Talk:Azerbaijani language

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Azerbaijan (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is part of WikiProject Azerbaijan, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Azerbaijan-related topics. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of objectives.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Iran (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iran, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Iran on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project where you can contribute to the discussions and help with our open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Iraq (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iraq, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Iraq on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Languages (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of standardized, informative and easy-to-use resources about languages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Swiss German - Azerbaijani Turkish[edit]

it's weird to see swiss people speak "Swiss German" although it is hard for germans to understand it, whereas azerbaijani language ist easily understood by every turkish people (in turkey, azerbaijan and iran). you can easily see that wikipedia is not following same standards.

please change the topic of this site to "Azerbaijani Turkish". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.240.58.159 (talk) 23:08, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

I agree. In Iran we call this language simply "Turkish" (تورکی - تورکجه) and not even "Azerbaijani Turkish". موسا (talk) 11:05, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
The language vs. dialect problem is a notorious issue in linguistics and has no objective solution. We are dealing with entrenched tradition and the influence of politics and history here. No doubt, what are called German dialects covers a wide variety of West Germanic dialects with very limited intelligibility on average (i. e., when you pick two traditional rural dialects at random, they will likely differ substantially and inter-intelligibility will be poor, especially when topics concerning rural life are discussed, rather than modern subjects, where many Standard German loanwords will be used). Dialects from the geographical extremes will differ so radically that they will be effectively like different languages, except perhaps in the Central German belt (Moselle Franconian – which effectively includes Luxembourgish – and East Lusatian around Görlitz may not be that mutually unintelligible). (Don't forget, however, that divergent lexicon has a far greater effect than divergent grammar or phonology: even two dialects that differ only in lexicon and are otherwise completely identical can be mutually unintelligible.) All this is true even when Low German is excluded. The divergence of Central and Upper German dialects probably started already in Late Antiquity, easily before 500 AD, and Low German may well have diverged even slightly earlier. On the other hand, one would expect that Azerbaijani and Turkish only started to diverge from each other well after the Battle of Manzikert, perhaps in the Late Middle Ages, in the early Ottoman period. By this time, Swiss German was already well distinct from East Central German, the basis of Standard German. It does make more sense to think of "German" as consisting of a number of independent languages within the West Germanic family, although they did form a coherent dialect continuum as late as the 19th century and in parts even today. It is pure historical accident that we do not have six Continental West Germanic written languages – Austro-Bavarian, Swiss German, Central German, Ripuarian, Low German and Dutch – rather than only two, Standard German and Dutch, as all the named dialect areas historically possess separate written traditions. (There are even more, such as Cimbrian, Pennsylvania German and Vilamovian, although these are all fairly minor.) Even Swiss German consists of more than a single potential language considering the very divergent Walser dialects. Meanwhile, there is an additional emerging standard, Luxembourgish. So even Western and Eastern Central German could be separate. And finally, there's also Yiddish, linguistically also part of Continental West Germanic. That all those regional written languages were eventually suppressed by the 18th century is purely due to political developments. It is easy to imagine an alternative history where Azerbaijani and Anatolian Turkish are united under the umbrella of an overarching written standard. Only politics have prevented this, and if the Azerbaijani should ever decide that they wish to adopt the Anatolian Turkish standard, this can happen even here. I wouldn't be surprised if many Azerbaijani consider a separate Azerbaijani standard language rather superfluous. Such developments have happened before: Dialectisation and separation are both not rare developments. The language–dialect classification is far more ephemeral and subject to change than people realise. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 23:01, 20 July 2014 (UTC)


Even if it is true that Azerbaijani and Turkish are the same language, however why should Azerbaijani be called "Azerbaijani Turkish". Why not calling Turkish "Turkey Azerbaijani" instead? ))) --Zidane-Materazzi (talk) 09:38, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

My recent contribution to the article[edit]

I removed the phrase "North Azerbaijani" from the infobox since the language is officially known as, simply, "Azerbaijani" by the government of Azerbaijan. Secondly, Azerbaijani is officially written only in the Latin script. While some forms of Azerbaijani might be written in other scripts in other countries, those forms are not officially recognized or sanctioned. I also fixed a minor grammatical error in the opening paragraph and added that the language is also spoken, natively, in Eastern Europe. --Nadia (Kutsuit) (talk) 05:30, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

What does "officially written" means? In Iran we have many magazines, books and newspapers which publish in Arabic script. Right now you can find hundreds of websites in Arabic script (for example see 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 (in Afghanistan), 6 (in Afghanistan), 7, 8, ). This Arabic script has far more age than Latin script for Azerbaijani (A millennium against at most a century) and it has far more users (15-20 million only in Iran). So why shouldn't it be listed?! موسا (talk) 11:00, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
What I meant was that the Azerbaijani language, in the Arabic script, is not officially regulated by any national body/institution. The only variety of Azerbaijani that is officially regulated by a national body/institution is the Latin-based Azerbaijani language of the Republic of Azerbaijan. For example, there are many people who use the Roman alphabet for Arabic, but the inclusion of this information in the infobox of the Arabic language article wont make sense, since Latin-based Arabic is not officially sanctioned. Do you see what I mean? --Nadia (Kutsuit) (talk) 12:03, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Yes I understand, but I think not having a regulation institution does not mean not recognizing the script. The Latin script for Azerbaijan did not have a regulation institution until one or two years ago, too. And the Arabic script, although does not have an official regulation organization, but there was community attempts and their results are widely accepted. For example two orthography sessions was held by linguists to regulate the script and the result (which is available here) is now widely in use by almost everyone. موسا (talk) 12:48, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Speaking of recognition, is Iranian Azerbaijani officially recognized by the government of Iran? I ask this because I don't think it is but I'm not so sure. In my opinion, therein lies the main difference between Latin-based Azeri and Arabic-based Azeri; the former happens to be officially recognized and sanctioned by a national body/institution whereas the latter is really neither recognized by any country nor sanctioned by any national body/institution. --Nadia (Kutsuit) (talk) 13:46, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
No despite being used by more than 15 million people, it has no official status or recognition in Iran. Actually Iran only recognizes the official language of Persian, while having more than 75 native languages, and this has only political and security reasons (as they think) and is not related to languages' use, power, extent or anything. So not being recognized by Iran, means nothing to language itself. The fact is Arabic alongside Latin is a very widely used script and this fact should not be removed from this article. You can see this in other languages too. For example look at Kazakh language, it lists Perso-Arabic script too, although it is just being used by only thousands of people in China. Or see the same in Uzbek language which has the same status and its Arabic script is only being used in China and Afghanistan with far less people than the users of Arabic script of Azerbaijani in Iran. موسا (talk) 14:51, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Fair enough. You made some valid points. I've re-added Cyrillic and Arabic to the infobox. Have a nice day. :-) --Nadia (Kutsuit) (talk) 15:13, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Thank you ;-) موسا (talk) 16:49, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Pardon for interruption . Although the matter of debate seems to be ended in previous dialogue , but I can add the fact the recognition of Perso-Arabic script Azeri depends on definition . Article 15 of Iranian constitution states that using the local languages is free , and it can be considered a form of recognition . --Alborz Fallah (talk) 12:40, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

The dubious tags[edit]

I see that several dubious tags were thrown around the article. I'll have them removed from this article within the next couple of days unless they are discussed. I'll start. First and foremost, it's not dubious that Azerbaijani is spoke in Eastern Europe. I added this information to the article after I found that the article only mentioned Azerbaijani was spoken in Western Asia. It's a fact that Azerbaijani is not only spoken in Western Asia but in Eastern Europe too. Azerbaijan is a transcontinental country that is partially situated in Eastern Europe, not to mention the fact that Azerbaijani is also spoken in Dagestan, which is completely situated in Eastern Europe. Therefore, unless this can be proven wrong -- which it couldn't -- then I'll have this tag removed from the article either tomorrow or the day after. But just to cut all the doubt, I'll provide a source, which I'll not add in the lede paragraph since that's not required according to Wikipedia bylaws. Instead, I'll add the source in the next section of the article.
Now regarding Ethnologue, I'd like to question why a dubious tag has been added to it. It is, by far, the most reliable source on language statistics in English, second to none. Unless someone can provide us with a better source in the English language, I'll have this tag removed as well. --Nadia (Kutsuit) (talk) 20:47, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Okay, I found two sources for the first dubious tag regarding Azerbaijani's presence in Eastern Europe. I'll have them added tomorrow morning. Good night everyone! :-) --Nadia (Kutsuit) (talk) 21:50, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Abuse of tags in the article[edit]

I have removed a couple of tags from the article as they are no longer needed. One of the editors had an issue with the article mentioning that Azerbaijani is spoken in parts of Eastern Europe and has added a dubious tag next to the term, but this was removed after sources were provided to verify that Azerbaijani is, indeed, spoken in parts of Eastern Europe, which includes Dagestan and Azerbaijan. Therefore, the dubious tag is no longer needed in this case. Another tag, related to the wording of the last part of the opening sentence, has been removed as the wording has been changed. --Nadia (Kutsuit) (talk) 23:18, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Please just be specific and encyclopedic and say that it's spoken in the Caucasus and Northern Iran and wherever. Applying broad vague terms like "Eastern Europe" and "Western Asia" is not going to help reader in the least. Caspian region is not exactly anyone's first association on the term "Eastern Europe", to say the least. Our own article Eastern Europe in the second sentence says that The term has widely disparate and varying geopolitical, geographical, cultural, and socioeconomic readings, which makes it highly context-dependent and even volatile. Parhaps it is sourced, but it's unhelpful at least. No such user (talk) 07:13, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
What do you think of these wordings:
1. Azerbaijani or Azeri (Azərbaycan dili) is a language belonging to the Turkic language family, spoken primarily in parts of Eastern Europe (the Caucasus) and Western Asia (northern Iran) by the Azerbaijani people...
2. Azerbaijani or Azeri (Azərbaycan dili) is a language belonging to the Turkic language family, spoken primarily in the Caucasus region, at the crossroads of Eastern Europe and Western Asia, by the Azerbaijani people...
? --Nadia (Kutsuit) (talk) 07:24, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
I'm fine with the wording 2. No such user (talk) 07:56, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
Great! I'll have it changed right away. Thanks for contributing, I've longed for some contribution in the talk page. :-) --Nadia (Kutsuit) (talk) 08:07, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Lead Restoring[edit]

Hallo
I restored the article's lead and template to the last stable version before the edit war started by User Kutsuit. Please feel free to discuss the content of the lead here, and change it after consensus has been reached. Alex2006 (talk) 04:33, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Stop your disruptive editing and blanking vandalism. A consensus has already been reached and your understanding of an original text is invalid. Furthermore, do not attempt canvassing as that is against Wikipedia policies and will get you in a lot of trouble. Lastly, address the content, not the person. --Nadia (Kutsuit) (talk) 08:19, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
I'm not exactly sure what has transpired between Alex2006 and Kutsuit, but a quick look at the events gives me the impression that the block on Kutsuit was ill placed and perhaps hastily done under emotional stress.
As for the matter at hand. When I look upon the last revert, I believe that the reference to Caucasia as "Southwestern Asia" is incorrect. The Caucasus has always been described as a region between the Europe and Asia. This article should reflect that reality. Fruthermore, the inclusion of number of speakers would be a welcoming addition. Lastly the term "North Azerbaijani" in the infobox is incorrect. The North Azerbaijani language doesnt excist, its simply Azerbaijani.
My suggestion to solve this issue with the following lead:
Azerbaijani or Azeri is a language belonging to the Turkic language family, spoken primarily in the Caucasus region, at the crossroads of Eastern Europe and Western Asia, by the Azerbaijani people. The language is indigenous to the Northern Iran (12 to 15.5 million speakers), Azerbaijan (9 million speakers), Georgia, Russian Caucasus, eastern Turkey and small parts of Armenia (6 million speakers). Mursel (talk) 14:12, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
Hallo Mursel, and thanks for joining this discussion! No, the problem - which one solves here in the talk page, and not edit warring - is exactly this. Caucasus is at the crossroads of Eastern Europe and Western Asia, but south Caucasus lies in Asia (see the excellent article Boundaries between continents about that), and Azerbaijan, which is a transcontinental country, lies mostly in Asia. This is a fact, a geographical fact, which depends on the geographic definition of the boundary between Asia and Europe, which is a conventional one: the border is the watershed of Caucasus, and is used since about 150 years. I stress that here we are talking only about physical geography, not political or cultural collocation, where things are quite different. The same of course is valid for Georgia, while Armenia is geographically fully an Asian country (and, btw, this is the consensus reached on the Armenia talk page). Now, if we are talking about the geographical distribution of the Azeri people, there is a part (almost all the inhabitants of Azerbajian, plus those who live in Iran, Georgia, eastern Turkey and Armenia) which lives in Asia, and the other part which lives in Europe. I think that the lead should reflect this fact, and we should have something like that:
Azerbaijani or Azeri is a language belonging to the Turkic language family, spoken primarily in Western Asia (most of Azerbaijan, Iran...), and Eastern Europe (rest of Azerbaijan, Russia, etc.) , by the Azerbaijani people.
The old lead was for sure incorrect (there is no mention of Europe), the new lacks of precision. Alex2006 (talk) 14:36, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
I don't understand the focus on continents in an article about a language. I think the focus should be on the countries, or parts of countries, where the language is spoken. I think the place for describing in which continents Azerbaijan, Armenia and Georgia lie is in the country articles, not the language article. CorinneSD (talk) 16:20, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
This can be an alternative approach, Corinne: we forget Europe and Asia and list only the countries where the language is spoken. The same approach is used for example at German Language. Alex2006 (talk) 16:41, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
I have always been cautious when it comes down to continents. Terms such as "Middle East" and "Europe" have a more historic and mainstream narrative, rather then a pure " physical geographic" perspective. If we look at the subject from a geographic standpoint, there is no Europe or Asia. There is only Eurasia, at least according to Russian educational system. That being said, I agree with CorinneSD's proposal, however I do suggest we add at least the Caucasus region (this much we know at least for certain).
Another point I want to raise is the number of Azerbaijani speakers in Iran. Obviously this is a hotly disputed subject but bare with me. I looked over the sources and according to the first source (CIA World Factbook) the percentage of Azeri speakers is 18% of the total population of Iran. That should bring the number to at least 14.4 million people (80 million Iranians x 0.18 percentage Azeris = 14.4 million speakers). So the "minimum speakers" stands at 14.4 million, whilest the "maximum speakers" is even further disputed. There are genuine sources (Brenda Shaffer, James Minahan, Ali Gheissari, Rasmus C. Elling) which note the considerable lack of consensus and set the number of Azeri speakers as high as 23,24,27 million. The article must reflect the disputed statistics, without chosing any side. Therefore I suggest the following:
''Azerbaijani or Azeri is a language belonging to the Turkic language family, spoken primarily in the Caucasus region by the Azerbaijani people. The language is indigenous to Northern Iran (14.4 to 23-27 million speakers), Azerbaijan (9 million speakers), Georgia, Russian Caucasus, eastern Turkey and small parts of Armenia (6 million speakers). Mursel (talk) 11:27, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
For me mentioning Caucasus is ok, but this mountain range (like the others :-)) has two slopes. The northern slope belongs almost totally to the Russian Federation, and for a small part to Azerbaijan and Georgia. According to Ethnologue, in 2010 there were 473,000 Azeri speakers in the Russian Federation, mainly in Daghestan. I don't know how many Azeri speakers live in the north Caucasus regions of Georgia (in the whole country for Ethnologue there were 360,000 speakers in 2007) and of Azerbaijan: always according to this Ethnologue map, which shows other languages in the area, they should not be many (another half million?). So, we should have one million Azeri on the northern slope and 30 - 40 millions on the southern slope. Due to that, I would suggest:
''Azerbaijani or Azeri is a language belonging to the Turkic language family, spoken primarily in the Southern Caucasus region by the Azerbaijani people. The language is indigenous to Northern Iran (14.4 to 23-27 million speakers), Azerbaijan (9 million speakers), Georgia, Russian Caucasus, Eastern Turkey and small parts of Armenia (6 million speakers).
The adjective "southern" prevents the reader to imagine an uniform distribution of the speakers along the two slopes. That is, it prevents undue weight.
Moreover, I have a question. Does Northern Iran belong to the Caucasus region too? If not, we should say "...spoken primarily in the Southern Caucasus and Northern Iran..." Alex2006 (talk) 13:29, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
I prefer Mursel's version. There are many readers around the world who only have a vague idea where the Caucasus region is. They would not even know that there are two ranges within the Caucasus region, so the phrase "Southern Caucasus region" would not help much. Also, Mursel says that in 2010 "there were 473,000 Azeri speakers in the Russian Federation" -- presumably this is the northern part of the Caucasus -- so it would be accurate to say that Azeri is spoken in the Caucasus region. I don't believe that northern Iran is included in "the Caucasus region", but someone can check that. Another thing I would like to say is that I don't think the figures for numbers of speakers is needed in this sentence. The figures can be given later -- either later in the lead or in a section giving more details. I think just the list of regions and countries where Azeri is spoken is enough for this sentence. (It also looks odd to give numbers for some of the countries/regions and not others.) CorinneSD (talk) 15:09, 25 July 2014 (UTC)


Corinne, first I must precise two things: I did not write "two ranges", but "two slopes": each mountain chain in the world - Alps, Andes, Himalaya, etc. - has a main range, and this range has two slopes, also named versants, and I think that everyone in the world knows it. Second, I wrote that the Azeri in north Caucasus are 473,000, to support my thesis, not Mursel. :-) . I don`t think that the insertion of the adjective "Southern" lowers the comprehension of the readers, but gives much more information, which is our aim. In northern Caucasus the Azeri speakers are only a small minority, largely concentrated in a small region (Daghestan), amidst millions of people speaking other languages. What would you think about the following sentence? "Southern speakers of the German language live in the alpine region." This is technically true, but 99% of the southern speakers of German live north of the Alps: south of the Alps there are only the inhabitants of south Tyrol, otherwise there live overwhelmingly Italians. Omitting the adjective "northern" changes totally the information conveyed by the sentence, and the same happens for the Caucasus. Regarding your other observations, I agree with you. Alex2006 (talk) 16:51, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

South Caucasus is certainly more accurate but as CorinneSD said, most people have a hard time locating the Caucasus anyway. So I worry that the average reader might get confused when we start using terms such as South Caucasus. Perhaps we can use the term Caucasus but link the page to the South Caucasus article. This way the information doesnt confuse people and yet redirects them to the South Caucasus article.
As for the extension of the Caucasus, if I remember correctly Northern Iran and even Eastern Turkey are part of the Caucasus mountain range. So this shouldnt be an issue. Mursel (talk) 19:55, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
I did not know that there was an article about South Caucasus. This solves the problem, because we can link the expression "South Caucasus" with the article, so confused people would read at once what the expression means. I would not link "Caucasus" with South Caucasus, since in that case people who know the meaning of the word and did not click on the link would be misled, not getting the "hidden" information. Another possibility is using (with link), instead of South Caucasus the word Transcaucasus, which I find even better, although the adjective "southern" is used 307,193 (and its synonym "south" 788,771) on Wikipedia, apparently without great problems. As alternative, we can always file a Request for Comment, asking if in this case it is preferable precision (as you said) or simpleness. Alex2006 (talk) 06:10, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
I'm fine with either. Will you adjust the article or should I? Mursel (talk) 12:59, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
You can do it, you play at home :-) . BTW, are you from Baku? I am trying since years (actually, since I read a book of Tiziano Terzani where he praises the city and his gulf "as beautiful as that of Naples") to go there, but benim eşim :-) resists, although she understands 90% of what Azeris say, and her doctor is an Azeri too. Alex2006 (talk) 17:50, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
I am from Baku, yes. But I dont live there anymore. As for the comparison to Naples, I couldnt say. I have never set foot in Naples. However both cities have a partnership and are considered unofficial sister cities. So there must be some truth to it. Mursel (talk) 18:20, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Terzani is always right. :-) The book is "Goodnight, mr. Lenin" and describes his journey in the Soviet Union in August-November 1991, during the disintegration of U.R.S.S. Is is a classic, and in the chapter devoted to Azerbaijan there is also an interview with Abulfaz Elchibey before he became president. Alex2006 (talk) 18:34, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Consensus hasn't been reached regarding the notion that the South Caucasus is the geographic area where Azerbaijani is primarily spoken. There are at least four members who had no problem with the other sentence, which stated that it is spoken primarily in the Caucasus region (which includes the North Caucasus), at the crossroads of Eastern Europe and Western Asia. Furthermore, it has been sourced. Until the dispute is fully settled, the lede sentence wont be changed unless others lose interest in the matter. --Nadia (Kutsuit) (talk) 11:55, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
Nadia Kutsuit, where else but the South Caucasus is the area where Azeri is primarily spoken? Off course its spoken by the Azerbaijani diaspora communities in Eastern Europe, but the language is "primarily" spoken in the South Caucasus. Azerbaijan and North Iran are located in the South Caucasus, so I really dont understand your reasoning. Please explain. Mursel (talk) 10:51, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
Also the POV tag is unjust, just because two sentences in the introduction are disputed doesnt make the entire article disputed. Therefore I removed the POV tag. Mursel (talk) 10:53, 29 July 2014 (UTC)
Hello Mursel, how are you? Please restore the tag as it wasn't a POV tag for the whole article. The tag said that the neutrality of the article's introduction is disputed, which is the case. Please restore it until the issue is settled. :-)
As for the sentence, I intend to mention that the region where Azerbaijani is primarily spoken is at the crossroads of two continents. It has already gained approval by 3 other members, excluding myself, so there's no reason why it was removed again, especially since it was sourced. Until this issue is resolved, the lede sentence shouldn't change in my opinion. Take care. :-) --Nadia (Kutsuit) (talk) 12:46, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

Dialects[edit]

There is a new article on the dialects of this language but the user who opened it is too jealous for anyone (or perhaps only me :-) to edit it. So I thought the people who are interested in Azerbaijani language could try their chances to develop that new Wikipedia article, relate it here, with this main article, and not to leave it to one user who cannot own it, by definition. Regards to all. --Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 13:06, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

I built this article in 22:43, 26 July 2014 [1]. and you instead of transmitting, created entries in new page ([2] 07:16, 27 July 2014). plz see WP:R--SaməkTalk 17:36, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
I was simply trying to move the article to the correct English title; I just got confused, and explained it in the edit summaries. Am I telling you how to make indents? Stop owning a lousy text and let people develop it. Have you ever heard of a "collective effort" (I mean on voluntary basis)? Regards. --Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 18:42, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Mistakes can happen but the new article should be deleted as it would confuse the readers. Furthermore I find the entire section in this article questionable. My concerns are as following:
1. Section 4 (Varieties and dialects) and section 5 (Varieties) should be merged as both are on the same subject.
2. Azerbaijani doesnt have 2 language classifications. Its 1 language, with 2 dialects (North- and South Azeri) at best. So the entire varieties section (which is unsourced) needs to go.
3. Ethnologue is a useful site but its the only source (that I could find) that mentions so many dialects within the Azeri language. This section would make us believe that Baku, Lankaran, Guba, all have different dialects? I think they meant accents, not dialects. A dialect suggests a difference in pronunciation (and more importantly) grammar, whilest an accent is only based on pronunciation. For example someone from Baku and Lankaran have as much as accent difference as someone from New York and Boston. So its not a dialect, but accents. And how relevant is it to mention so many accents?
Therefore I suggest to adjust the article on several points. There is 1 Azerbaijani language, which has 2 dialects (North- and South Azeri), and a dozen accents. Mursel (talk) 19:02, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
Better go to edit the article (I mean stub) and let's close this discussion here. I will also edit if that user acts more civically. --Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 19:06, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Discussions related to the neutrality of the article's introduction[edit]

Such discussions could be found under the section titled "Lead Restoring" and may be continued there or in this section. Thank you. --Nadia (Kutsuit) (talk) 12:45, 28 July 2014 (UTC)