User talk:Nepaheshgar

Welcome!

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

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

Help

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

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

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

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

To Aucaman-Please Read and Respond

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

Message 1:

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

Message 2:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Shaddadids

dear ali,

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

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

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

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

Al-Khwarizmi

Salam ali,

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

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

Ibn Nadeem

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

Tabari:

واسمه هارو1 وكنيته أبو جعفر.

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

 Thank you very very very much!

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

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

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

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

Hello

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

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

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

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

Iranian Wikipedians' Notice Board (WatchDog)

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

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

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

Alhazen

Hi Ali doostzadeh.

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

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

Please vote !

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

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

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

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

Here is what user:Diyako has written;

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

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

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

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

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

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

HAPPY NEW YEAR

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

Your Comments and Citations Needed

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

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

Hi

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

Happy New Year

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

Thanks to all Friends

Thanks to all friends for ther Nowruz greetings.

provocative?

Respected ustad

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

with respect

btw your links were extremely informative and interesting

Hi

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

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

Iranian Azerbaijan

Hi there,

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

KhodahafesDariush4444 04:21, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Nizami Ganjavi

Dear Friends, watch out for the Nizami Wikipedia entery. Here is a response to some pan-turkists.

Nizami and his ethnicity

The problem with our friends from the republic of Azerbaijan is that they can not read Nizami or sometimes they mention a verse that does not exist or is pronounced so badly, that one can not judge it. I want to add that any person can find all the original 5 jewels of Nizami in its original language:

1) His Mother

Else his ethnicity is very clear if you read and understand his work. His mother is definitely of Kurdish extraction and that is pretty clear by this verse about his own mother: Gar maadar man Rai'seyeh Kurd - Maadar Sefataaneh Pish Man Mord. (If my mother Ra'iseh the Kurd - Left this world in motherly way). This is clearly makes him Iranian and not Turkic..

گر مادر من رئیسه کرد

مادر صفتانه پیش من مرد

از لابه‌گری کرا کنم یاد

تا پیش من آردش به فریاد

غم بیشتر از قیاس خورداست

گردابه فزون ز قد مرد است

زان بیشتر است کاس این درد

کانرا به هزار دم توان خورد

با این غم و درد بی‌کناره

داروی فرامشیست چاره

ساقی پی بار گیم ریش است

می ده که ره رحیل پیش است

Persian (like Turk/Tukic) is also a fluid term and has been used ethnically for Iranian(Iranian branch of Indo-Iranians) in general sense. Note some Azarbaijan scholars want to change the term Kord to Gord (warrior) here although no edition and manuscript supports this and the verses above would be meaningless. Because Nizami is talking about the suffering of his mother and how motherly she was. Nothing about being a warrior and in fact for strict Muslims like Nizami, Women had their traditional role, specially his mother.

2) His Father

As per his father, the following verses are in some of the manuscripts:

cho dorr gar cheh dar bahr-e ganjeh gomam valee az ghohestan-e shahr-e ghomam beh tafresh dehee hast "taa" naam-e oo Nezamee az aanjaa shodeh naamjoo

It is from introduction section of "Divan-e khamseh, nezamee ganjavi" by Moinfar, corrected by Vahid Dastgerdi, Zareen Publishing, second edition, Tehran 1362 (1983). It describes his father as being from Qom (Central Iran).

These are all the verses available about his parents. None of them mention Turkish. Dr. Julia Meysami, as well as Vahid Dastgerdi and Dekhoda have all mentioned his Kurdish mother and Persian father.

3) Now as per Albanian, Albanian (Arrani) did not exist anymore during Nizami's time and the Albanian church was already incorporated into Armenian Church and became part of the Armenians. Note I am not denying that ethnically Azarbaijanis are not related to Albanians either. In fact genetic testing shows that both Armenians and Azarbaijans of the Caucus are the closest people to Albanians. But here I am mainly concerned about culture and language of Nizami and so Albanians (which did not exist at that time anymore) would be invalid. Nizami contributed solely to Persian culture and language.

4) As per Seljuq Turks, Nizami was not a Seljuq or from their family. Else he would not be a court poet of theirs! Also the Seljuqs intermarried all over with local dynasties and they were Persianized to a large extent. They supported Persian culture and eventually some of them took Persian names like Keykhosrow, KeyKavus and etc. The term Turk even was derogatory in Anatolia prior to Ataturk. But Nizami was definitely not a Seljuq or else it would have been mentioned in different biographies as well as his five jewels. Nizami has some very harsh words about Turks. For example, he describes from eskandar: "Beh nefrin torkaan zabaan bar goshaad - keh bi fitna torki ze maadar nazaad" or "Torki sefat-i vafaayeh maa nist - Torkaaneh Sokhon sezaayeh maa nist - An koo ze nasab boland Ayad - oo raa sokhan boland baayad". Three of his works are also about Ancient Persian and two about the Sassanid dynasty. Had he contributed anything to Turkish folklore or culture, there could have been a debate on his ethnicity and him being partially Turkish. The fact is, the Sassanids and the Alexandar/Dara stories does not have anything to do with Turkish folklore and heritage like Dede-Qorqod or KurOglu. They are part of Persian/Iranian folklores (see Shahnameh).

5) Persians/Iranians today live from the North and South of Baku (Tats in Baku and Talysh in Lankoran/Astara and Tati in in Iranian Azarbaijan) all the way down to the Persian Gulf. And from the west all the way to Bukhara/Samarqand and Tajikistan. So I am not sure where one person gets the SW Iranian theory. Yes the ancient Persian empire rose out of the SW Iran, but their language was ancient Persian which was mutually intelligible with Median, Soghidan, Avesta and etc. of that time. This is 2500 years ago and by that time various Iranians had intermingled and the term Persian came to refer to any Iranian –speaking group.

You might want to read the following about the turkification of the area: http://www.kiffer.us/azeri_info/history_of_azerbaijan-emb.htm

6)

Nizami has some harsh words for Turks when he describes them in a non-figurative way. First we should not be confured and to Nizami the term Turk meant the Mongloids of Central Asia, as Anatolian and Azarbaijani Turkic speakers did not exist back then. Nizami describes the ethnicity of Turks clearly: Cheshm Tang (narrow eyed) like that of the Mongoloid race. See the Persian verses below which he belittles Turks and leaves us no doubt that he was not related in any way to Turks:

به نِفرين تُرکان زَبان بَرگُشاد

که بي فِتنِه تُرکي زِ مادَر نَزاد

زِ چيني بِجُز چينِ اَبروُ مَخواه

ندارند پِيمان مردم نِگاه

سُخن راست گُفتند پيشينيان

که عَهد و وَفا نيست در چينيان

همه تَنگ چِشمي پَسنديده اند

فَراخي به چَشمِ کَسان ديده اند

خبر ني که مهر شما کين بُوَد

دل تُرکِ چين پُر خَمُ و چين بُوَد

اگر تُرکِ چيني وَفا داشتي

جهان زيرِ چين قَبا داشتي

I do not want to translate the above verses because it is absolutely rude to a great degree. He also says in another poem:

تُرکی صِفَت وَفای ما نيست

تُرکانِه سُخن سِزای ما نيست

آن کز نَسَبِ بُلَند زايد

او را سُخن بُلند بايد

And again he describes Turks as narrow-eyed and Mongoloid as well:

ز بس که آورده ام در چشمها نور

ز ترکان تنگ چشمي کرده ام دور

7)

There is also a theory put forth by the Azarbaijan republic scholars that Nizami's third wife could have been Turkish of Qipchaq. But this is not supported clearly. Because a ‘’Turk-e-Qipchaq’’ is used in Persian poetry as a beautiful lover (since Iranians at that time found the Mongoloid race beautiful) and does not have an ethnic connotation. For example Hafez used Tork-e- Yaghma, Tork-a-Khajal, Tork-e-Khataai....etc. The term Turk and Hindu and Roman and Ethiopian are used as Sun and Darkness in Persian poetic imagery. Because Turks were yellow and Romans are white, while Hindus and Ethiopians are Dark, the contrast provided a reasonable poetic symbolism for the poets. So there is a lot of imagery here and nothing of it has to do with ethnicity. For example Nizami in one verse described a beauty of Kurdish extraction of having a Turkish face with a Hindu mole. Khaghani in one verse claims to be a hindu (here meaning slave or servant) of

Turks(the mongloid types) while being considered beautiful by Persians poets, were also deemed as cruel and unfaithful.

Also the term Tork-Zaad (born of a Turkish mother) rather than Tork means someone born of a Turkish slave. And it is actually derogatory: "Sokhan bas kon az Hormozd-e-Tork-zaad - Keh andar zamaaneh mabaad aan Nejaad". (Ferdowsi) The Sassanid half Turkish king Hormozd whose mother was a Turkish princess of the Gok-Turks, was referred to as Tork-Zaad in Shahnameh,. Zaadan means to give birth and Tork-Zaad rather than the term Turk, refers to a son of Turkish slave (Dekhodas dictionary). So if Nizami used such a term about the son from the Turkish slave (assuming the term Turk here is literal and not metaphorical like most of Persian poetry) given to him by the Seljuqs, then he would definitely not be a Turk.

Also Afaagh is not the name of this wife. Afaagh means horizon and Nizami is saying that his beuty is like the Horizon. I am not sure how even some go from Afagh to Apaq, when there is no mention of such word and all the copies have put Afagh.

8) Nizami heavily praises Ferdowsi:

سخن گوی پیشینه دانای طوس

که آراست روی سخن چون عروس

The wise speaker of Tus who wrote verses as beautiful as new brides. Ferdowsi was not much liked by Turks either and has harsh words in reference to Turks. In fact Nizami mentions that he took a flower from Shahnameh and expanded it.

9) Nizamis description of Azarbaijan in Eskandar nameh is purely Zoroastrian and Persian.

So this makes it clear Turks were not natives of Azarbaijan at ancient times. Furthermore Nizami has very harsh words for Turks that I will just write in Persian:

http://rira.ir/rira/php/?page=view&mod=classicpoems&obj=poem&id=10905&lim=20&pageno=3

وز آنجا به تدبیر آزادگان

درآمد سوی آذر آبادگان

بهر جا که او آتشی دید چست

هم آتش فرو کشت و هم زند شست

در آن خطه بود آتشی سنگ بست

که خواندی خودی سوزش آتش پرست

صدش هیربد بود با طوق زر

به آتش پرستی گره بر کمر

بفرمود کان آتش دیر سال

بکشتند و کردند یکسر زکال

چو آتش فرو کشت از آن جایگاه

روان کرد سوی سپاهان سپاه

بدان نازنین شهر آراسته

که با خوش‌دلی بود و با خواسته

دل تاجور شادمانی گرفت

به شادی پی کامرانی گرفت

بسی آتش هیربد را بکشت

بسی هیربد را دوتا کرد پشت

بهاری کهن بود چینی نگار

بسی خوشتر از باغ در نوبهار

به آیین زردشت و رسم مجوس

به خدمت در آن خانه چندین عروس

همه آفت دیده و آشوب دل ز گل

شان فرو رفته در پا به گل

در او دختری جادو از نسل سام

پدر کرده آذر همایونش نام

چو برخواندی افسونی آن دل‌فریب

ز دل هوش بردی ز دانا شکیب

به هاروتی از زهره دل برده بود

چو هاروت صد پیش او مرده بود

The above verses clearly mention Azarbaijan as Iranian and Zoroastrian (Magian) stronghold. The Turks were a shamanistic people living far away from Azarbaijan . At the time of Nizami Ganjavi, the main language of Azarbaijan was not yet Turkish. For example the city Ganjeh is clearly a Persian word, as are cities like Shirvan, Baku, Nackjivan,Darband,.. as well as the name Azarbaijan itself. The Turkification of this area occurred later.

10) Nizami understood Arabic, Persian, Bukhari(Soghdian Persian/Iranian dialect) and Tabari (Mazandarani Persian/Iranian dialect).

باز چستم ز نامه‌هاي نهان

كه پراكنده بود گرد جهان

زان سخن‌ها كه تازي است و دري

در سواد بخاري و طبري

وز دگر نسخه‌ها پراكنده

هر دري در دفيني آكنده

But no where has he mentioned using Turkish sources for any of his stories.

11)

Note I am not trying to put the people of republic of Azerbaijan down, but the simple fact is that at that time, Turkic was not predominant neither in the caucus nor Azarbaijan. Neither did the formation of an Azarbaijani ethnic group exist. There is simply not one poetic manuscript of this language from the caucus prior to the Ilkhanid mongol invasion, long after Nizami. And even after that, it was just from couple of court poets of the Ilkhanids. Azarbaijani Turkish started developing during the Black Sheep Turkomans and then Safavids. Indeed if there was a formation of Azarbaijani ethnic group at the time of Nizami, then they would have had poetry in that language as well. Also expert Oxford Professor like Julia Meysami has already given a very clear verdict and I support her decision. So Nizami would be ethnically Iranian.

Another Russian Iranian scholar, by the name of Mikhail Kapustin in 1988 (during the time when the soviet union was opening up to the world and there was no pressure on scholars to manipulate fact) wrote in the cultural magazine of Soviets: Nizami Ganjavi is one of the greatest thinkers and poets of the middle ages and belongs to the exceptional heritage of Persian literature. He had no connection with the current culture of Azarbaijan. And Azerbaijanis (he means the caucus ones that consider themselves Turks) are making a useless effort to claim and make him of their own. At the time of Nizami, Azeri-Turks did not exist in Azarbaijan. (sovietkaya kultura (soviet culture) magazine, 27 of December, 1988).

Here I will mention another historic figure which is claimed by some Turkic groups, Babak Khorramdin. The reason is that it sheds more information on the ethnicity of the region during the time of Nizami.

Azerbaijan was the scene of frequent anti-caliphal and anti-Arab revolts during the eighth and ninth centuries, and Byzantine sources talk of Persian warriors seeking refuge in the 830s from the caliph’s armies by taking service under the Byzantine emperor Theophilos (p.195)…Azerbaijan had a Persian population and was a traditional centre of the Zoroastrian religion…(p.203)…The Khurramites were a…Persian sect, influenced by Shiite doctrines, but with their roots in a pre-Islamic Persian religious movement (p.215) From: Whittow, Mark, The Making of Byzantium: 600-1025, Berkley: University of California Press, p.195, 203, 215.

12) Culturally Nizami is a Persian. (There is no debate on this as he is a Persian poet and his five jewels have nothing to do with Turkic culture). Ethnically he is with 100% certainty half Kurdish and with reasonable certainty half Persian. So he is a product of the Perso-Islamic culture that produced other poets like Khaghani, Mahasti Ganjavi, Qatran, Homam and over 1200 Persian poets that we know from the area before Turkification. His works also reflects it as the Sassanids were true glorious Iranian dynasty and his most well known work is the Haft-Paykar and Khusraw o Shirin. If he was Turkish, he would write something about Turkic epics which he did not. The Sassanids were major enemies of Turkic dynasties like Go-Turks and Khazars. Note Nizamis praise of Alexander is due to the fact that Alexander was considered a religious Islamic figure named Dhul-Qarnain. So even Ferdowsi has put some good words for Alexander in some verses.

So even if some users suggest we do not mention his ethnicity, the term Persian poet is very clear. The fact is his contribution is all for the Persian culture and he lives through this culture. And Iranians, Afghans and Tajiks today understand him while Turks do not. Also it is 100% that he was half Kurdish and this is well known fact mentioned by Dr. Meysami amongst many other scholars. His cultural contribution are all left for the Iranian world and even if he hypothetically speaking was a black African, the poetry today is known by the culture and language and masterpieces that he created. Poetry can not be translated and lives through the language that is spoken by the people. So culturally Nizami did not have anything to do with Turkic groups.

--Ali doostzadeh 08:57, 18 May 2006 (UTC)--Ali doostzadeh 08:57, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Doroud

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

Question

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

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

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

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

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

Re: Nizami

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

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

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

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

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

BTW...

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

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

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

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

Here we go again...

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

Your work on Nizami was Great

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

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

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

These is only the tip of the ice berg. 72.57.230.179

Look at the Disfigurement of Iranian History

Are these okay edits on the part of this user?

[7]

[8]

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

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

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

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

In regards to this

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

Aryan invasion theory

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

The Seeds of Discord are Being Planted

Iranians, Editors, People of Rational Minds, Academics... The seeds of propaganda are bieng planted: reports of the massacres of Azaris are being doctored. Look at what is weing said by editors from the Republic of Azarbaijan about Azaris, [9]. They are really trying to forment biased articles. They have created to alternative articles about Shah Ismail I, one being a mythical Turk king. WE should merge the article and get rid of the Pan-Turkist fiction! 72.57.230.179

Please watch the Azari people article

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

Nizami

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

User:Johnstevens5

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

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

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

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

Sheikh Khazal

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

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

wa alykom asalam brader!

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

Azeris problems

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

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

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

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

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

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

Ahmad Khan Nakhjavan

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

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

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

Nava'i

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

Azeris reworking

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

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

Keep Up the Good WOrk

Your work is valued and appreicated. Thank You 69.196.164.190

Re: Nizami

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Nezami Mausoleum

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

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

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

References

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Good work!

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

Picture of Azari Refugess

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

Kurdish people

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

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

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

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

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

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

Kurds are Iranic people

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