Talk:Mammed Said Ordubadi

move

Dacy, maybe we can move this page to Mammed Said Ordubadi? Ateshi - Baghavan 18:49, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

I moved the page. Ateshi - Baghavan 19:28, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

I made some minor fixes, also South Caucasus is not the same as Azerbaijan. Grandmaster 16:31, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

A) There was no "Russian Azerbaijan" until the USSR occupied the ADR. B) There was no Azerbaijan in the Caucasus at all in this time period...What are you and Elsanaturk trying to pull?Azerbaijani 23:52, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

You better check scholarly articles and books, for example Swietochowski. Here we use a term 'Russian Azerbaijan' not necessary in historic sense but in academic to identify a part of Azerbaijan which was under Russian rule.--Dacy69 13:54, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Show me one scholarly article from the time that mentions a "Russian Azerbaijan"...Russian Azerbaijan was not a term used then. And I fail to understand how Russian Azerbaijan identifies a "part" of Azerbaijan which was under Russian rule, the Russians never even conquered any of Azerbaijan, they simply conquered the land up to the Aras river...No where on any of the Russian Iranian treaties did it say that Russian takes any part of Azerbaijan, what are you talking about? What are you talking about?Azerbaijani 23:34, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Cool down. First, I told that a term "Russian Azerbaijan" can be used in academic articles like Wiki in scholarly term. This is exactly how T.Swietochowski uses it - check his book "Russian Azerbaijan, 1905–1920. The Shaping of a National Identity in a Muslim Community. Сambridge: Сambridge University Press, 1985" As far as historic meaning, Russians called today's Azerbaijanis "Azerbaijanskiye tatari" (Azerbaijani Tatars). Some Russian writers (for example Velichko) even used term Azerbaijanis and Azerbaijan - check this В.Л.Величко. Кавказ. Русское дело и междуплеменные вопросы. Публицистические сочинения. Том 1, СПб, 1904. - page 154. He wrote "Aзербайджанцев называют татарами, но это совершенно неточно, если относить притом татар к монгольскому племени... Азербайджан дал Персии одну из величайших ее династий, во время владычества которой расцвели в этой державе науки, искусства, земледелие и ратное дело..." - translation: "Azerbaijanis are called 'Tatars' but it is absolutely wrong, if we associate Tatars with Mongol tribes... Azerbaijan gave Persia one of the greatest dynasties during reign of which science, arts, agriculture and military affairs florished... So, these terms used In Russian Empire --Dacy69 13:48, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Again, what are you talking about? In this article, "Russian Azerbaijan" is used as a geographic term to describe this person's area of activity, not as an "academic" term. Also, your Russian source is talking about Iranian Azerbaijan obviously.

No text or map or anything ever mentions a "Russian Azerbaijan" until the Soviets occupied the ADR. Why are you still going to argue about this? You are obviously wrong here, you know this.

Also, this person did most of his work in Tiblisi (as the article itself says, he only returned to Baku in 1918), not "Russian Azerbaijan". It is more correct to put Russian Caucasus, as this person did not do most of his work in "Russian Azerbaijan" and because there wasnt even a "Russian Azerbaijan" at the time.Azerbaijani 17:47, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

To end this silly dispute I put Russian Azerbaijan and the rest of Caucus. The person passwed away in 1950. The article could use more expansion and referencing but there is no need for a NPOV tag over such a dispute. --alidoostzadeh 19:23, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I would rather prefer to end this dispute as well but no because of the lack of arguments but definitely because this is old dispute which even does not belong here.--Dacy69 19:55, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Then why dont we just put Azerbaijan SSR?Azerbaijani 20:13, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Because he started his career earlier before ADR and AzSSR emerged. And Velichko - fyi - talked about Azerbaijan under Russian control which is part of the subject of his book--Dacy69 20:29, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Exactly, he started his career before the ADR...can you show me one usage of the term Russian Azerbaijan before the Soviets actually conquered the ADR (I'm talking about primary sources here, from the actual time period)? Thats what I'm asking you to do, if you cant, than just admit your wrong.Azerbaijani 20:37, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I just told you about Velichko.--Dacy69 20:46, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

The guy who was talking about Iranian Azerbaijan? Where doesnt Velichko mention Russian Azerbaijan? He does, this is according to your translation:

Azerbaijanis are called 'Tatars' but it is absolutely wrong, if we associate Tatars with Mongol tribes... Azerbaijan gave Persia one of the greatest dynasties during reign of which science, arts, agriculture and military affairs florished...

I think you have even confused yourself! Still waiting for you to find one reference to "Russian Azerbaijan"...Azerbaijani 22:59, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I think the wording is ok. Russian and ussr was also used together. --alidoostzadeh 23:23, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

We have already established that it is an academic term used today. However, what I and Dacy are debating is a completely different thing.Azerbaijani 23:55, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Velichko does not distinguish because at that time there was no term like - Iranian or Russian Azerbaijan. But he talked about Azerbaijan which was under Russian rule. So, speaking about Ordubadi - he lived in Azerbaijan under Russia - so we use term Russian Azerbaijan. What is the problem, I can't understand. You want to say that term Azerbaijan did not mean at that time terrirory which is now modern independent Azerbaijan. But Velichko and other Russians used that word. We can put just "Azerbaijan" in the text, if you wish. This page is not about that dispute. We need just to indicate that Ordubadi lived in Azerbaijan which was under Russian Empire. So, then Swietochowski described the lives of Azerbaijanis under Russians he used a term 'Russian Azerbaijan'. So did I. I don't see any problem in principle - why you want to bring problems to that article.So, Russians applied that term to the territory where Ordubadi and other Azerbaijanis lived--Dacy69 01:00, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Valichko is talking about Iranian Azerbaijan, as the only usage of the term Azerbaijan was for North Western Iran at the time, this is indisputable. He even clearly says that Iran got some of its most important dynasties from Azerbaijan...last I checked, none of Iran's dynasties originated north of the Aras river.

Also, no, Azerbaijan was not used in the Caucasus at all...infact, the Cacuasus was made up of Khanates. Ordubadi could not have been born or worked in Azerbaijan before 1918, as a Caucasian Azerbaijan simply did not exist at the time. Infact, before 1918 this man did his work in Tibilisi, not even in the present day territory of the Republic of Azerbaijan.Azerbaijani 05:19, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

I'll be back after weekend - on Monday. for sure Ordubadi worked in Tbilisi and Azerbaijan as well. Velichko talked about Azerbaijan which was part of Russian Empire. you can find his book in internet. Perhaps we need to dig other Russian sources. We'll resume that, though I still believe that this dispute does not belong here and as you see I tried to stay out of the dispute on that subject on other relevant pages.--Dacy69 06:01, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Further - here we mention Russian Azerbaijan once - and it is not about even Ordubadi. I believe you can discuss this dispute on other relevant pages.--Dacy69 14:02, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Nowhere have I seen any mention of a Russian Azerbaijan. What are you talking about? Where does Valichko say Russian Azerbaijan?Azerbaijani 17:11, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Would you agree if we put just Azerbaijan. (Velichko wrote about Azerbaijan under Russian rule.)--Dacy69 18:39, 30 April 2007 (UTC) Besides, I found other sources (addition to Swietochowski) which in its narration uses the term 'Azerbaijan" to present day independent Azerbaijan, which was at the time of Ordubadi under Russsians - for example Austin Jersild, "RETHINKING RUSSIA FROM ZARDOB: HASAN MELIKOV ZARDABI AND THE NATIVE INTELLIGENTSIA", Nationalities Papers, Vol. 27, No. 3, 1999.--Dacy69 22:01, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

In what way is Valichko talking about Azerbaijan under Russian control? Was he talking about when Russian conquered Iranian Azerbaijan during the second Iranian-Russian War? All I see is you trying to stretch what Valichko says into what you want it to say.

Also, I am not talking about modern sources, I'm talking about sources from the time period. And no, Azerbaijan is not fine either as there was no Azerbaijan in the Caucasus before 1918. How about we say this:

Mahammad Sidgi was well-known intellectual for his enlightment activity in the Caucasus and later the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic in the beginning of the XX century.

This is a fair compromise as is a factual reflection of the reality.Azerbaijani 00:36, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Question

Is the external link placed at the end supposed to be the source used for the article? If so, the unreferenced tag can be removed.Azerbaijani 17:56, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

No, it is one of his work. But someone removed my previous link to his bio. I would add others--Dacy69 19:56, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Thats not the question, what is the source for the information presented here in this article.Azerbaijani 20:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I put 2 links--Dacy69 20:46, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh, so the external links you mean? We should probably change that to references.Azerbaijani 23:07, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Agree--Dacy69 00:50, 28 April 2007 (UTC)