflict resolution procedure. Please contact # Alex Bakharev (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) The participants of the subjet editing wars were at least these parties:

Ali doostzadeh and/or 69.86.16.239
Khosrow II
Jpbrenna
Arash the Bowman
Marmoulak
Tajik

You may want to attract other your allies to this mediation effort

Barefact 20:19, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have dispute with the scholarly community not only me. I would stop enganging in Wikipedia if I were you since your theories are not backed by scholars. --alidoostzadeh 21:34, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tājiks and Uzbekistan

Salām wa dorūd, dūste azīz. Could you please take some time and go through the following interview: [27]. It contains many interestings infos about the life in Uzbekistan, as well as the oppression of Tajiks and Persian-speakers in that nation. You may also be interested in the mentioned book "Murder in Samaqand". Another good info-page for the book is this site. It would be great if you integrated this infor in the articles Tajiks and Uzbekistan, since your English is way better than mine. Thanks. Tājik 23:32, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Btw: I won't be very active in the comming 3 months, because I have a lot to study. So please watch the typical chaotic articles of Wikipedia, especially the Turco-Iranian related articles (Babur, Timur, Mughals, Safavids, etc). I trust you, and I have already asked User:Khoikhoi to do the same.

Tājik 23:36, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:

My father was a diplomat, and I go on roadtrips overseas annualy. I've been to Iran three times and each time was great. To be honest most of the things I heard about Iran before my first visit from "dissidents" were not true, although in fairness that's maybe because i'm Armenian and a tourist. Everyone treated me with great respect. I saw Tabriz, Isfahan and Tehran. In Tehran I even went to metal concert. In the future I intend to visit Persepolis and Pasargadae.--Eupator 17:50, 5 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Timur

Hi Ali. Please have a look at the article Timur as well as its discussion. Tanks. Tājik 10:07, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion is not about his Persian culture, but about his alleged "Turkic" descent which is not supported by any reliable encyclopaedia or scholarly source. Timur was a Mongol, chief of the Mongol Berlas tribe. Tājik 05:01, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chohraganli

Isnt he also the same guy who has two dogs, one named Armenian the other Persian? Supposedly considering Armenians and Persians the same as dogs.Khosrow II 02:36, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That was Rahim Shahbazi.. Unfortunately these groups are being supported by neo-cons in order to put pressure on Iran. --alidoostzadeh 08:24, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi guys,

I wonder if his real name is Chehregani. didn't he change it to the turkish sounding Chohreganli to distinguish himself from persians?

And by the way, Ali, I would appreciate if you send me the book you talked about.

thanks Arash the Bowman 10:15, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

consulting

salaam, Last month, I added a section in Bernard Lewis article about his views about Iran. [28] But some admin insisted that it is a "original research" (although most of it was "cut and pasted from other articles in wiki (e.g.Anti-Iranianism ). I deleted some parts [29] but they are not safisfied yet. [30] you have more exprience in wikipedia than me; so what do you think should I do now? thanks for your attention. --Pejman47 20:36, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

try it, but be carefull that they consider any thing more than 2 sentences about his (intentional?) goof about prediction of nuclear attach on isreal by iran as "undue weight"! and they threatened me to be blocked for ever. I think, he is also the man behind the idea of "political islam" which was crafted against U.S.S.R.

an other interesting point is that another zionist "orientalist" called Ármin Vámbéry is behind the Pan-Turkism. [31][32]--Pejman47 15:55, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pishevari's party

Is it me, or "Pishevari's party, which was created by the direct of Stalin capitalized " doesn't sound grammatically correct? --Mardavich 08:22, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We should change it to Ferqeh. --alidoostzadeh 08:44, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Muchas gracias

Hey Ali, thanks a lot for supporting me in my recent RfA. It succeeded, and I am very grateful to all of you. If you ever need help with anything, please don't hesitate to ask. Also, feel free point out any mistakes I make! Thanks again, —Khoi khoi 04:49, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About the Medes

The name of the medes in Kurdish isnot correctly displayed at the beginning of the article. Their name is not written like that in Kurdish (Mad). I included a reference from wikitionary, but it was reverted. Anyway, I restored the reference about the language. It is also contradictory to say that there is little linguistic evidence about medes and then in the sentence right after assert that but their language undoubtedly was related to Kurdish. If you have any evidence please provide it.Heja Helweda 23:15, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Afghanistan

Please have a look at the article Afghanistan where User:NisarKand is vandalizing the article with unsourced POV. Tājik 23:05, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Al-Farabi

Anon is vandalizing the al-Farabi article, trying to "Turkicize" him and ignoring major sources, such as the Encyclopaedia Iranica. Tājik 15:21, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hephthalites

Please have a look at Hephthalites. Thx. Tājik 17:08, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Persian people

See the corresponding talk page. What's your opinion? Jahangard 02:45, 10 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiIran

Hey man, I don't necessarily think the Armeniapedia article should exist either, as it doesn't meet WP:WEB. The best way to stop the article getting deleted is to make sure it meets WP:WEB. I have no particular feeling about including Wikis one way or another so long as they meet the guideline. If you put the Armeniapedia article (or Azeripedia -- have they got one yet? ;) up for deletion, I'd probably vote the same. - Francis Tyers · 08:52, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Hills south west of Sanandaj near the village of Kilaneh.jpg

Image:Hills south west of Sanandaj near the village of Kilaneh.jpg is up for delisting on FPC nomination page. [33] Please give us your opinion, or try to solve the problem the majority have with the picture. I think it deserves to stay FP. Thank you. --Arad 19:53, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Ali

Could you please check out the discussion at Talk:Ibn_Khaldun#Ibn_Khaldun.E2.80.99s_dislike_.2F_respect_.2F_admiration_for_different_cultures? Thanks, Khoi khoi 20:43, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And this, too. Khoi khoi 22:43, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fine by me. You can go ahead and make the necessary changes now. Khoi khoi 04:03, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Population numbers

Hi,

Please take a look at the population table again. I am not disputing the table itself, but if you add up the numbers as given in the current table, you can not get 54 million. I think this should be clear enough and there is no need to get into lengthy discussions about definition of ethnicity etc. The current situation just undermines the credibility of the article itself.Heja Helweda 19:49, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jami

Hi Ali, As you seem to know well Iranian history and literature, just wanted to let you know that the user khoikhoi and some other gay lobbyist users insist to have "Pederasty Poet" tag with some pictures supposedly from Jami books (I doute that the caption is from the book...). Can you confirm or infirm such things about jami. thanks. F_mir 74.57.251.217 02:43, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your persistence in imposing your personal views on scholarly articles

Ali, I do not understand how you can square your ethical stance against the intellectual dishonesty of an Ahmadinejad (which I find admirable) with your persistent imposition of your personal notions of what is and what is not Sufist practice, despite the conclusions of genuine scholars. Until I took a look at your edits on other articles I thought you were some kind of a nut. I see that you are not, yet your constant ignoring of Wikipedia rules, and your constant injection of homophobic comments in the discussion on Nazar do you no honor.

Stop messing around with properly sourced material and bring in opposing points of view if you like, and if you can find them. But not your own because you are a nobody and not notable, just like me. Haiduc 13:22, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually all your quotes are from some British Gay scholar of the 19th century who is beeing requoted. That's it. I have quoted Rumi who is the most popular sufi known throughout the ages. He is the ideal model of every sufi and yet you people have the audacity to quote a 19th century British scholar instead of Rumi. As per homophobic comments you need to understand homosexuality is wrong in Sufism as it is in Islam(which true sufism is the mystical dimensions of like Kabbalism is to Judaism and is not its own religion) as it is in Zoroastrianism. Any attempt to distort these facts and try to have a homosexual interpretation on these religions is academic dishonesty. --alidoostzadeh 17:19, 17 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

SAADI

Hi Ali. It's me again, F_Mir. I've just discovered another bullshit (sorry for the word) in Saadi page of wikipedia. I quote :

"Saadi has been translated by a number of major Western poets, most of whom were not deterred by the "transparently homoerotic" [1] tone of much of his work. According to Wayne Dynes, "English translators even in the tamer episodes of the Gulistan turn boys into girls and change anecdotes about pederasty into tales of heterosexual Iove." (Asian Homosexuality p.66)".

These guys use homosexual sources or homosexual "so called-Persian poetry scholars" as a source for prouving what they wrongfully call the "homoerotic" nature of persian poetry. How honest is that? They even try to speard the rumor that Edward Fitzgerald (Khayam poem translator) was gay. that's outrageous. What is this wikipedia thing? Is it the the website of British Gay Association, which want to justify their way of living, by spreading rumors on dead poets ???????

Please make aware everybody you know, to make a large scale intervention. We can not allow the spread of lies through the internet. Thanks. F_mir74.57.251.174 20:01, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Again I checked Edward Fitzgerald article. Here I quote :

"Persian literature scholar Dick Davis, in a 1989 introduction to the poem, strongly suggests that FitzGerald was gay (describing his marriages as "disastrous.") He points out suggestions of homoeroticism in the poem. "The sáki—the cup-bearer of Persian poetry may be of either sex... [but] is more often conceived of as a young man than as a girl—as a Ganymede figure, in fact." The line "this delightful Herb whose tender Green/Fledges the River's Lip on which we lean" suggests to Davis a reference to an adolescent boy's moustache; while the stanza

None answer'd this; but after Silence spake A Vessel of a more ungainly Make: “They sneer at me for leaning all awry; “What! did the Hand then of the Potter shake?” is read by Davis as FitzGerald's protest of the stigmatization of his sexuality."

taking into account that Dick Davis is a no one (probably gay himself), how is it possible to write such things about Fitzgerald because one gay guy thought he was gay, and now he is gay in the face of the world. What kind of reference is that? And then as a consequence distorting the truth about the persian poetry. I tell you these guys are infiltrating like a virus, a little bit here, a little bit there, to make their point and fullfil their agenda. They don't care about the truth. Is this wikipedia, or wikipederasty?!!!! F_mir74.57.251.174 22:27, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HI the Saghi is not sexual symbol .. It just means wine bearer. Just like the Motreb (minsterl) sings and is used a lot. The term Saghi actually could go all the way to Sumerian. Also we have sources on our side from the most prominent Persian literature scholars alive like Franklin. Their sources do not hold weight against Franklin and other scholars of Persian literature. Also if you can please send me an email and I will ask you for you help in sending me some sources perhaps from your own library. thanks. --alidoostzadeh 00:40, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Turko-Persian Tradition

Ali, i did not delete anything but put back the deleted references, wikifications and the external link. You're reverting blindly. After doing the your edit, please provide the references and do not remove the wikifications and references of previous editions. These wikifications take 15 mins. Please, respect the fellow editors. I prefer to discuss the issue, rather than putting back all the previous edits all the time. Regards. E104421 13:21, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You deleted the neutrality and citation needed tags.

@ Ali: please keep an eye on the Afghanistan page ... if you have the time. Tājik 18:40, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, there is a pov-check tag, which implies that the article may be biased. You know, this is a new article. Wait for a while. More references will be provided. Keep in touch young brother! E104421 19:55, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hanukkah

Thanks! You too. :-) Khoi khoi 06:46, 25 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Haiduc

Hi, just to let you know, this aggressive user has made personal attacks against both you and me at Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studies/Notice board. I have toned down his clearly nonsense and inaccurate post, but you may wish to keep an eye on that page. As we both know, he doesn't have much of a case as I have only removed the unsourced parts and what was clearly and obviously original research, which he termed "vandalism"! This problem appears to extend well beyond this single article, but these problems should not continue. Do you have any suggestions? metaspheres 04:38, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Arabic wiki

have you seen this [34] ???!!!!!!! and "عربستان" redirects to إقليم الأحواز، and if you can understand some arabic, you got what I mean. Can we do something? --Pejman47 19:36, 2 January 2007 (UTC) p.s. please archive your talk page, it is very heave![reply]

Hi Ali

salam!

During last month I worked on this article. I would like to invite you and other Iranian wikipedians to see the article and help in improving it. I would like to invite you to see the parts on Iranian culture in particular. We have to stop people like Mohammad Ali Ramin and Fardid followers. They are destroying the country and culture. Long live Iran! Sina Kardar 15:41, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments. I enabled my email. Also I agree with you about the point you raised. I am very suspecious about these people. They look like spies than anything else. I am not sure whether Iranians should ignore these guys or not: Gary Legenhausen, Ramin, Hamid Mowlana and even Fardid! All these guys have a very strange background. Please edit what ever you think needs to be edited. Please feel free to revert my edits. Thanks.Sina 09:08, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also: It would be great if you could add Al-Ghazali and Motahari in the article and put more weight on them and less weight on Khalkhali etc. I think it is better that people like you who are knwoledgable about Iranian history help in writing the page. Sina 09:19, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Need help

How about Shiites in the Arab World? It gets 236 Google hits. :-) Khoi khoi 05:50, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I've also copyedited the article. BTW, please archive your talk page! Khoi khoi 09:15, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ali

I sent you an email. If we are going to do some thing about that issue, let's do it faster before the article is mirrored in other places. Sina Kardar 13:16, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

I sent you an email. Thanks. Sina Kardar 10:28, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Two Articles in need of your attention

There are two entries at Wikipedia, which have falsely created -- they are Turco-Persian and Turko-Persian Tradition. Both entries are factitious. I have requested the entries to be deleted. My reasons are:

The term Turko-Persian Tradition (or Turco-Persian) does not exists academically and it is a factitious entry! Check the Encyclopaedia Iranica to confirm -- The correct name for that culture is the Persianate culture not the "Turko-Persian". Turkophones (mostly of mixed race and Persianized in culture) only spoke in Turkic dialects and were in the military. That is not enough participation in creating and forming the culture to deserve the name "Turko-Persian Tradition" – This is misinformation. All the elements in that area, which have to do with tradition and culture, were drawn from the Iranian culture and the Islamic faith, not much Turkic elements (like shamanism, yurts etc.) were incorporated in. That is what makes the name "Turko-Persian" an imaginary one and therefore the entry should be deleted.

Any contributions would greatly appreciated. Bā Sepās Surena 02:01, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Would you be interested in making a comment at User talk:Rokus01? Khoi khoi 03:39, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well it's always important to assume good faith. BTW, why did you leave me a message at User talk:Khoikhoi/Unprotected??? Khoi khoi 03:56, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see. Anyways, I was sorta hoping you could reply to Rokus, as I'm pretty busy at the moment. :-) Khoi khoi 04:02, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I did in the scythian talk page. --alidoostzadeh 04:10, 24 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Greater Iran vs. Iran

Hi, could you please have a look at this: [35] Tājik 02:57, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Scythians

I am not amused by your strange accusations. Worse, I am not amused by your reverting without discussion. You claim to know about the source I used, now show me. Rokus01 16:27, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion

If you can help expand this section here: List_of_Islamist_negationists_in_Iran#Arabic_vs_Persian, please do so. Thanks! Khodavand 21:49, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

reply to MB

Write it clear. Khuzestan used in Ka'aba Zardusht. Few texts that have sinus arabicus map also have Persian Gulf , but use Persian Gulf in their text. 80% were from Hondius which later on was revealed that he corrected it. The rest of the politics is not related as this is not a chat room. Also Ahwaz is not an Arabic word, it comes originally for Khuz (Elamite).--alidoostzadeh 15:56, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Message

Evan Siegel & Brenda Shaffer need urgent attention. Please contribute if you have extra material. Kiumars

Ali; Religion plays a major role in our lives, it is on our birth & death certificates and we are judged and even buried according to our religions; and we all have certain loyalty to our religious beliefs. So it does matter. Kiumars

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Brenda_Shaffer"

Ask for help

Salam Ali

Would you please do me a favor? Apparently no member of Persian cinema wiki project is active. Then I would like to ask you to take a look at the Abbas Kiarostami, an article that I am currently working on. I would like to have your comments to improve the article. Any helps will be very much appreciated. I have been really disappointed of so many negative feedbacks I recieved on my work on this page. Thanks a lot for your time. Sangak 19:52, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Persianate society

You've just reverted a lot of work improving the English of the article, correcting links, bringing it into line with the manual of style, etc. It seems clear that you didn't look at what was happening before reverting, and that you've done so because asked to by Surena (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). This hs nothing to do with citations, but with correct English and style. Please revert yourself. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 15:21, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay you are right. By mistake I thought the sources were deleted. I reverted back to your improvement. --alidoostzadeh 15:22, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks. (Re your edit summary, I have explained at the Talk page, though simple copy-editing doesn't normally require Talk-page notification.) --Mel Etitis (Talk) 15:26, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your attempts to defend the article against the reverting. I hope that eventually the fuss will die down and we can get back to improving it. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 22:26, 10 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Iranian art template

Hi Ali!

We need an article on Safavid art. Are you familiar with French? The French article is now a FA. I posted a translation request for that. In any case it would be good if you could either help in writing it or check it once in a while. Take care. Sangak 18:17, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We need to have a proper template for history of art (perhaps similar to greater Iran template). I made some thing but obviously needs to be improved. What do you think about it? Do you know of a nicer photo? How should we make the list? Sangak 18:33, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is true. That will take some time. --alidoostzadeh 00:44, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Safavid dynasty

Salam. Did my editions in that article help you with building consensus.--Sa.vakilian 04:52, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please look at Talk:Safavid dynasty#Controversial tag--Sa.vakilian 05:01, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please translate Talk:Iranian Revolution#Ayatollah Khomeini.27s commandment for Bazargan--Sa.vakilian 05:04, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]