Talk:West Azerbaijan province: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 03:14, 28 December 2005

Transliteration?

I wonder if someone might add a transliteration of the Persian name for the province? I recognize the first word as "Azerbaijan," but what is the second? It looks like "Furby," which I take it is Farsi for West? Why is this place Azerbaijan Furby, while the other Azerbaijan province, the name of which is transliterated, is given as "Azerbaijan-e Sarqi?" Is the -e a short vowel that is unwritten? --Jpbrenna 02:53, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hmmm, probably should be transliterated Firby or Firbi, to avoid confusion with the Furby. (I awlays thought it was spelled "Furbie," but I guess not). --Jpbrenna 03:29, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Oops, that was Gharbi, from the Arabic word for "west." I confused فا with غ --Jpbrenna 07:17, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ethnicity

The majority of west azarbaijan are Kurds. The historical capital of the Mahabad Repuplik is in this province. The name of this province is only a political name. Here, you can see a map of Prof.Mehrdad Izady and another Iranian news portal calls these cities Kurdish cities.

Sources: Prof. M. Izady, Colombia University, New York, USA. http://www.kurdistanica.com/english/geography/maps/map-02.html

Iran-Newspaper http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=3183

"The protests in the Kurdish areas came after the killing of a Kurdish activist by Iranian security forces in the city of Mahabad on July 9. Since then, anti-regime demonstrations have erupted in the mainly Kurdish towns of Sanandaj, Mahabad, Sardasht, Piranshahr, Oshnavieh, Divandareh, Baneh, Sinne, Bokan and Saqiz."

http://www.urmiye.org

Mahabad at Encyclopædia Britannica http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9050086

West Azarbaijan is not just Mahabad. Urmia alone has 4 times the population of Mahabad. And it is predominantly Azeri.

Also, my maps seem a bit different from yours. On my maps, not all of W. Azarbaijan is covered by Kurdish areas. It seems more like a 50/50 split.[1][2]

You cant ignore the Azaris. If you do, you will only be intensifying ethnic wars (and losing more ground), because Iran belongs to EVERYONE. Not just Turks or Kurds or whoever.

It is my observation that those who have been pressing for ethnic independence in Kordestan, or Azarbaijan, or Ahvaz, have no ties to Iran (and are foreigners).

Havent you heard? --> همه جای ایران سرای من است

--Zereshk 22:42, 4 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes every one knows that calling for your rights and divulging the truth in countries

like Iran and former Iraq is often related to foreingners as USA, Europe and Israel (as iranian goverment call them The Big Satans!). I do agree with your new opinion that "The majority of west azarbaijan is split between Kurds and Azeris."

In fact a large number of Urmia populations are kurds who can speak "azeri turkish" but they are not azeri turks! as I do! and Urmia is not only a city and we should not ignore rural regions who mostly are kurds.

Mahabad, Bukan, Piranshahr (in kurdidh :xanê), Sardasht, Oshnovie (in kurdish Shno), are kurdish-inhabited cities.

Shahindej, Naqade, Salmas, Takab, Urmia, have got significant kurdish population (beetwin 40%-70%).

In adition, in other cities of the provnce you can find kurdish people but they are in minority. beetwin (10%-30%).

Thank you for your last editing. I almost agree with it.

November 27th demographic edits

There were several edits made today that I've tried to pare down by removing wording that I felt was overly POV, and information that was either unsupported by references, or didn't seem to be at place in an article that should be about the province in general (with city-specific information ideally going to the related articles for each city). The diff can be seen here - hopefully someone who knows more about the area can improve on my changes. Cheers. --PeruvianLlama^(spit) 00:01, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There has been a Turkish/Kurdish war going on here. Nobody has given any references for what they post. And everyone keeps reverting the other. So I gave up. Let them fight forever.

However, I must say that when visiting Urmia, the population was predominantly Azeri without question. It wasnt even split. It was almost entirely Azeri. (Im referring to the current edit claiming otherwise).

That's all from me for this page.--Zereshk 04:47, 6 December 2005

(UTC)

I don't know from where you get that kind of 70 %-30 % figures, but it is generally known that West Azerbaijan is a majority Turkish province with Kurdish populated areas. I have not removed any of the external links. All of those links given in demographics section are loosly drawn maps and two are from Kurdish sites. There are plenty of websites belonging todifferent ethnic groups claiming as much land as they can, or actually want. Furthermore, since when maps are used to calculate demographic data? None of the maps say, that kind of precise 70 %-30% figures and they don't even show who is the majority. Even if one accepts the accuracy of those maps showing which ethnicity lives where, it has no clue to the actual number of ethnicities. Using that kind of maps one can say that Inuits make 1/3 of the population in Canada, for example. It is known that Azerbaijani Turks make the majority of West Azerbaijan province in Iran. How are the estimated percanteges, I don't know right now, when I do, I will make necessary edits. Thanks. --TimBits 02:44, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The population of the kurds as well as their lands in Iran has always been ignored or playded down by central regimes because of their ethnicity and religion and political reasons. and here in this province, (West Azerbaijan) while the kurds are majority of the inhabitants of the area, maybe the name of the province lead some ppl to mistake about the demograpy of the province. Diyako 11:30, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

All non-Persian ethnicities were played down for that matter, and especially the Turks because, unlike Kurds they have the potential of rivaling Persians for dominance. And until you come up with something more specific, the name itself can be a reason to consider Western Azerbaijan a majority Turkish province. Thanks. --TimBits 11:42, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You are not right. this is the kurds who have the potnecial to do something and there are plenty of sources which you can read for exemple here: the Kurds...

Remember the Kurds are sunni while turks and the central regime are shiite (and the govermnt is religious). and kurds have fought against central regime and have got many armed organisation while turks lead the government! Do NOT forget Ali Khamenei, khalkhali, ayatollah Hasani... and thousands... (and there is no kurdish individual among them)Diyako 12:26, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Diyako,

That is exactly the reason why Kurds do not face the same difficulties as Turks in Iran. As you have given the examples, it is clear that Turks are reprsented in high posts and therefore are potentially more able to rival for leadership of the country. On the other hand, whatever the Kurds do, it will have a marginal importance in any case. But, that is not the issue here with this article. The issue is who comprises the majority in Western Azerbaijan province of Iran. I have to say that I have been dissapointed in you as a fellow Wikipedian. You have been overzealous with this issue and want to have it your way, no matter what. Let's be reasonable, ok? You have called me a racist, and said that I do not accept the existence of Kurds. I wonder if you really read the article before jumping to a revert. The version I had posted before you changed, said that Kurds and Turks together comprise the majority. Despite that I do not agree with that, I have decided that before one comes up with a more detailed and reliable information this version can stay. But you seem to think that anyone who does not accept the clear majority of Kurds is denying their existence. I don't know what kind of inferiority complex it is, but in any case it is far from being reasonable. I am asking this question again: other than the loosely drawn and questionable maps, what is the basis of the information that Kurds are the majority in Western Azerbaijan? Other than that, what is the method to guess actual population data from the maps? Do you suppose that all areas of a certain place have the same population density per sq. km? That is simply nonsence. For your information, I will add other maps from the same sources that you gave. If you are interested in truth, you will not remove those. Thanks. --TimBits 11:28, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

And remember CIA and its sources are Not pro-kurdish. Thank you Diyako 12:28, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Except for some uninformed individuals, the Iranian Kurds have never had a desire to secede from Iran. The latter is the voice of non-Iranian Kurds mostly living in the west.

The reason has to do with the schism between Iranian and Ottoman Kurdestan at the time of Shah Ismail (War of Chaldoran) four centuries ago, the result being that Iranian Kurdestan became a semi-independent state ruled by Ardalans. Hence the Iranian Kurds were as free as one could be, and had no interest to join the other parts of Kurdestan. They are as separate as Austria and Germany. Turkish Kurds and Iranian Kurds share a language and culture, just like many Spanish-speaking Latin American countries, or the Arab states . So they watch the same movies without sub-title, but that is where the commonalty ends. The Kurds of Iran have a lot of stake in Iran and they would never give Iran up.

Keep dreaming if you think otherwise. You will only be fooling yourself. The Kurds have been part of the Iranian identity for thousands of years. You cant erase that so easily.

Things like civil rights have nothing to do with separation or Greater Kurdestan or Greater Azerbaijan, Greater Armenia, Greater Assyria, etc. These are rights that all Iranian minorities demand. It is a simple matter of recognition of cultural and political needs of different nationalities and ethnic groups of Iran.--Zereshk 18:10, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This is your opinion that kurds will remain with iranian faschistic regimes or not........." Except for some uninformed individuals, the Iranian Kurds have never had a desire to secede from Iran. The latter is the voice of non-Iranian Kurds mostly living in the west......"!!!! I do not talk about Kurdish question on this discussion page! I just mentioned existence of a hard opression and discrimination on the kurds in Iran and that there are many reasons to be ignored by central regime of Iran. Yes things like civil and cultural rights has nothing to do with separation but central regme of iran does not think so! and their only reply to any rights demanded by the kurds is killing kurds! please do not mix up different questions about kurds.Diyako 19:38, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

And so is your view pure opinion. What makes you think the Kurds deserve any better reason for secession than the Azeris, Arabs, Gilakis, and other 75 ethnic minorities of Iran? All have their rights usurped. All. Not just the Kurds. Most of the prisoners in evin are not even Kurds. They are in fact Persian.

We will see if your wish of secession will ever come true. You cannot rob the Kurds of their historically unquestionable Iranian identity, no matter how hard you try.--Zereshk 20:07, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I just want to say that Kurds are one of the first victims of discrimination in Iran. as well as arabs and Balouchs. I am very hapy that you accept discrimination on Kurds and Arabas.
...I do not rob it and it does NOT matter that their fathers in 3000 thousand years ago what have done or not.
You are trying to call me separatist; as Iranian government does, facing kurds demanding their rights; In fact we kurds have been known for separation by ppl like you who ever had wished to ignore and fool us by calling us as the ppl who have been historically iranian or such poor opinins...!
If you are inrterested to talk about kurdish question I suggest you to visit paltak rooms where there are many kurds discussing it!! (and not wasting my time!) Thank you.Diyako 20:38, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Edit war

POV tag instated

The page has turned into a springboard for "Kurdish Republic" POV edits.

Diyako keeps putting a map of Iran that supports his POV (that all of the province is populated by Kurds). He ignores three other maps that show it to be split or nearly split, as it really is. [3][4][5]
Diyako keeps refering to Kurdish websites as standard references.

These problems need to be settled. The tag will stay up until I am satisfied.--Zereshk 04:52, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have not ignored those maps becauase they really DO show the Greater Kurdish lands (The Greater Kurdistan) which ever have been ignored by ppl like you but the only credible map which show West Azerbaijan borders and ethnic distribution is the one which I have put on the article if you want and I like and agree with showing other maps too.

Diyako refers to sources provided by CIA, Western universities and other credible ones which are neutral (not pro-iranian and not pro- kurdish.). Definitedly there are other sources which claim this province is entilrely kurdish but I have not put them on the article!)

Thank You

Diyako Talk + 08:58, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This is wrong I have tried to contact him but his email is not functioning. We are writting a better encylopedia than others not just copying other ones mistakes. Diyako Talk + 13:37, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Statistics given by KHRP are not credible for exemple it claims that:

"East and West Azerbaijan have an area of 38,850 sq km (15,000 sq mi) and a population of 1,971,677 (1986); its capital is Orumiyeh. The population is Azeri, with a Kurdish minority." (!!)

While only West Azerbaijan province of Iran has an area more than 39,000 sq km by atself!!

The source cited by you cliams that the population of this province is 1,971,677 (20 years ago!!) it is not also correct so I do not believe such a source.

Do not forget the kurdish population is terriblly growing [6] in addition to this they mainly imigrate to cities such as Urmia because there is a better walfare in comparison to their economically poor reagion.

Thank You

Diyako Talk + 15:22, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Edit War

Strongly suggest a cooling off period here - this keeps turning up on my RC patrol, and the edit war is definitely not constructive. I'm requesting page protection. CarbonCopy 18:49, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This TimBits thinks can do something with ~some expired and incredible sources.

Diyako Talk + 18:53, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to ask both of you - Diyako and TimBits - to read the WP:NPOV and dispute resolution process and try to find a way to resolve your disagreements without editing back and forth. It is possible to present alternative viewpoints fairly within the same article. You may want to also take note of the Three Revert Rule because I think you both could end up subject to the provisions if the edit war continues. CarbonCopy 19:05, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Diyako, Let's be reasonable. I have given sources. You have not provided even an expired and incredible(?) source. You think it is the way to do things here? The document written by H.C. Lawrence Smith and the site Encyclopedia of Orient are current. Just because you don't like it, does not mean that it is wrong. The other documents by a Kurdish group allagedly has old figures. But even if it is like that, it does not change anything. If the population increases, then both Turks and Kurds increase. The ratio would still be the same, more or less, because both groups have similar rates. You say: Do not forget the kurdish population is terriblly growing. I don't know what kind of an argument that is and I leave it to you. Accept the reason. You can not take it forever. I will stop editing for now, only to calm things dawn. I will, push this until a truly neutral and correct article emerges. And don't get me wrong, this all about the article. I don't know you, therefore have nothing against your personality. You on the other hand have called me names. It's ok. I understand. No hard feelings. --TimBits 19:24, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There are many sources regarding kurds are not minority as you at first wanted to put it in the article. In governmental (official) sources, in gehography book of the West Azerbaijan which is special to students of the province, there is no referring that kurds are minority in this province despite of many pressures which the Kurds are facing by the government. There is significant cultural differences between the kurds and the turks in this province, this is what I meant terribilly growing population (regarding number of family members in the kurdish families and its significant effect on the population of the province).

I do not ignore your sources, I think every credible sources provided by us (and other users) must be added.

Thank YouDiyako Talk + 19:49, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Diyako,

Stop messing with the page!

Why do you keep inserting a map that is not related, when there is already one there?

I have notified administrators to monitor this page.--Zereshk 22:16, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The map which you are trying to remove is the first one which has been on the article.
The map which you are trying to remove is a credible map about Iran (and NOT caucasus) and shows the west azerbaijan provinces border.Diyako Talk + 22:23, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've protected the article for the time being. (3RR investigations may occur soon.) If it is felt that the edit war has sufficiently cooled down, unprotection can be requested. --Wikiacc (talk) 22:41, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Responding to request for comment

Did a little neutral proofreading of the article text. If leading sources actually do conflict about the majority ethnic group of the province, then I suggest making a separate article section to discuss the difference in NPOV terms: state each position clearly with citations and offer explanations of the significance and possible reasons for the conflict. Best wishes. Durova 22:20, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The name of the third map has changed!!!!!!!!!!

It is about caucasus and not west azerbaijan provine!!!!! you have changed it!!!! What does it meen??!! Diyako Talk + 22:31, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The map is supposed to be about Azarbaijan. Not about "Greater Kurdistan" or "Greater Azarbaijan" or Ethnic minorities in Iran. Hence I cropped the old map so that the new map only shows what is relevant to the article: West Azarbaijan province.--Zereshk 22:34, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It is about caucasus not Iran it is and does not the west azerbaijan borders.

Remember you changed it name!!! Diyako Talk + 22:37, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The page's name is not The caucasus. It is Western Azarbaijan. And the map should be about that. Not anything else.--Zereshk 23:12, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The map cited by you (although I do not say must be removed) is about caucasus region and the article is not about caucasus region is about an Iranian province that lies soutern of Caucasus and the provinces border is not shown the there... While the other one (which is credible but you do not like it) shows West Azerbaijan province borders clearly. West Azerbaijan province borders clearly,

Incorrect. The map I put on the page and which you keep erasing is not about the Caucasus. It only shows Azarbaijan (both west and east). The one youre talking about is here. Your map shows all of Iran, which is unrelated.
Citing Kurdish sources as fact everywhere in the article while ignoring other sources is POV. This article is not about Kurdistan. It is about West Azarbaijan.
The majority of Urmia are not Kurds. This is a fallacy. Ive been there.
The Kurdistan Democratic Party of Iran does not support secession from Iran (as it is said on the KDP link). So stop vandalizing the page with your propaganda, and stop down playing the Azari minority of the province.--Zereshk 23:49, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WHO YOU THINK OTHER PEOPLE ARE??

MR/MRS ZERESHK:

I HAVE NOT REMOVED YOUR MAP. YOU KEEP REMOVING MINE. UNDERRSTAND ???
THE MAP CITED BY ME SHOWS THE BORDERS OF WEST AZERBAIJAN OF IRAN UNDERSTAND???? AND IS QUITE RELATED. IT IS ABOUT IRAN AND THERE ETHNITICAL GROUPS AND PROVINCES. AND YOUR MAP IS ABOUT AZERI TURKS IN CAUCAUSUS NOT WESTERN AZERBAIJAN PROVINCE OF IRAN, YES PROVINCE.
I HAVE BEEN IN URMIA SO MANY TIMES I HAVE FAMILY AND CLOSE FRIENDS THERE. MORE THAN THAUSAND TIMES I HAVE BEEN IN URMIA AND THE MOST POPULATION IS KURDISH, KURDISH. UNDERSTAND????
THE KURDISH DEMOCRATIC PARTY OF IRAN IS ANOTHER MATTER AND I AM GOING TO DISCUSS IT LATER, AFTER YOU UNDERSTANF THE MATTER AND WHAT IS THE TRUTH.~

Diyako Talk + 00:12, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please be civil. Thanks, --Wikiacc (talk) 01:49, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think now you can understand what is the matter Diyako Talk + 23:24, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank the administators to protect the page. Diyako Talk + 22:38, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Mr Diyako

Your sources such as this one are not neutral. in this site ,claimed to be site of urmia city, u can see the contents of site in Kurdish, Persian , Assyrian and even Finish but NOT in Azeri!!! are azeri people in urmia less than assyrians?!!!

we know kurds of urmia are mostly from southern cities of west azerbaijan. provincial status of iran is not based on ethnic groups. and kurdestan is not an exception. Bijar was a turkish city and ghorve too. the name Saggez is a turkish name meaning "eight".

I have kurd friends (but they r not racist as u). one of them is from Ghorva , he says that his grandpa has migrated from Sanandej to Ghorva 60 years ago, when kurds in ghorva are less than 1000 people. kurds are migrant people, and now a days they are moving from kurish cities to turk populated cities. but you can't claim that these migrants are major in these cities.

Mahabad , Bukan, Piranshahr, Oshno and Sardasht Are Kurd cities, but kurd are minor in other cities. I'm an azeri, with my own tendencies, but I never say that tehran is a turk city(tehran has about 50-60% ethnic turks) because tehran is originally a persian city.

I wish you real human rights, but you can't ignore rights of other ppl.

--Dr.Hamed 21:21, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Think about what your words mean then write them! as in here to Zereshk: "...And about west azerbaijan. Kurds have a large population in this area, but kurd are not the major. only 20-30% of W.Az are kurds. although their polulation is growing and methastatic :) urmia has less than 5% kurds in 1340 but now they are about 25%; most of them are orginally from southern cities as well as kurdestan province. diyako is a vandalist and ultra racist person. he has some wonderful ideas such as 30% kurd population of iran..."
I have NOT cited [7] as a source but as a link in the section of External links.
yes as you see there is no materials in azeri turkish in that website but it can NOT be a reason that they are racists or...
Noone cliams Azeri people are less than assyrians.
Kurds of urmia mostly are from the Urmia and western and northen partts of Urmia and then from southern cities.
I am NOT a racist. (maybe in future you will know me better).
We do NOT discus about who are migrant or not, as well as we do NOT discuss that whose region or whose province it is (I think the owners of a city are all of its inhabitants not a specific ethnic or religious group.
we discuss the population.
I never claimed and never cliam "...Kurds compromise 30% of population of Iran..." (and nor the turks)
I never wish other peoples rights be ignored because I have been one of the first victims of discrimination.
Saqez (Sakiz) does NOT mean EIGHT in Turkish. it means chewing - gum (in fact herbaceous gum).

I think as a Kurdish my Turkish knowlegde is better than yours!))::

Thank You. Diyako Talk + 22:09, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You think your turkish is better than me!!! ok, ok... then I should explain some thing about kurdish accent, if a kurd wants to pronaunce the word Saggiz, he says saggez, and saggiz means EIGHT.

I didn't ignore your rights too, I have kurd friends and I respect their cultural and political rights, but you shouldn't be so extermist.

Ignoring Turk population of W.Az. doesn't help you.

In your last edit on Urmia you give this data: turks 50%, kurds 50% and 40% christian. we know that most of christians of urmia are armenians not turks nor kurds....then urmia is 140% !!!!!!

Migrants have rights as well as original settelers, but they can't change the history. in most of your articles , you claimed that W.Az cities are originally kurdish!!!

changing the facts ....Does it work? I don't think so.

what happens if kurds establish their own country? 1-Economy of kurdistan will be worse. United Iran has oil and more, but kuristan is a province with no significant mines and oil production or factories or Farmlands.

But why kurdistan economy is poor? the central government does not like to develop factories in kurdistan because of several crisis and wars happened in this area.

Please note that: All iran ppl are in poor condition. ok, there is significant difference between Isfahan and sanandaj, but kurds are not innocent in this progress. Most of them have strong desire to establish their own state, then kurdistan is an unstable area for economy.

Please send your answers to my own talk page, if you want to discuss more.

--Dr.Hamed 22:50, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your answer.

Is it srange that my turkish be better than yours?!
saqez; the word Saqez here means GUM . And I should explain some thing about saqez. if you study a litle about kurdish language and its pronounciation you will see that it has the ability to pronounce many other languages for exemple Kurdish language, So I mean kurdish speakng people can pronounce the Turkish words saqiz (gum) and sekiz (eight) with no problem (maybe UNLIKE persian speakings) so the way they pronounce it as saqiz has a logic meaning beacause of many trees who produce gum in that region (around city of Saqiz).
There are (and have been) enough sources to ptrove Kurds have been in thousand years in this province (area). But in fact this is your claim that is strange!
About Kurdish Question I do not think so because kurds do NOT love war, blood and fighting they have been forced to defend themselves because of unjust condition and situation in which they are. In fact this is the faschist goverments and regimes of the Middle East who are not innocent not this oppressed ethnic group (as well as other ones).
I see all of iranians are in poor comditions.
About political topics I do not like to discuss in Wikipedia.

Thank You

Diyako Talk + 23:26, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sekkiz is a Turkey Turkish word but in azeri we say Saggiz.
I think both kurds and turks as well as other minorities in iran should prove their rights, but they shouldn't fight against each other. W.Az has a significant kurd minority, and they must have their cultural rights. Ignoring other ppl doesnot help u.
Every realist kurd knows that kurd population in most central and northern cities of W.Az is less than turks. anyway turks and kurds live together in these cities and discussing about which ethnic group is major, doesnt improve their condition.

--Dr.Hamed 23:51, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sekiz (and not sekkiz) yes it is a turkish word and in azeri it is saggez BUT the name of the city is Saqez (from the turkish word sakiz or in some pronociation Saqiz) which means GUM. If the name was saggez (the number 8) so people could pronouce (gg). Also we should remember many people think the name is derived from the name sakkais the name of an ancient people who once lived there!!
Ignoring other people helps noone.
In west Azerbaijan province, not only in towns, we should NOT ignore Townships and RURAL as well as remote areas which their population is mostly Kurdish!
It does not change standards of living for the kurds (nor the Turks) in this province. It has no political benefits, not cultural, not ... anything. But we have got a true and accurate statistics of one province of one country in this world!! only this! nothing else.

Thank You

Diyako Talk + 00:02, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As long as this anti-Azari attitude of Diayko in suppressing the article exists, the page should remain locked. Some one who believes that 70% of the province are Kurds has some serious bias issues. --Zereshk 01:24, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As long as this anti-Kurdish attitude of Zereshk in suppressing the article exists, the page should remain locked. Some one who believes that 70% of the province are Turks has some serious bias issues!!!

Diyako Talk + 02:29, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide a reference where I said that "Azeris had a 70% majority".--Zereshk 02:34, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Here in this version

Diyako Talk + 02:40, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

For the record

I'd like to draw attention to Diyako's false claims (i.e. lies):

The version he just reported above (02:40, 12 December 2005) was not edited by me: [8]. It was edited by Dr Hamed:[9]

However Diyako did write that 70% of the province were Kurds here, which is an incredibly POV statement, with no sources.--Zereshk 03:09, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You could change it. So you think the Turks are less than this figure? good.
I say the Kurds are about 70% (and may more) again and again. One day you bilieve me.

Thank you Diyako Talk + 03:16, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia does not care about what you "say". This is an encyclopedia. Not a forum.--Zereshk 03:24, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In addition, your 70% estimate is uncited and original research, both of which are strongly discouraged in Wikipedia (prohibited in most cases). --Wikiacc (talk) 20:09, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

For Exemple here we can estimate. Kurds are Not a significant minority, more than this. Thank You Diyako Talk + 20:19, 12 December 2005 (UTC) Diyako Talk + 21:33, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My position: there is no official statistics or percentages on ethnic numbers in Iran. There is no reliable other source as well. The CIA and others only give guesstimates. However, Azeris are in a strong majority in the capital city of Urmia (followed by Kurds), and in a slight but certain overall majority in the province. The exact percentage numbers however, are not known for a fact.

I've been to the province 3 times btw.--Zereshk 03:09, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I know Wikipedia and what is an Encyclopedia.

I agree with this that "..there is no official statistics or percentages on ethnic numbers in Iran.."

About capital city of Urmia it depends what is your defination about majority here, in fact the percentege of the Turks and the Kurds in this city is very similar but turks mostly are in sight specially because of the name of the province and their jobs and business in this city and their presence in central parts of the city but there are many many kurds specially in environs. (here we talk about the city). So there is a very close figures for the Turks and the kurds in the capital city of Urmia.

But in the township of Urmia in rural areas that includes a large area with a large population the Kurds are in majority.
This also is true about most of northern cities of the province but in Khoy which the city (and NOT the township) is mostly Turkish.
Even with a minimum figures for the Kurds in the northern Turkish-Kurdish cities and townships of this province the result is a high majority for the Kurds. (But certainly it never does mean that a specific ethnic group such as the Kurds or the Turks are the owner (!!) of a province.)

Thank You

Diyako Talk + 03:49, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Diyako, trust me, the Turks say exactly the opposite of what you are saying. That's why it is better to take an impartial 50/50 approach. And I'm really reaching out here, because the Azaris are indeed a STRONG majority in Urmia and some of the cities in the province, contrary to what you claim. Dr Hamed even doesnt agree with 50/50. Ask him.

Therefore, since there are no official stats, and since there is a standoff here, I strongly suggest that if youre going to cite and present pro-Kurdish sources as fact, then you must be impartial enough to do the opposite and add opposing Azeri sources as well. Only then can the article become balanced.

Unfortunately, your edits have made the article look like as if the province belonged to the Kurds, the Turks took it over, gave it the name Azarbaijan, and that there is a full scale turf war going on between the Tehran backed Azeris on the one side, and the independence seeking Kurds on the other. Which is totally false.

Also, the problem of the map must be resolved. Problems with the map: 1. It is an ethnic map of the 30 provinces of Iran, not the province of West Azarbaijan. 2. It inaccurately shows Urmia under Kurds (which is why you keep pushing for it). If you want to show it, fine. But you must also show its counter map (which shows Urmia under Azeris).--Zereshk 22:06, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Zereshk, Thank you for all your steps toward resolving the problem.

The Kurds as an Iranic ethnic group have lived in this province since many millinioums ago.
The name of the province has political reasons.
I had (and have) accepted your map but you kept removing mine. I think both maps must be put on the article.
If we calculate the demography of the province we will see that the population of the Kurds is more than 70% and they are in strong majority. So we must do so.

Diyako Talk + 22:17, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"My map" is not on the page right now. You took it off.
The source you keep posting does not say: "70% of West Azarbaijan are Kurdish".
Your claim that the province is named Azarbaijan for political reasons can be mentioned, if provided with a source. You cannot present it as fact. Because the Turks think exactly the opposite. Iran already has a province called Kordestan.--Zereshk 23:08, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You can cite your map but you kept saving another one. (You can not remove other credible maps or sources.)
But we can calculate and then we we will see (aabout the population).
I have not yet put my claim about the name of the province in the article
Iran already has a province called Kurdistan is another matter, that province is only a small region that does not cover all of iranian Kurdish lands.

Diyako Talk + 23:16, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Item 2 is unacceptable, because it is an example of "original research" which is prohibited by Wikipedia guidelines.--Zereshk 00:08, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, this Item proves that Kurds are in majority but about being an example of original research we must ask others too.

Diyako Talk + 00:19, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Why are these maps on the page - neither of which depict the province - either not at all or only peripherically. Can we please remove these and can we please become a lot more civil with each other? Refdoc 23:41, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Solution?

Judging from Diyako's talk page, there seems to be a proposed solution. If there is an agreement, a request can be made at WP:RFPP, where other admins can look and comment on it. --Wikiacc (talk) 23:44, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Page unprotected

I have unprotected the page. I will closely monitor it. I will enforce the 3RR rules. Please be civil. Refdoc 23:45, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

RefDoc, what do you thin about this map?

Better, or wose than other 2?--Zereshk 23:55, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It shows large parts of irrelevance for the province. I also does not show the borders of the province - in consequence it is rather useless to the non-initiated. Sorry Refdoc 23:58, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, the other 2 maps currently on the page must go as well then. for the same reason.--Zereshk 00:00, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The initial province map is part of the overall scheme of things, puts matters into perspective etc. It must stay. The kind of map I envisage should look like this one here - only with ++ more detail + obviously accuracy checked . As said above I have no clue about the exact distribution of people groups, but the basic idea is clear I guess Refdoc

So I gather you are against having the map I propose, and yet support having the incorrect 2 maps?

I was one of the original writers of this article. There was no "initial province map". The first person to bring a map into this article was Diyako [10]. And it was an ethnic one. Not even geographic.--Zereshk 00:19, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think we are cross purposes - the 'initial map' I refer to is the one at the very top showing the province highlighted in a administrative map of Iran - it must stay. The two maps at the bottom Kaukasus and All Iran ethnic groups etc both are irrelevant as they stand. The third one you suggested suffers the same problems. The one I put up is useless in its current form and is only meant to clarify what I mean - an ethnic distribution map should concentrate on the province discussed and shoudl show the province borders. Otherwise it is pointless here. Refdoc 00:26, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed.--Zereshk 00:32, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Urmia also is not a turkish city; it is a Kurdish-Turkish city.Diyako Talk + 00:33, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hash this out between you too. I will remove both irrelevant maps now and suggest that a good solution is first shown here on the talk page + agreed upon before the main page is edited again. Refdoc 00:38, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Republic of Mahabad

A significant event, indeed. All detail should be in the relevant article. I have therefore shortened the paragraph significantly. I woudl suggest that the second bit (about fighting between 1979-1990) warrants also its own article and should not expanded upon here . Refdoc 00:38, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, this is why I did not expand them more than one paragraph.

Diyako Talk + 00:41, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. And this is why I have shortened it even more. I guess you have no problem with this. Refdoc 00:52, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Factual accuracy

I have cleaned up a lot of the style, repeated sentences etc. I also think currently there is little worthy of dispute left or rather all disputes are described. I will therefore remove the factual accuracy disclaimer. WRT the ethnic distribution map - I would suggest that anyone who comes up with a suitable map should put it up first here on the talk pages to avoid a new edit war. The criteria for a new map are clear, but I repeat them:

covering the province only rather than whole of Iran,
clear demarkation of province border
some distinction between country side and townships seems to be necessary
my suggestion is to not have any monocoloured "Kurdish" or Turkish" areas, but to have "stripey" bits for mixed settled areas - without the map making any exact assertions about percentages. In this way we can keep the dispute in the text where it is a lot easier to explain. Refdoc 13:48, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Inaccuracy: The sentence: "The goverment nevertheless mentions the Kurds as the main group in the province" cites a government reference which does not mention anything about Kurds being the "main group of the province". Please correct.--Zereshk 18:55, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Zereshk, I do not mean the government can (or dare) say the Kurds are the only main group. They say the Kurds and the Turks together are main groups.

Diyako Talk + 19:13, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence in the article is clear. Change it.--Zereshk 19:47, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and changed it.--Zereshk 20:10, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Naming of Urmia/Orooomiyeh/Urumiyeh etc

One version please. Too many spellings which are all proonounced more or less alike, but look decidedly confused. Refdoc 13:55, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

ZERESHK UN IS NOT CREDIBLE??? OK SO I DO MY BEST TO DO WHAT YOU ARE AFFRAID OFF. THE TRUTH!!!!!!!! Diyako Talk + 19:54, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

latest revision

This is very good and the pictures are absolutely excellent. Refdoc 07:43, 17 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Histiorical Liars

To inventors of Kurdish Azerbaijan!!!

I don't ignore kurdish population in west Azerbaijan. Kurds are about 20% of W.Az population , but in this article I read somethings about a kurdsih azerbaijan!!! then where are Azeri turks?! they are prodominant in only one city (miandoab), all iranian people knows azerbaijan as a Azeri poulated province, I don't care about source given in this article, I can establish many sites and then use them as sourses. I can see the situation of W.Az. IN ALL NORTHERN CITIES (north of naghadeh) you can see Azeri Turks anywhere, and Kurds are about 10% of these cities, however Kurd are dominant in southern cities. Mahabad and Piranshahr are kurdish cities now.

Iran government is not Turkish nor kurdish, in other hand Kurds are ethnically an iranian subgroup, but Turks are not iranian ethnically. Then why should iranian government name a kurdish province "Azerbaijan" ????

Oh, it's too dificult to prove that england belongs too english people! not indians.

and about Mahabd republic: Most of kurds in Iran live in Kurdistan province. Then Why they establish their own autonomous government in Mahabad!? Because Kurds of Mahabad are politically active, more than ones who live in kurdsitan.

Mahabad is called "Sabilagh" by kurds. Sabilagh is derived from Turkish name " Sough - Bolagh" (cool spring).

Anyway this article can't change the facts,it only can change reliability of wikipedia

West Azarbaijan is not Kurdish

This is a stupid game, and the lie simply wont fly. Urmia is not "Kurdish-Turkish". The same for many Azari cities that have been presented as "Kurdish". That is a comic blatant fabrication.

Please do not remove the tag until the matter is resolved.

You cannot hope to achieve anything by "downplaying" the Azeri majority.--Zereshk 22:44, 18 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

West Azarbaijan is mixed province with no real geographical boundary between ethnics

regarding to article there are some points that must be considered 1)there is a big difference between "shahrestan" and "shahr" in Persian language, (city and small province??) 2)up until now there has not been any statistics that deal with ethnicity in Iran so every estimation will be with approxiamtion , and so many approximation coul change the whole picture of the fact. 3)names of provinces in Iran do not neccessarily represent the real ethnic or historical background or exact geographical boundaries. 4)Azarbaijan is actually a geographical region with some how defined boundaries and its name has more than 2000 years background . It is not a "ethnical" name with vague boundaries like kurdistan or Luristan.

west Azarbaijan is a long and vast province with a very complicated geographical features that make controlling it actually impossible.just for example the distance between Takab and Bazargan is 605 km and still it must be considered that the roads are narrow and very dangerous and are completely in mountanous areas. Thats why it is actually impossible to have direct and centrlized rule over the province and again because of that there is not a homogenous culture in this province , actually this province can be divided into four or five different region with different culture and geographical features. Azeri and Kurdish are predominent ethnicities here (historically Assyrians were the third group but after the world war first they are now a small minority) just the name west azerbajan does not prove that the majority of population of province must be azeri.It is a mixed province and although Azeri was predominent culture in the province (becasue azeris mostly lived in cities and kurds in rural areas) but as kurds migrate from rural areas to cities, this predominent culture will fade away and will be repalced by a mixed or two hostile culture. Mahabad and Mokrian region are different stories, so please Kurdish nationalist don't hang me here, but apart from this region in other parts of province up to 30 years ago Azeries mostly lived in cities and kurds in rural areas.

Orumieh(urmiah is old assyrian name that has been obsolete for many times)is name of a city and also small province. As city traditionally it was a mixed Assyrian and Azeri city with big minorities of kurds and Armenians and jews.After expelling the assyrians and migration of Armenians to Tehran and Us and jews to Israel, this city became an Azeri city with a kurdish minority (who could speak azeri fluently), but after revolution with wrong policies of province governers and also Iranin regime who were suspect of kurds, Kurdish rural area were kept in a very poor condition and combining it with disappearance of security in the border regions create a big immigration of kurds into the city and as they came in city and they want new cultural rights.much of the current city population grow is attributed to these wave of immigrants.

As small province "Shahrestan e Orumieh" is a vast region with more than 5000 sq km and nearly half of population lives in rural areas and majority of them are kurds.traditionally this Shahrestan is always divided into two region, city and its rural mountaines area that were kurdish.So nobody can say that orumieh is not (or was not) kurdish and they were moinority in this Shahrestan,kurds were minority up to 30 years ago in the city but definitly not in shahrestan and all kurdish immigrants to city actually belong to the rural population that rushed in the city and this is happening for all the cities of Iran. So we can say that Orumieh is defenitly mixed as a shahrestan and somehow mixed as a city .

Another problem , verb "belong " has no meaning in Iran.West azarbaijan belongs to persians and baluchs same as Azeries and kurds.

Hey

The Kurds form 70% of the population and the Turks form the remaining, this is a fact and this fact is visible because there are 5 cities in the province which their populations are 100% kurdish and just 1 city which is completely turkish.The remaining are a mix of kurds and turks.

Urmia with its surrounding areas is 80% kurdish and the turks make up just 20%.However, even if the kurds form 20% Urmia is a kurdish city, not turkish, because: the surrounding areas of the city is 100% kurdish, in the west, north, and the south, except the eastern side which is water.If you use your logic you will find that Urmia is kurdish and not turkish, because inside the city kurds are 55%(majority) and with its surrounding areas kurds will reach more than 80%, turks are less than 20%.

the most populous citis in the province are kurdish, the 5 cities, they are among the historic cities. there is just one city which is 100% turkish.

Oshnaviyeh is the most historic city in the province, and it is a populous city, and 100% kurdish, not turkish, so oshnaviyeh belong to the kurds not turks

hello mr Hey

first of all I don't know from where you brought these statistics 30% or 40 % 20% 80 % because there is not any source that prove your claims or similar claims, so what you say is just based on approximation not on facts and it just shows your wishes or thoughts.

about the 5 citites in southwest of province (namely Mokrian) they all have around half an million population (more or less) and it is just 20% of population of province and this does not prove that from every 8 remaining persons 5 are kurd, (and if it is true , you can not prove it, you just think it).

please tell me how could you calculate the percentage of kurdish people in Maku or Khoy or Poldasht? how about Takab or Shahindej? In takab one village is speaking Azeri the other speaking kurdish and in the third people are bilingual and mixed. names also can not help because many villages with Turkish names have kurdish populations and many village with assyrian names have turkish or kurdish populations on the other hand around Miandoab and keshavarz there are many villages that didn't have turkish names but their populations are azeri.

you said kurds compromise 55% of Orumieh why 55% ? why not 53.7% what about 39.6 % or 63 % please be serious, except Daneshkadeh Bld which its population desity is very low and Islam Abads ,which their population densities are high but they are relatively small areas, there is not any part of Orumieh which completely or predominantly be kurdish.and about your logic in surrounding area well it is not 100% because eastern parts are completly azeries, and more ever many kurds have two home one in city and one in rural areas this must be considered too, another problem it that while majority of kurds know to speak azeri , very few Azeri could spoke kurdish.your logic is like panturks who thinks 80% of Tehran is Azeri, so by current knowledge this city is mixed that is all.

about Oshnavieh it belongs to Iranians, and about its history it was not a city it was a big village or at the most a very small town.actually in the one hundred years ago there was only 5 cities with considerable size in this province, Orumih, Salmas, khoy, Maku and Mahabad, the reminder were only small towns or villages.

And History majority of cities in south west of province has been destroyed in Othman and Iran wars or in the mongol invasions, Mahabad has only a slightly more than 3 centuries history, and the other are far much less. on the other hand Salmas and Orumieh and Maku has been named in Armenian sources in 5th and 6th century.

with regards.

The Kurds in Northern parts of the province

The demographic section is verified and the related source has been cited. The tagg must be removed.

Diyako Talk + 12:37, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The second paragraph of the section and the table are still unsourced. The gazetteer doesnt say anything about a Kurdish or Turkish majority in each city, and as for the second paragraph, the links given only refer to Salmas.

We can take the tag off, but then you must be prepared to accept opposing sources as well. Fair enough?--Zereshk 13:00, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Zereshk

The cited source is not only about Salmas. about Khoy, Urmia Maku.. etc and the source of the ethnicity of table is this one. source of the population is gazetter. So there is no problem about second paragragh and the table. Diyako Talk + 13:15, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes but it doesnt say anywhere in it about percentages and numbers compared to Turks. It only says so and so Kurdish tribe lives there. That's not conclusive. Is it now?--Zereshk 13:17, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes this is also true about percenteges and numbers compared to Kurds. Regarding northern cities of the province there is no conclusive ethnicity statistic source hence the only logical way is to accept biethnicity of the cities and not 51%(!) is Kurdish or Turkish. Diyako Talk + 13:35, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

So the tagg must be removed. Diyako Talk + 14:12, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The tag will not be removed. You havent been convincing. There is no support for what is being stated there. The only way to bring the tag down is to accept opposing sources in the text, OR fix paragraph 2 and column 3 of the table.--Zereshk 13:22, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Why you ask me to accept your sources? My answer is clear and does not need your question or putting taggs, "If your sources like all of my sources are credible so they are accepted otherwise wikipedia cannot accept biased sources. So do not put unverified tagg for no acceptable reason (It's not a game); and Do not put protected tagg because there are many people who want to edit the article and add new materials. (Respect others also).

Diyako Talk + 13:34, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Kurds in West Azerbaijan Province of Iran

Request mediation for article West Azerbaijan. User:Zereshk keeps putting unverified (+ protected) tagg for no acceptable reason regarding the Kurds in Northern part of the province, despite of numerous credible sources. Thanks you Diyako Talk + 02:34, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Some credible sources regarding : 1)The Kurds are majority in West Azerbaijan province of Iran and; 2)The Kurds in Northen Part of the province

As you see, clearly the greatest parts of the province is Kurdish inhabited:

[12], [13], [14],[15],[16],[17], [18], [19][20]

Done, There is absolutely much more credible sources regarding this matter.

Thank you Diyako Talk + 13:58, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed let us request mediation

To page mediator(s):

Diyako and anon's position: Kurds are "majority" in West Azarbaijan.
Me (and Dr Hamed and Timbits)'s position:
- Urmia (capital) is clearly Azari majority, not Kurdish, or even "Kurdish-Turkish". The Kurds are a minority there. (Azarbaijan means land of the Azari by the way)
- If not an Azari majority, the province is at least 50/50 in ethnic makeup. Diyako accepts only a "Kurdish majority". Dr Hamed and TimBits (as I understand) are for 70% Azari. As you can see, I am the conservative of the pro-Azeri bunch here.

Diyako's position is therefore unacceptable.

Here's why:

To begin with, paragraph 2 of the section in question and its following table in ordering the Kurds first and claiming majority makeup in certain and most cities is not substantiated by the links provided. The links only mention Kurds as found to be living there. Nothing more.
Diyako et al refuse to acknowledge (and keep deleting the fact that) there is no official or government or even semi-government ethnicity census for West Azarbaijan in Iran. Everything therefore being claimed here by Diyako et al are only indirect remote estimates, or guesstimates, from foreign sources, whether pro-Azeri or pro-Kurdish.
One cannot use maps (links [19] and [20] cited above e.g.) to justify a claim of majority status of Kurds in West Azarbaijan. Maps are inconclusive and cannot tell whether or not a group is in majority status vis a vis another. It only tells where a specific group can be found to reside there. If anything, in fact Maps [13] and [16] cited above show Urmia (the largest city) as Azeri. If we were to interpret maps as an indication of majority status, I could also then show maps that claim the opposite (i.e. show an Azeri majority). Examples: [21] [22] [23] and [24]
Links [15] and [18] cited above say nothing about a Kurdish "majority" in West Azarbaijan. They only report Kurds to be found to live there.
For the claim of Urmia being Kurdish majority on map [17], I can in turn cite the following opposing sources: These sources claim a majority for Azeris in Urmia:
1. H. Anzali, ISBN 964-6614-07-8 p49, (2000)
2. A. Kaviyanpur ISBN 964-91860-6-9 p421, (1999)
3. "...90% of Urmia are Azeri..."
That leaves us with only link [14] as directly stating "a Kurdish majority in West Azerbaijan". But then again, there are opposing sources as well, which Diyako et al ignore:

My vote therefore is:

In light of the lack of any official census, and in light of having both Azeri and Kurdish sources oppositely claiming majority status for the province, it would be only fair to claim 50/50 status in general, and only say that the south of the province is thought to be Kurdish dominated, while the north is Azeri, and that Urmia is for certain mainly Azeri, while Mahabad is for certain Kurdish.--Zereshk 23:04, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

1. Since an editor can contribute with several ID's so the number of editors is not important but the Sources cited.

The same can be said about you and that anon editor of yours.--Zereshk 02:50, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

2. Most of your sources are not credible and are too Pro-Turkish!

Your sources arent credible either. Youve been posting PDK sources!--Zereshk 02:50, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

3. Others are too old and are not up-to-date!

Says who? Show me.--Zereshk 02:50, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

4. All of sources cited by me (Diyako) are comming from western universities and are quite neutral and credible:

[25], [26], [27],[28],[29],[30], [31], [32][33]

Oh, you mean the maps. Well maps arent credible enough to base a majority claim on.--Zereshk 02:50, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Diyako Talk + 23:20, 27 December 2005 (UTC

The main problem is you have not accepted large kurdish population in northern part of province.

I accept "Large". I do not accept "majority" claim. I opted for a 50/50. YOU REFUSED.--Zereshk 02:50, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Let me explain something important for you: In fact the southern Kurdish population of West Azerbvaijan province of Iran are Mukrian. But there is a large Kurdish population Kurmanc (speaking a dialect of Kurdish) in west and northern parts of the province, as here in the neutral and credible source: [ http://www.ethnologue.com/show_language.asp?code=kmr Ethnologue.com] )Iran section).

You dont need to explain anything to me. Ive been there 3 times. I was born in Iran.--Zereshk 02:50, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Diyako Talk + 23:50, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Zereshk..! This is paragraph 2. What is wrong with this paragraf? You should accept that all of these cities are biethnic.

"...The province is divided into 14 townships, the present number of townships was achieved over time by subdivision of many of the larger townships into smaller ones.The townships in the province are as following: Urmia, Salmas, Naghadeh, Piranshahr, Bukan, Khoy, Mahabad, Oshnaviyeh, Sardasht, Chaldoran, Miandoab, Maku, Takab and Shahindej.

6 of these 14 townships are homogeneous, which 5 of them are entirely Kurdish and the another 1 is entirely Turkish, the 5 prodominently Kurdish cities are: Oshnaviyeh, Piranshahr, Bukan, Sardasht and Mahabad and the other township which is prodominently Turkish is Miandoab.The remaining 8 townships are principally heterogeneous and their populations has long been a combination of Turkish and Kurdish peoples, these townships are as following: Urmia,Salmas, Maku, Chaldoran, Naghadeh, Khoy, Takab and Shahindej..."

Where in your links does it exactly say "5 are entirely Kurdish"? How is it that you put "entirely Kurdish" for majority Kurdish towns and instead put "Kurdish-Turkish" for Turkish majority towns (such as Naghadeh and Urmia)? I find that problematic and biased.--Zereshk 02:50, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Diyako Talk + 23:59, 27 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In fack I am discussing with a racist turk qashqai pasdar terroris pro ahmadfinejad turk whho even can do ne recognoze UN emblem and think it is PDK Diyako Talk + 03:12, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In fact I am discussing with a racist Qashqai turk pasdar terroris pro ahmadinejad who even can do not recognoze UN emblem and think it is PDK's Diyako Talk + 03:14, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 662: / Line 662: @@
 In fack I am discussing with a racist turk qashqai pasdar terroris pro ahmadfinejad turk whho even can do ne recognoze '''UN''' emblem and think it is PDK
 <span style="border: 2px solid #FF1111; padding: 1px;"><b><font color="#00aa00">[[User:Diyako|'''D''']]</font>[[User:Diyako|iyako]] [[user_talk:Diyako|Talk]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Diyako&amp;action=edit&amp;section=new +]</b></span> 03:12, 28 December 2005 (UTC)
+In fact I am discussing with a racist Qashqai turk pasdar terroris pro ahmadinejad who even can do not recognoze '''UN''' emblem and think it is PDK's
+<span style="border: 2px solid #FF1111; padding: 1px;"><b><font color="#00aa00">[[User:Diyako|'''D''']]</font>[[User:Diyako|iyako]] [[user_talk:Diyako|Talk]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Diyako&amp;action=edit&amp;section=new +]</b></span> 03:14, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Revision as of 03:14, 28 December 2005

Transliteration?

Ethnicity

November 27th demographic edits

Edit war

POV tag instated

Edit War

Responding to request for comment

For the record

Solution?

Page unprotected

Republic of Mahabad

Other problems

Factual accuracy

Naming of Urmia/Orooomiyeh/Urumiyeh etc

latest revision

Histiorical Liars

West Azarbaijan is not Kurdish

West Azarbaijan is mixed province with no real geographical boundary between ethnics

The Kurds in Northern parts of the province

The Kurds in West Azerbaijan Province of Iran

Some credible sources regarding : 1)The Kurds are majority in West Azerbaijan province of Iran and; 2)The Kurds in Northen Part of the province

Indeed let us request mediation